>> [inaudible conversations] >> [inaudible conversations]

>> [inaudible conversations] >> good morning ladies and gentlemen. i'm jessica mathews. i'm president of the carnegie endowment for international peace. and it's my very great pleasure to welcome you all to what i think will be a really important and wonderful day. we have the great, good fortune to bring together a dozen infamous leaders from five countries, along with hundreds of members of the washington policy community for some

sharing of understanding and questions that really hasn't happened before. 16 months ago a gathering of this sort would have been unthinkable. mubarak, gadhafi were all empower, and infamous parties in many cases were banned. today, many arab countries are in transition and infamous parties are an important part of this historic process of change. in tunisia, morocco, and egypt, infamous parties have won substantial victories at the ballot box your and now or will soon occupy key government posts. similar results are widely expected in libya and in jordan later this year. the rise of islamist parties is a political reality, and the decisions that they make will powerfully shape the region's future for years, the years to

come. we convened at this conference because inspite of their growing powers, infamous parties remain poorly understood in washington, and and other key capitals outside the region. many leaders of many infamous leaders have never served in government and have had only limited contact with the west. and the rise in power has provoked a great deal of uncertainty, interpretation -- in trepidation among policymakers. they replace autocrats who were at least known. and so we felt it would be enormously valuable to bring together both sides of this new equation for an overdue conversation. our hope for today is for cantor and a pointed exchange of views. we invite everyone to listen

carefully and to ask tough questions. the arab world, after all, faces major challenges, after decades of repression and stack nation. with islamist parties poised to enter par for the first time, we have questions, how strong a role in the religion play in government? will individual freedoms be protected? with islamist parties respect the outcome of future elections, no matter who wins? on the economic front, what do you islamist parties plan to do to reduce unemployment and to spur growth? what sort of business environment do they plan to create? our panel said it resigned to address all of these questions, and more. they are meant to provide emerging leaders in the region a chance to share their views with an expert audience on how they

intend to govern. and at the same time they're meant to provide washington, western policymakers, a chance to listen and also to ask probing questions. we are at carnegie both proud and i think to be able to host this event and uniquely equipped to have done so. we operate one of the arab world's leading think tanks, the carnegie middle east center in beirut with scholars and staff from across the region. we operate and publish all our work in both arabic and english, and we focus our analysis and research on issues of political reform, economic reform, democratization. when we launched the carnegie global vision five, six years ago to create the world's first global think tank, we did so within ambition to connect a global audience with local

expertise, local voices, from the world's most critical regions. and that is precisely what we are doing here today. i want just to thank two people, individuals who made it possible. marwan muasher, marina ottaway, and nabil alkofahi from carnegie staff who have worked for untold hours to pull this audience together. and the swiss government, the open society institute, and the heinrich -- of may today's conference possible to their generous financial support. the carnegie endowment is deeply grateful to all of them. and most importantly, i want to thank all of you for joining us. a day like this obviously depends on those who have traveled, in some cases, great distances to join us.

and we are particularly grateful for them, and we're delighted to have all of you here for what i think will be and importantly from which we will all leave the wiser. so with that said, it's my pleasure to turn the floor over to the head of our middle is program, marwan muasher, who is moderating this first panel. welcome, and enjoy your day. [applause] >> thank you very much, jessica. before we start, let me just thank some -- i want to remind everybody, lease, they can have their cell phones off, and to use your translation machine, you have to turn to six for english and eight for arabic. that should be easy. okay. we are starting the first session with building new

regimes after the uprising. and to do that we have with us representatives from four arab countries, two of which have undergone transition, egypt and tunisia, and two others who are trying to put in place a process of reform from above in order to avoid transition such as what happened in tunisia and egypt, and put in place an informed process, morocco and jordan. and we are going to hear from all of them. the tvs are included with you, but let me just briefly introduce mr. mustapha elkhalfi, minister of communications and his moroccan government, to my immediately, doctor, head of the international relations of the muslim brotherhood of jordan. to my immediately is doctor abdul mawgoud rageh dardery, a

member of parliament from the freedom and justice party in egypt, and to my far left is a member of the constitute assembly from another party. many questions of course are on everybody's minds. as we go through these transitions, the question of the peaceful rotation of power, rights of women and minorities, personal rights, constitution by process of course, a process that should be done by consensus or by majority? it is what is being billed as simple, and how would either look, what are the economic programs of the islamist parties that are coming up? what are these programs, what do they look like? what does an islamic state look like? what does opposing islamic principles in government mean?

will it be -- sharia be the only source of legislation? and islamic state as jessica said, as arrived at, our citizens allowed to change their minds and vote islamists out, or would it be -- [inaudible] these questions and more i think are on everybody's minds. the islamists are being held to a high standard, as they appear to be winning in all arab countries. i think that these questions also need to be asked from state secular parties as well as government parties. pluralism is something that is hoped would be for all parties in the arab world, working for pluralism and not just expected of islamist parties. so what i found we would do is

start with the countries that have gone, undergone transition. we start with tunisia because it was the first. we moved to egypt and see what experience the egyptians had. and then we talk about morocco and jordan as two countries, to monarchies that have not undergone transition. i thought what we do is i would ask questions of you, but please feel free to add anything you want, and limit your interventions to more -- to no more than 15 minutes. we have a large number of people in the room. i'm sure all of them are interested in hearing your views and then asking question pics i hope we can limit the initial remarks to about 10 minutes each. and i start with, ask about the transition process in tunisia today. how is it going? do you feel confident that

pluralistic society is put in place, how would you characterize the transition that is going on tunisia so far? [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: i think the carnegie endowment for this invitation and for their efforts in conducting this dialogue. now the islamists ties is rising in the world. we are discussing here the islamist performance in the field of individual freedoms and woman follows him. the freedom of expression. these are a number of fundamental and basic issues that have to be clarified for everybody so that we are able to draft or to establish a

democratic system that will guarantee these freedoms. and find that society that is deep-rooted in freedom is -- now, the relationship between the islamic values and motor the values is an issue. -- motor and the values issue. i say that peaceful revolution, to reach out is not violent. the first thing was the transformation by violence. they also dropped the concept of fear from dictatorship. also the methods changed by violence. and in addition to this peaceful, civilized message by

this revolution we were quickly able to organize a free elections that were transparent, fair for the first time the arab world. when i said arab world, i mean that is the first time elections were held to express the will of the people through the ballot boxes without affording the will of the people that was a peaceful, civil revolution, freedom of transparent elections, and in a short period of time we were able to build a regime, a system that is the beginning of constitutional elegy, assembly gusher constitutionality, a center that includes all parties in the society, political parties, islamist, liberals, leftists, nationalists. there is pluralism, and, of course, if you want assembly

which reflects the reality of tunisia and society civility of the opportunistic spirit also a short period of time we were able to draft a small -- and then regulation to govern tunisia for three years so that we can build democratic system that will be best on freedom and democracy. within the system we have elected the chairman of the assembly as president, and then we fought government importantly about this government is that international coalition that combined another movement, a grouping, which is also the republican party which is liberal party. this combination combine

islamists and leftists and liberals and nationalists in one government. this perhaps is what i considered an element of strength, meaning that we have, we have under the rule of one party as we enter dictatorship. now we are, we also stopped at drafting constitution, a new constitution now. we have formed -- for freedoms and the rise and the relationship of branches, and to start thinking about the regional governors we work for within the constitution of framework. we work on reconciliation

national agreement. we see that this constitution represents all tunisians and all the people with the goals of the revolution in tunisia. the method in which we will drop this -- draft this constitution is by consensus to care for expanding the consensus among the people by all parties, but particularly from another movement we have the majority. it is a proportionate representation, the size of different parties represented. so they are represented greatly, so we were careful to build on very basic things in the

constitution, and that is the islamist nature of all state in tunisia. this needs the agreement of all parties. so islam and other is some will be the main foundations. the main thing also is to guarantee individual freedoms. there's discussion about the type of, the regime, whether it will be a republican system or a different system. there should be a constitutional court that will monitor all laws enacted, and we are careful to have higher form that will oversee all of elections. that will not be too governor of minister for others.

but it will oversee also the formation sector. there will also be the watchdog to maintain the judicial system. so we'll have also an independent commission that will organize the formation in the media in tunisia, so that there will be guarantee that dictatorship will never return back to tunisia. so this is a great game in tunisia. so there is a mission for personal status in which the women in tunisia have to gain a lot. so the revolution as we know was built on the shoulders of young people and women.

so islam again. we adopt a civil state, a republican regime, democratic system. and our vision is for -- dialogue and the state and society. and so we vision this as democratic method which is not different from other but it will be a matter to adopt. so there is no difference between democracy and islam. perhaps we can deep-rooted the democracy within islam in very sound matter. we consider there is no

contradiction between islam and democracy, and relationship between the values of islam and humanitarian gains and what was the human mind, the modern societies that had emanated from outside the arab islamic domain. so there is agreement with all these points. we respect them with islam, to respect the rights of minorities, the christians, jewish minorities are small but they are accepted within the society. we don't have any sectors, sectarian strife between the different religions.

the other minority religious groups enjoy their rights like everybody else. we are careful among the movement to respect the individual freedoms, public freedoms, to respect freedoms of women, rights of minorities, and all the parties agree on the values of citizenship based on, founded on islam. this is, this meets consensus in europe. so recently we have presented the idea of building the constitution based on sharia law. so legal reference for the constitution would be the islamic term. there is another area that talks about tunisia, to be independent, free country,

religion islam and other language. this is a political divisions, and there is no need, so there was a great discussion in tunisia and there was debates and discussions, demands to include sharia in the constitution. but there are other movements that consider that this will divide, split the society. and the sharia is kind of confusing. sharia uphold justice and

freedom, and main ideas of religion is to maintain the religion to have all the main points of religion. there are lots of scholars who talk about this freedom and justice as fundamental pillars of islam. the scholar who wrote about sharia, he had stated that sharia democracy are for matters of things, and we have confusing points about the sharia, that it is, calls for polygamy, but it's looked upon as and justice.

so, in that we decided to postpone the sharia law in the first phases. that was accepted by all parties. in the constitution we will be sufficed the first chapter of the constitution by excluding the sharia fundamental issue that should be best. so we are also careful to combine all the tunisian society on all denominators. and as i said there are parties, republican our system, whether it is by presidential or the relationship between the executive -- and the civil societies, the women's rights, we adopt these things and accept

them. also, the freedom of the press, of the media. these are a group, the movement, to see how they can build the constitution in a way that will build the new republican system that would be based on neutrality of the administration, the freedom of belief and expression, and coercion should be not employed, not necessarily, especially in religion. no corrosion also at the choice of individuals for the way of living. these are fundamental issues. there are also other challenges in which -- government now faces. we were to expand the governing

base, so now the government had submitted huge program that includes social, political, security aspects. so these are priorities in the society. and, of course, employment, so we'll have to work of supporting and enhancing domestic on foreign investments. of course, the previous regime had created a jazz them -- a chasm between the different society. so different sorts of growth, and injured there was minimal. so about the new government has change this equation by being

more of a provincial development as well balanced and security and safety will be enhanced also your justice now is the challenge. how can we carry on reconciliation and accountability so that we have in this period that will discuss the transitional justice, where we talk about a number of issues such as national reconciliation, and many other things. that will be all important with the context of -- this is a number of challenges that we face economically. and, of course, the political arena, how can we manage this period by consensus and through

dialogue, and how can we combine all the different parties? we believe what had happened in tunisia has been good so far. and we, the army in tunisia has played a positive role in the earlier days of the revolution. the army could have taken charge of the country, but it supported the revolution, and protected the people from the forces, and also worked on protecting and safeguarding the elections to be free of fraud. so there is dialogue now with commanders of leadership of the army, of the government. we believe that army played positively, and did not serve the authority.

there is cooperation with the military establishment. we want to build civil state. that will not -- be a kind of sacred, i mean, a rumor would not be giving his sanctity -- a ruler would not be taking his sanctity, but rather will be from the people for taking care of the people's interest. so it will not be democratic or military governor state. it will be civil society. these are a number of issues that i had tried to briefly mention to you. i would welcome any questions to

present you any clarifications about the situation in tunisia, and about another position. [applause] >> thank you. >> thank you very much for this presentation of what is going on. doctor, talk about some key concepts that i think many people would like to hear in this audience and be on. you talked about a coalition government, a consensus writing the constitution through a consensus process rather than by the majority, and civil state, sharia not being the only sort of religious nation, individual rights, women's rights, all these are of course very important concepts as we build a

new state in tunisia. how do we compare this to what is going on in egypt? egypt is facing some difficulty, even forming a constituent group to write the constitution. yesterday, the muslim brotherhood presidential candidate declared that implementing the sharia remains his number one objective. how do you match that against what we heard from tunisia and what's your own program stated to tunisia? [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: in the name of god, the merciful, i would like --

[speaking in native tongue] before i talk about the implications of the revolutions that took place in egypt, to make it clear for my american audience and others, the story of egypt did not just our in january. it started almost 200 years ago when the french lost a battle, and we wanted to punish the british so we had to occupy egypt. [laughter] so that we came to suffer because of the european conflict on the american soil. so that's very much interconnected what we are talking about today. we came with the understanding of the relationship between different powers in the states, and then all of a sudden we

found this totally different culture. we didn't really know what to do. here you go. we have a compromise in front of us, what do we do with them? do we recognize their mind or recognize their body? and fortunately the decision of the business colonial community decide to both of them. and when we did that it created more confusion, not only in the minds of the egyptians but also in the culture of the egyptian. and from that time there were three direction. one direction that was supported and developed by the european colonial powers is the only way for maternity it to look like europeans, act like europeans, even state european leg which. and that was the only option offered by those he believed in the european model. that was a very important

direction in the start of egypt develop it for democracy. the second was almost the other, and these directions to place during the colonial era, and it is still until today it is different rush of trying to become an understanding. the first direction was go european, look like them. the second on the other extreme, that we've nothing to do with europe. let us close egypt to the egyptians and we will do everything egypt. the third alternative, which i personally represent and freedom and justice party represented from the science of muslim brotherhood them into existence. no. we do have this tradition that needs to be respected. but at the same time we cannot ignore the european development. because europe came out of the dark ages through islamists -- and europeans learned a lot from

the muslim experience and say why can egyptians or arabs and muslims in this regard learn from the europeans, take from the europeans what we need, and leave what we don't. and since then the struggle went on. nazis came to power. the struggle went on. then came, the problem was not specific. mopar, the same thing on january 21. egyptians went millions in the streets of every city in egypt. they decided in one word -- we are not leaving. he has to leave. and him was not just a person. it was more of a system. thank god the system collapsed. but i think of the problem in

egypt is not the problem of the day of the dictator. it is a problem of dictatorship. culture of oppression. so egyptian has -- not only with the downfall of the system but the ideas that kept the system going. after the system collapsed, there was on march 19, deciding roadmap, what do we do. there were lots of discussions. to a go for the constitution first and then the presidency? do we make the presidency count? do we do the elections first? lots of ideas. the committee was full. there was an understanding presented them with a public referendum for the egyptian people. egyptians decided to go with the road map as follows.

have elections or the people that are simple and fair, elections, writing the constitution and elect a president. once you have this, then the journey towards the changing the culture of oppression, the culture of democracy starts. until today, unfortunately i say unfortunately, and i mean, it took us longer than expected. we could have done this process in a really short time. but those who like to think of why did it take too long in egypt, there was an understanding, and that was part of dictatorial understanding that egyptians have a short memory. so if we give them long time maybe they will forgive that we made revolution. [laughter] then they come back and can

control us again. they forgot this is not going to be the case anymore. egyptians are determined to live in a free democratic rule of law. honestly speaking, we suffered a lot. i've was university teacher. my students will recall bias some of my students, -- to be analyzed, we had one problem with my english. they went and complained to the president of my university. they said, the doctor is problematic for us. we don't know them. is he an american liberal or -- than the president asked, why do you think he is from the muslim brotherhood? he said the way speaks in english, we would like to do this homework next week in sharia law, so he puts in sharia

law in the version of the english language. so you can imagine the suffering the egyptian. and egyptians are determined, all of them, i agree, with so many egyptians and with the tunisian experience, that winning big, putting it on the table takes a top priority. but many egyptians, we would like to live free even if we become hungry. and until the freedom and justice party moves forward, we will wait for the reform. but we're happy we are living in free society. living in a free society after years of oppression is really problematic in the. i didn't think it would be this difficult as a member of the parliament. because everywhere you go people question, why did you do that? and we would not do this in the past. that was a lot of preparation. like most preparation, -- now

the roadmap went as follows. a free election, free and fair elections that produced about more than 20 different parties in the egyptian parliament. although freedom and justice party are 40% of the vote, but we refuse to control all the committees, same as you do here in the congress. 51% gives you the chance to control all committee. and the egyptian experience, because this is new democracy, we really wanted the participation of each and everyone, not just in dash not just each and every party, but each and every egyptian. we really were inclusive information of each committee. we wanted representatives from each party, and we came and went

meetings with the different parties of how to form the different committees. after the parliament came the election. many different parties consisted, the freedom and justice party got more than 50% of the vote. but we didn't think of it as minority versus majority. we think of it as an egyptian project. coming out, acquire ideas to help of each and everyone. we are very much in creating this balance that they spoke about at the beginning of my presentation. this balance between honoring our own culture, at the same time interacting with the european and american alternative. creating that unique alternative that i like to call the egyptian alternative. so we're moving out into the third mind, writing the

constitution. we thought from the very beginning that this constitution does not belong to the majority because it does not. it cannot. it's not fair. it's un-islamic to have just the majority. because the majority controls the parliament. that's fine. controls the government, that's fine. because you can leave a comment after a few years, the next election. but constitution goes longer than that. it protects the future generations of egypt. i was there when the formation of the committee, the referendum that we voted on on march 19 gave the people assembly and assure account, hundreds represent his of egyptians. there were many options, is to make the hundred and the people from the assembly and the council, outside of both of them, of any, it was open for

us. so we listened to everyone have certain parties. with other parties, 100% out of people of a summit. we came for discussions because we would like to see this pluralistic alternative that we have in egypt with a 50/50 arrangement. 50% are from within, 50% from without. and we made this and it was great moment in egyptian history. i remember. i was there when i spoke and i said this is a historic moment in egypt, that we agreed together as representatives of egypt, really elected by all of egyptians, over 65% of egyptians participated in the election. so it was a historical moment. to my surprise, some liberals did not even wait for the first

meeting of the constitutional committee so that they could put their own alternative on table. less than 24 hours. some of them decided to withdraw. we were shocked. all of egypt as the president, why did you didn't accept the election process? the people simply elected you to represent them. that created a lot of confusion, the details i would be happy to discuss later with you. after the election, we thought that the military council in egypt is going to give the majority party the right to form the government. because they only represent a body in egypt is the people's assembly. the military's council is just protecting and helping the democratic process to move forward. to our surprise, the people of

egypt -- a warning letter. people in egypt, our constituencies, keep bombarding us by saying we elected you, nothing changes. where did we go from there? we demanded a vote of no confidence. for the transitional government so that the majority parties could come together and form a government that can serve the needs of the people. to the surprise of everyone, the majority of egyptians, the military council refused to give the majority party the right to form the government. and then we heard the stories that the parliament may be dissolved, because it was based on a legal procedures. that has scared lots of egyptians. that made lots of egyptians ask

is the revolution still going on? then the presidential committee became immune from being questioned after declaring the results of the election. that really scared all, most people working for democracy in egypt. and that is one reason why freedom and justice of our people is baking higher sure as a system, until it brings fruitful results to the egyptian people. and, finally, comes to presidency, we insist in the coming months a major changes will happen in egypt, will determine to have egyptian society. because it is pluralistic and we would like to reflect the pluralism not only in writing the constitution but also in all other. in egypt we don't have minority's. we don't look -- because they

are not just a number but they are part of egyptian society. they are all citizens. at the same rights as muslim. in fact, we would like to call them all of egyptians, and that is the egyptian way of looking at it. on behalf of the freedom and justice party, we prefer parliamentarian, or a balanced way of creating, and that requires a lot of discussion with other parties. we are not interested in bringing another -- that's like the parliament that is elected by the people, represents the people. that an islamist is government, a government of god to rule over the people. that is a strange idea for islam. we never thought of our leader

as divine or holy. that was the european experience. and imposing it in tunisia is very much unfair. we live in a civil state, a civil state. we also believe in an islamist cross reference behind. we are a little different from the tunisia experience in this regard because when it discussing whether sharia law is there or not. we're discussing another level of discourse. whether we put islamic principle or in islamic ruling, putting islamic ruling as some parties in egypt insists will make it very difficult for egyptian people and make their life really difficult. we would like to put islamic principles or just leave it islamic sharia law. what does islamic sharia law offer us mean? the objective of the sharia,

what do the lead to? the implication of the sharia rather than the specific him and that means democracy, that means the freedom, that means the rule of law. that means the basic universal principles that humanity is giving for everywhere in the corner of the earth. >> great, thank you. >> i still have one minute. there are many challenges. the military council in the children everywhere in the world, the military is getting away from policy. we would like to avoid the military and thus the conflicts in harmony. we would like the civilians to be able to control their lives the way they want. having a ministry as like having a bureaucracy, but it is equally form.

and both democracy and military ruling of the egyptian life. then once we are sitting with the council, writing the constitution, we have a huge task. the problem has not party just because we need to be able to change the culture from the culture of cooperation, to culture of freedom were all of us can make a great pashtun agree and disagree. we need to be able to honor our human dignity, respect our differences, because we believe that these two principles, human dignity and respecting our differences, are indispensable conditions for egyptian peace, for national peace, and for world peace. thank you. [applause] >> thank you very much. >> okay. we move to the two monarchies that are as i said, put in place

reform process from above. yesterday, i was talking to the minister, and he said we represent a third choice. not the status quo of the arab world and not the revolution that are going on, we represent the third way where we have a monarchy, we like to keep the monarchy, but within the monarchy we are trying to put in place a series and sustained reform process. and to hear about the third way would like to hear from national what is your in gain? what is the future of morocco? do you think the reforms can work in the arab world or elsewhere? what is your taking on this? >> let me first of all thank you for this invitation, and i think that we are succeeding in

implementing what we call the third part. between the revolution and what we call the old system of political control, ignoring the democratic demands that now is imagine in the arab world. and in morocco. nobody could ignore this demand, but we can't anticipate this demand, and give up what we call reforming without losing our stability. taken into account the crucial role of the monarchy in leading the country towards military reform that's happened in the past decades, reforming the family code, the recognition of the culture, dealing with human abuses and establishing a

reconciliation committee, integrating more islamic muslims within the social and political process, all this happens during the last decade. as a rule of the monarchy was crucial, like now, we are moving towards a generation of political reform. gradual, democratic, genuine reform. how we did it, at the beginning monopolize all countries in the region. with the emergence of the youth movement called 20 february, 21, february 21, and this movement succeeded in mobilizing the part of the civil society, part of the political parties. and they went to the streets asking for fighting corruption and fighting authoritarianism. the king, the monarchy decide to

react. and there was the march 9 speech wendie king decide to open the gate for competition reform, organizing new elections, and providing new policies to deal with critical issues, like identity issues, like the issue of good governance and accountability with a responsibility. dealing with the issue of real elected government. at the beginning there was some skeptical views, skeptical views of said this will be limited reform. this will be partial reform. we are not going to see real

changes, but what happened after we published a constitutional commission, and in july 1, moroccan people approved the new constitution. this was the first step of the march 9 speech. and we succeed in recognizing that our ideas are still diverse. and we succeed in drafting a bill of rights, 21st articles about all measures, rights of humanity, from almost two in three centuries. and we achieve in finding that main elements and measures

related to what we call good governance, transparency, integrity, respect, rule of law, for chapters in the new constitution. the second set was the election, november 25. and everybody was waiting to see, are we going to sectarian limit in the constitution or not? are we going to escape from the challenges of the democratic reform or not? are we going to succeed in giving voice to the people, to make the change and to see the results of this change? and this is what happened. and i described the report as the part of the revolution of -- not the revolution of the streets.

november 25 election gave to the justice and the other party, vast majority, egypt, a voice, more than 1 million of the voters vote, voted. 107 seats in the parliament. but we shouldn't ignore that only 45 persons of the moroccan society went to vote. and we should work in implementing the constitution and widen it, the trust on the political process. after this election, the team decided to eliminate the chief of the government from the party that won the election.

in the constitution it's not clear that the chief of the government should be the secretary of the party. the king decided democratically the constitution and terminate the general secretary of the party. and many secular, leftist, nationalist, islamist, they saw in this move a good thing, positive thing. and positive signal that morocco is moving towards reforming gradually, establishing real democratic system. after we succeed in establishing the coalition, it brings together leftist party, nationalist party, and also a

political party with a culture, nationalistic also, with the pgd. the coalition is working 100 days, but after the nomination of the new government in january 1, 2012. what happened during this process from february 2011 until now? ..

>> the role of as an action that unified the country, has the religious legitimacy that gave him the ability to make the moderate interpretation of islam. and linking modernity with our islamic references. let's define these two things, unifying the country, the new interpretations of religion to meet the challenges of modernity. besides these two things, monarchy plays a crucial role in preserving political pluralism after independence.

and even after the collapse of the soviet union has played the role in accelerating the process of the emergence of what we called in 1997-1998 the democratic transition with the governments. and now the monarchy is playing a role in leading the country toward more democratic reforms. the significant factor is the existence of very dynamic, active civil society. almost 50,000 of the associations are working in morocco. feminist groups, groups, u.s.

association, religious association, development association are working in the society, and they succeed in creating mediation between the states and the society. and embracing the ideas of political reforms and breeding a culture of citizenship, a culture of human rights within the society. the civil soaz has played -- society has played a great role since the beginning of the '70s in morocco. and pushing the country towards many political and social reforms. and as now they are playing great role in the process of the implementation of the new constitution. and the civil society has been --

[inaudible] moroccan society is still young, and many problems related to the employment, ill literacy, poverty, related to plett call opportunities, related to corruption and governance, youth is the victim of all this. and this is the problem. and the u.s. movement when they emerged as the driving force during the arab spring of the reform, they found an existing civil society that provides for them a platform. the third factor is the existence of a minimum of political pluralism that has been strength by the integration

of the moderate political parties that they have, that they claim the islamic reference. and main by the pjd. but it's not only the pjd, it's the -- [inaudible] party and others. but mainly the idea that since the middle of the '90s morocco decides to integrate parts of the islamic models. not like what happened in tunisia when the regime decided to abdicate. or when egypt when decides to maintain their control and to limit them to marginalize them. in the case of morocco, no. and i think that morocco with the arab spring took advantage

from this policy. the policy of integration. and not only towards the moderate islamic groups, also towards the leftist group. and i think now one of the elements that has to ask in morocco in accelerating the process of the implementation of the new constitution is the stature of integration. why? because this culture succeed in the culture of working together between all different consonants of the political spectrum. the culture -- establish a strong governmental coalition. what are the main challenges of the future now? >> [inaudible] >> we have five minutes. >> okay. we have four main challenges,

and the first is the implementation of the new constitution. yes, we succeed in escaping from the risks or the challenges of the arab spring that lead to in some countries the collapse of the regimes. but the road map that helps us in doing so is the new constitution. and the new constitution is not only some text that we use for public diplomacy or we use it for public relations, no. the new constitution is written the ingredients, the elements of reshaping the relationship between executive branch, legislative branch, the judiciary branch. reshaping our system of governance is the answer of the

implementation of the constitution. and we have only five years. the new constitution clearly says that we should adopt several organic laws that will implement the new constitution. for example, freedom of press and the freedom of expression. in your constitution the article 28 is clear, that you should provide all guarantees for the freedom of expression. so we should -- [inaudible] that the government should encourage the emergence of an independent, democratic council that will organize the journalists. so we should do so. we should stop intervening in all matters related to the organization of the media.

and having real independence and democratic and professional and responsible media in our country. and this is one of the goals and the objectives of the new constitution. like this, in the legalism, in the judiciary level there was many changes that the constitution is calling for it. and you are working to do so. presently, our government decide to adopt the international agreement against kidnapping. and we are moving to embrace what the international community has developed in terms of the recognition of the basic human rights. we are moving toward this direction. but it's not only changing the text, but also establishing new

councils and institutions that in your constitution have -- [inaudible] one of them is strengthen the rule of the security institution. what is fighting corruption. one of the biggest problems that we suffered from it is the spread of corruption. the new constitution clearly recognizes this problem and says that morocco should have an independent, very effective, critical to live. the moroccan policy is against corruption. our rank last year was 85 in the international transparency index. in 2002 we were in 52. it's a big problem for us. and we can't escape from this

reality. the only way is to recognize it and to present real, credible, effective policies to deal with it. and not only this institution to fight corruption. another institution related to enhancing the political participation and social participation, economic participation of the women toward real parity in our society. and in our political system. one of the problems that we are facing is that we have very limited political participation of women, and only we are using a system of affirmative action to enhance the political participation of the women. now we are working to develop

new policies on this level. so the first challenge is the implementation of the new constitution. the second challenge is working to have real system of regionalization and decentralization. in the past we have regions, but with limited power in the administrative level. now we are working to develop political, economic, social, cultural, administrative regionalization. and this will be a period of transition towards resolving, first, the -- [inaudible] conflict and allowing people in the region to manage their affairs and to develop economically and socially. the third challenge that we are facing is providing genuine, real answers to the economic and social problems.

the people when they went to the streets asking for democracy because they understand the link between the lack of democracy and the social and economic problems. employment are the first, health problems, social, housing problems, educational problems, all these problems. the new government succeeded in developing a program dealing with this critical issues. and since two weeks we are debating in the parliament the development of new national plan related to providing the necessity, financial sources to the poor people for health and education. and this is one of the biggest challenge. poverty, ill literacy, and the

fourth challenge -- >> [inaudible] >> -- is taking advantage from the new political environment that is emerging in the region to develop real regional cooperation between all these countries. we think that this thing is so crucial for us, and we should work on this level because we can't deal with economic problem, energy problem only by using the old policies. also we should take into account that europe is suffering from a deep economic crisis. tourism, exportation, money transfer, all of them in the past was connected with what is happening in europe. now, we should develop regional cooperation with all countries

just in order to succeed in resolving the economic and social problems. thank you so much. [applause] >> thank you. >> we're going to hear from the last speaker from jordan and then open the floor to questions for about half an hour. dr. nabil, jordan has been also attempting reform process from above, perhaps at a slower pace. there have been constitutional amendments, but the country does not have an election law yet. elections have not, therefore, taken place. there is no prospects of sort of an elected government coming out even after the elections. how do you confer the processes in -- compare the processes in morocco and jordan? a lot of people also think that the muslim brotherhood in jordan have not been, perhaps, as categorical, as clear as its

counterpart in tunisia or in morocco or in egypt about the commitment to diversity or pluralism and the commitment to sort of a peaceful rotation of power. so perhaps you can shed some light on the muslim brotherhood's program in the country, and how do you see the reform process going forward in jordan? [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: thank you. i would, with respect to the three experiences that our speakers just shared with us, i think there's one common factor which is that the arab peoples have suffered from the same problems. these peoples decided alean and without -- alone and without any assistance, not from the west in particular, to stand up and

exercise its will. not to remain on the margins of human civilizations. the arabs decided to be partners for the west in human civilization. the situation in jordan is very similar to what's happening in morocco, but a little unique on its own. and the common factor is that both monarchies did not, do not have blood on their hands, and this is a very main, common factor, and this is why both regimes decided to institute reform. and in jordan in particular there's the problem of corruption which exceeds the g gnp, and jordan has high levels of education which are very

similar to western nations, but we have a budget deficit that exceeds 65% of total gnp, and there's also unemployment and poverty which exceeds 20% of the labor force. and the population. certainly, there are positive aspects in favor of the regime in jordan, but over the last ten years several of these achievements were destroyed and reform in jordan started not just with the arab spring, but there were previous years in which the muslim brotherhood took part in the political process, and it had also a very difficult experiences. the first and foremost of which is the fraudulent elections in

2007 which is why we decided to boycott the 2010 elections which produced a parliament that doesn't represent the people not in terms of the political frameworks or the people that could possibly insure -- i mean, shoulder its responsibilities towards the people. unfortunately, i would like to say that the regime in jordan even though we are still hoisting the slogan of reforming the regime, the king and the government and parliament and institutions, they are still stalling, and when it comes to reform. and that's why the regime in jordan is attempting in spite of the lack of loud voices, um, protests until now are continuing in jordan even to

this date. and next to syria, jordan is the secondary wrap country in which protests are still active and calls for reforms are reflected in marchs and demonstrations to attain the rights that were robbed because the constitution stipulates that the people are the source of legislation, but articles 25-40 of that constitution limit all the popular authorities in the hands of the king. and the ministers are, also, the min structures of the king and so -- ministers of the king and so are the military forces. and the king has the right to dissolve parliament and, also, to sack ministers and to take decisions to go to war separately.

therefore, the reform movement in egypt is an attempt to reform the constitution to return, to restore to the people its rights. as the constitution has undergone 39 amendments between '52 and the present time, and the people are no longer the source of legislation. we would say that we are before two main problems, the main dilemma is a dilemma that relates to the political system, and the fact that the regime itself does not, is not serious about the reform, but they respond to partially to some of the pressure out on street. and also responding to the general state of unrest in the region. that's why there's a continuous

attempt to absorb the reform movement and overpower it. for example, the king brought a government whose head was involved in the biggest frauds, election fraud in 1997. in 2007 he was involved in the scandal, and yet this prime minister was brought back to lead the reform movement. but the people refuse this government and the reforms that it proprosed. and another government was brought to power and also this government was robbed of any powers. even though it has, it's led by an international judge, a respected judge, and he promised to reform the election law which

is the access for reform this jordan. but the government continues to isolate parliament and refuse to recognize its powers to institute any real reform in jordan or that would lead to any political competition that would put an end to corruption in the states. therefore, this is a very important issue for us in jordan, and we hope that the jordanian people will continue to pressure the political system so that it can institute real changes so that the king would also be a direct source of power, but also it would shoulder his responsibilities towards the people and would be the head of government and also

a source of unity for all forces and patterns and ideologies. but, but we insist that the king should be part of the efforts to solve the problem in jordan, but some insist that he's part of the problem in jordan. and many of them try to even circumvent these reforms. but we in jordan are not very different from other arab countries in that we would like to have a constitution and political pluralism. and god almighty who has sent this religion to us, the islamic world and jordan did not witness anything in if its history -- in its history over 1400 years that

is called religious oppression. our christian brothers continue to live among us in peace and social harmony, and we don't say this is, this person is christian and this person is muslim. the islamic movement has also had its own experience in supporting, in getting the support of the christians in jordan, and the islamic movement has on several occasions also elected christian representatives. and we also have witnessed over 20 years is since the formation of parties in 1990, we've seen several coalitions that have overcome the religious and ideological differences among the parties.

and we also, the islamic brothers have also stood by all laws that call for freedoms and pluralism. but, unfortunately, some of these issues have not been dealt with. for example, political reforms have not been dealt with so far, including some very important procedural changes. for example, it's not -- for example, in the constitution in the 21st century to have a military tribunal that would put people to trial on accusation of harming the reputation of the state, but this is being done by

the state security court even to this date, and these accusations are still common place, and there is intervention and control by the intelligence apparatus in particular. the army is very peaceful as far as the political aspect is concerned, but unfortunately, the general intelligence service is still authoritarian and continues to play this role many terms of the strangulation and oppression against people. and jordan continues to suffer from targeting. for example, even a person like myself when i travel to such a place, i am being subjected to interrogation. what we would like to seek to achieve in jordan is to achieve

stability in the country and restore the powers of the people and also find or establish an electoral law that guarantees all the rights of jordanians. some of you are not aware of the characteristics of jordanian society. some jordanians come from the west of the river jordan, and they came to jordan after the israeli occupation. and these considered half the population, and they are being used as a way to threaten all jordanians. but we, we believe that all jordanians of various origins have overcome this problem, and another issue that is being used to threaten people is also to raise the specter of the islamic movement. but we have to stress that this movement has made, major

contributions to the history of jordan and also in other countries. and has made several sacrifices. what we seek to achieve in particular is to hold elections in the near future according to a fair law that encourages political participation in jordan and the peaceful transition of power. and the islamic movement is the only party in jordan that has this peaceful transition of leadership. even women in the islamic brotherhood is being elected to leadership positions, and this is not a language we use in jordan. we don't hear about the problem of women's participation in jordan. and we, therefore, it's not

appropriate for jordanians to pay the price for -- jordanians feel shame that the heads of the intelligence services that were appointed by the king, and i would say who is the highest authority in jordan to be tried on fraud charges. this is major problem and challenge and also harms the integrity of the governance and also with respect to the jordanian economy, it suffers from structural imbalance, and we have a trade deficit. and this is equally dangerous and serious because it, um, it shakes the foundations of the values and the way in which the

government supports etc. own citizens -- supports its own citizens and forces people to be loyal to the government in return for the subsidies and, that the government provides to people. and this is also a challenge that we at the muslim brotherhood would like to address, and we know that if there were free elections and fair elections, this would be an issue that will be addressed. and we also believe that if such free elections were held, we as a muslim brotherhood will get, make the same gains that our brothers in neighboring countries have made. and, and we believe that this is a right that will be realized no matter what, and if elections

were to be held according to a fair system, we are not seeking a law that favors us, but we would like to see a fair election law. and one last problem i'd like to point to which is the arab/israeli conflict and its use in the internal politics of jordan. because it's being used as one of the reasons and justifications for the regime to stall in instituting the reforms. and usually the reform has always been deferred until such time that the arab/israeli conflict is solved in light of its importance to the arab people and also the jordanians. but it's not justification for the deferral of reform in

jordan, and we would like to say that these calls find ears also among decision makers in the west. and it's not the case and thank you. [applause] >> thank you very much, doctor. let's open it up. i'll take three or four questions at a time because i'm sure there are lots of them, and then we will -- and, please, make it a very short question because we really don't have time, and address it to one of the participants if possible, please. can you wait for the microphone? >> my name is -- [inaudible] i'm from morocco, and i work with the world bank. my question is to --

[inaudible] as we see in the united states, the economy plays a major role in elections whether in past elections, probably in this one as well. do you think the performance of the pgd will be determined mostly on the progress that you will be able to accomplish in the economy regardless of all the other reforms? >> thank thank you very much. >> do you want identification? >> please. >> -- [inaudible] from the "philadelphia inquirer". i'd like to address my question to mr. dardery. you put forward a very moderate position for the freedom and justice party in egypt, but some of your leaders have said things that sound much less moderate than what you've put forward. one of them was referred to when

it was said implementing sharia remains the number one objective, he has talked about jihad in the past, and also your leadership has called in the past, in 2007, for a sort of guardian council that would oversee all parliamentary laws and make sure that they were in alignment with sharia. i know that they have still dropped that, but what i want to know is now that they are in, now that freedom and justice is the leading party, do they stand by what you said, or are they closer to what your presidential candidate says? [laughter] >> in the back. yes, please, sir. >> thank you. my name is -- [inaudible] from algeria. one of those elected in the

election in 1991 after the algerian spring and, unfortunately, which was, you know, stopped by the military and security. [inaudible] to the brother from tunisia and the one from egypt, how you see the future relation between the civil society, the civilians and the military relationship? based on this, are you -- are there any red linesbe that the civilian and political system will have not to cross in order to continue with this democratic process? the same question go with the monarchies but not the same end. with the monarchy and military, how will you see -- because really in morocco the king was really courageous engaging in such reform. but how far do you see this situation going?

based on the experience that we had in algeria, it was peaceful change, an attempt to a peaceful change was stopped by military, security establishment and their allies, and what followed with manipulation and violence, etc. so how will you see the future? because it's a wonderful experience that perhaps you're worried about the future, thank you. >> one more question maybe. yes, please. >> um, i'm with the center for the study of islam and democracy. i want to thank the carnegie endowment. this is a wonderful event, and it's an amazing day to have all of you here in washington, but also to witness what's going on in the arab world finally. my two questions very quickly is to dr. daughterrer dardery from- dr. dardery from egypt.

the big question now is will they align with the new party or with the secular party? they have 50%, clearly needed to have more allies in the government, and that's, i think, the big question, who would they align with? and this would really determine the future of the direction of egypt and the transition of egypt. and my question to mr. el calf my from morocco, we've heard of the abuses from the new constitution recently and the lawyers who are having a legal case against the king himself for abusing the new constitution. do you have any comments about that? is it true, and what is the government doing about this? thank you. >> all right. let's start. who wants to take the first shot? >> economically, i think that

this is the most important challenge of the government because we can't afford answers to the youth problem, mainly resolving employment issues and housing without having real economic prosperity or real economic development. and for this reason the government has put this issue of the -- [inaudible] after good government, fighting corruption. because the main problem of -- [inaudible] in our country is the lack of good governance. we presented almost 25 measures related to enhancing the climate of investment in the country, and we succeed three weeks ago in developing a partnership between private sector and the

government to launch huge reforms in investment environment, in the financial and legislative institutional aid of the governments towards private sector, in finding new markets, exporting products and working with other companies in the international level and, also, starting work to revive many free trade agreements that we have with many country like united states and to launch real investments on this level. besides this we are working with small business companies in the country because we think that the leading or the driving force of fighting poverty and fighting employment is to invest in small business. companies, enterprises in our

country develop projects on this level based on providing fiscal impacts, measures working with them, reforming the educational system in order to create some complimentary between the market of jobs with the education system. so we have a program on this, and we are working on it in close partnership with the private sector. considering the second question, i think one of the things that create some specificity to the moroccan case is we drafted the constitution before the election. before going to the election, we drafted the constitution. and the constitution has determined clearly power, the the relationship between different center of power and

has established -- and this is very important -- a climate and the institutional tools cooperation between monarchy and the government. after election we succeed in implementing this, and we have successful cooperation since almost four months. and this cooperation is based on the constitution. and also is based on a confidence and trust that we succeed in the development since the '90s when we started working in the political arena and participating in election. and for this reason as political party we decided in 1997 election and also in 2002

election to limit our participation. and the goal is we should enhance confidence between us and political elites. otherwise we are going to repeat bad experiences that ore countries -- other countries see it, and we should be so careful in building this confidence because it's the essence of the implementation of the new constitution. the third question -- >> please, quickly. we really don't have time. >> [inaudible] >> i'm going to tell everyone to ask one question and limit the answer to one because we really don't have time. >> we are suffering from the old law that has been developed in the pre, new constitution era.

and now we are working to implement the new constitution, many new laws have been drafted. for example, the establishment of an independent, democratic council for press. we agree with the major editors and the journalist unions about new law on this level. so this is why i said that the first democratic challenge for morocco is the implementation of the constitution, and we should do it quickly. this year the major laws that will implement not only the text and the articles, but also the spirit of the constitution thank you. >> dr. dardery? >> thank you for asking this question and thank you for the statement you made at the end of your question. and sometimes i think of it i was invited to california a few years ago to speak about islam in america, and my host

introduced me as we're really happy today to have a moderate muslim. and then after the presentation i asked him, why did you call me a moderate muslim? she said, because people here do not believe that muslims can be moderate. let me state this very clearly, i'm really honored and proud of being a student of the muslim brotherhood. what i told you today is what i learned from the muslim brotherhood educational circles, educational books. i am a product of the muslims, and i am not telling you something that i don't believe -- that is the platform i ran for election for. that's what we study in our education alter, and this is how -- educational material, and this is our understanding of islam. it's really important, two issues that you mentioned. the guardian, you see, we're still moving, we're trying to move from being an opposition

into people in power. so when you are in jail, you have a jail mentality. when you are out there, you have a ditch mentality. -- different mentality. why shouldn't we have a guardian council? why don't we have a constitutional court? why don't we have a court for these matters? but the two important issues you raised are sharia and jihad, and i strongly encourage a dialogue around these because is very important, and i would like to encourage the muslims among you to engage in a dialogue with a nonmuslim friend within the american society so that we can come to understand the sharia. sharia is the word that is not even said in english because when it is translated into english, its ambiguity, sharia means legal law. so we're ruled by law, we have to have a law. you call it islamic, you call it secular, you call it this, you call it that, so it is a different law. i emphasize that it is different, and it has been there

for 1400 years ago. it was tried, sometimes it succeeded to produce great civilizations, sometimes it failed. the people failed to utilize it to produce a great civil. civilization. it's human experience of understanding a define text. it can produce the best alternative, sometimes it does not produce the best -- concerning jihad's the same thing. what does jihad mean? take it out of the arabic world, give it the english translation. i am doing jihad under this pressure, under the question. this is an intellectual jihad. [laughter] so jihad means exerting an effort. if you study, you're doing jihad. if you eat, you're doing -- but don't eat too much. [laughter] you're doing jihad too. so jihad is really a whole concept that identifies a muslim's journey towards the universe.

towards other people. and mr. summers, the other -- i'm sorry, we look at it differently. we don't look at it this versus this, or it is not a black and white thing. i think we'll work with whomever we have an egyptian agenda, and the egyptian agenda has priorities. whoever agrees with this agenda, we will work with them. we will work with the liberals, and if we can agree on some items with the lower party, we will work with them. we're really trying to create a consensus. >> thank you. [inaudible] [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: a question from the brother from algeria. with respect to the military site and civil society, in

tunisia the military plays a national role in defending democracy and taking part in development and also preserving the territorial integrity of tunisia. therefore, the military has no role to play in politics. the military and the security forces don't even take part in elections. they cannot be candidates in elections and cannot even vote. and like all civil societies, we have a min try of -- ministry of defense. but they do not play any role, their role is limit today the security aspect, and they cannot run for elections, they cannot vote. and this is what happens in civil societies in the free world.

of course, you've suffered from a military coup, for example, isn't that what happened in algeria, and the military is a big problem. and i believe even in egypt the military institution is a problem, and the is military council continue to exist, there will be no revolution in egypt. because if it continues to be as powerful than the revolution would not have succeeded. as for the red lines for us in tunisia, red line for us is no to violence. and any organization or any party that engages in violence is red line, and the law is above everyone and, also, torture, for example. the human, the physical rights and integrity of the human being

is important. we received reports after the revolution that there were instances of physical abuse, and the government opened an investigation in this matter. and this is, the results will be implemented strictly on all involved parties, and the head of government was very clear that any person who engages in torture many tunis will be held accountable. there's also respect for human rights and, also, there will be no return to presentation and corruption -- to oppression and corruption, and there are several issues. and as the revolution is followed by a period of security, uncertainty and chaos, but we continue to try to return

to normal life and to solve problems and protests. and, also, there is improvement in this aspect, but it will need time. and program of the new government that will be introduced this week will also contribute to peace and security and also to encourage investment and return to normalcy in tunis. and thank you. >> i can't see. david? i don't see any women -- [laughter] >> my name is joseph, and if i look at history of the middle east and north africa, i see very little democracy. and as an american i'm a bit confused what is the meaning of

sharia. so i ask you, can you, please, provide a vivid example where sharia law promotes democracy? thank you. >> please. [inaudible conversations] >> thank you. >> my question is to you, mr. atig. if you think you out of all of you experienced political repressions, and you served it seems like, what, 16 years in a prison? you were in prison for a long time. so my question is, how does that, what did that provide for you, that time personally and as a political figure? and how does that shape -- i'm sure there are many people like you coming from that, how did that shape the political landscape, and what is that, what kind of struggle do you personally go through as well as how does that shape your political, you as a politician? and thank you.

>> the woman in back over there. yes, you. >> my name is helen, i'm from egypt, and i have a question for, um, the representative. i know that jordan does not have sectarian issues that sometimes lead to sectarian violence as in egypt, but i know that there is other, another set of issue ideological or, you know, palestinians versus jordanian and how does that then impact, um, the agenda of the muslim brotherhood in just garnishing their support? thank you. >> [inaudible] >> thank you. [inaudible] from the american task force in palestine. my question is you mentioned the issue of arab/israeli relation, and as you rightly said, this is a matter for concern here in washington based on the islamic -- the muslim brotherhood's position vis-a-vis

the peace treaty between jordan and israel. so my question to you is if you were in government, how would you deal with the peace treaty with israel, the general jordanian/israeli relation, and how would you react with an american-led peace process? do we have a reason to be concerned, or would we see a more pragmatic muslim brotherhood in that case? thank you. >> let's start with dr. nabil. please. [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: start with hanan's question. as muslims, we believe that religious or ethnic diversity is a source of enrichment for society, and perhaps it's one of the most distinctive characteristics of american society. we believe that the problem or

the jordanian/palestinian problem in jordan is just an illusion to hinder the reform process, and it's not a real problem. the islamic movement is the biggest component socially and political that strikes a balance between the palestinians and jordanians in jordan. and perhaps most other political parties are kind of polarized towards one particular group. there are parties, there's a jordanian majority or palestinian majority. we believe that this is a very important, distinctive characteristic of the islamic movement, and it usually

fielded, for example, in areas that are predominantly jordanian. it fielded candidates who are of palestinian origin, and i believe this is a plus and not a con. also as with respect to the other question, as muslim movement we do not have a problem with israel. our problem with israel is political, and it relates to the occupation of palestine. i mean, the jews lived in all arab countries and continue to live in yemen, for example, and in iraq and even in bahrain. that small country there are still jews living there. therefore, depicting the problem of the arab/israeli conflict as a conflict between muslims and nonmuslims is completely wrong. and if some of you don't know an

attack by a muslim against a muslim is considered to be an individual attack, but an attack by a muslim against a christian or jew is an attack on the prophet, and it's not considered an individual problem. and we believe that this issue will be asked one day, and we would say once in government we'll have very clear answers. we are advocates for peace and for rights for the palestinian people. the rights have been usurped, and they are being denied of all peoples in the world to establish a state that reflects its own palestinian identity, and this will be a decision to be taken by the jordanian people through its own, its election of its own representatives and a government that will engage in

foreign policy. this is the general framework of our policy. with respect to the private framework, before we talk about the -- before anything, we talk about ending the aggression, israeli aggression against the palestinian people and also the return of all the rights of, usurped rights of the palestinian people and also the return of the displaced and the refugees. based on your resolution, 194. [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: and also to restore all the rights of the palestinian refugees, and this is a very clear position that we as the muslim brotherhood adopt, and all jordanians adopt and, therefore, ending the aggression

is a precondition for any further action. .. but if we go to writings we our doctor hamada we find these writings, this new

modern centrist line which calls for benefiting from western thought in a way that would not contradict islamic thought. so there is an elite group in the centrist movement here that represent the main pivot for the muslim movements for the brotherhood and mao did i and abazz and the justice development in more -- morocco, and developments for those scholars and, mr. , this centrist feels that democracy a mechanic system is adopt the principle of shura in islam.

this does not contradict with islam. the second point that was mentioned by the lady is that a personal matter. i, spent 16 years in prison, six of them in isolation. i left my daughter, two years old and when i came out of prison she was, she had already taken baccalaureate degree. we have spent some money under the dictatorship where there was really torture for, against political prisoners solitary confinement is a harsh discipline for prisoners. this is not where all the

comfort was adequate and thanks to god i came out of prison memorizing the koran. we were even deprived of personal visitations for 10 years, i haven't had adequate communication through even a glass window with my family. so we don't want a society with terrorism or with repression of, suppression of freedoms. we are victims of torture. traces of torture are still with me on my body. i will never repeat this experience to violate the physical, bodily, cause bodily injury to human beings.

we will, we suffered because we opposed the ben ali regime. we represent the islamic in tunisia. our project is against oppression. we ourselves were, who suffered under oppression and therefore we will never build anything but project that is built on the freedom of individuals and human, respect of human rights. so the question of freedoms and, this is guaranteed in our -- thank you [applause] >> i truly want to apologize for the many, many hand that are raised but we really are out of time. i want to encourage you all to mingle with the guests and, you know, talk to them in the intermission and, during the day. we're going to have, let's say 25 minute-break until

11:0. then reconvene to talk about the constitution writing process. thank you very much [inaudible conversations]

>> here on c-span2 all day coverage from the carnegie endowment for international peace. they're holding a conference on the arab uprisings. high level representatives from islamist parties from the mideast and north africa. when they come back at 11:30, they will discuss writing a new constitution. russia can support a u.n. security council motion on syria if it doesn't contain ultimatums to ba'asyir assad's government a foreign minister said today. that is from the associated press. we'll be back with live coverage 11:30 eastern. until then part of this morning's "washington journal.". >> host: obama's comments on court stir debate. president obama struck a nerve this week when he took the unusual step of commenting on supreme court deliberations saying it would be an unprecedented

extraordinary step for the justices to overturn the health care law that stands as his signature domestic policy achievement. many conservatives charge that obama's words amounted to a stark warning he intends to campaign against the court if the law or its key elements are struck down. while some speculated that he was trying to bull i let justices. one next sass judge outraged that obama seemed to question obama's very to review laws. ordered the justice department to submit a three-page explanation. even legal scholars sympathetic to the obama and the health care law saying that the president might have been better off keeping quiet here as the president on monday. >> ultimately i'm confident that the supreme court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong

majority of a democraticall democratically-elected congress. i just remained -- remind conservative commentators that for 4:00 years we heard the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint. that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly-constituted and passed law. well, this is a good example and i'm pretty confident this court will recognize that and not take that step. >> host: back to "the washington post." the debate over obama's foray into the supreme court's deliberations underscored the intense political heat surrounding the fate of the health care law. to many scholars across the idealogical spectrum once considered a sure bet to pass constitutional muster. after three days of oral

arguments last week which conservative justice appeared willing to strike down the heart of the law, the requirement that all americans buy health insurance or pay a penalty, the notion of a major loss for obama began to look far more realistic. some liberal groups said a loss could help the president politically by galvanizing his base in time for the november election around shared disdain for an activist, conservative court. a white house official speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal thinking said obama's remarks reflected the reality that the law was the subject of a major public and political debate. quote, it would have been bizarre in the extreme for the president to say that's pending litigation and i'm not going to comment the official said. it is just not realistic. the president also spoke about this issue on tuesday at the american society of newspaper editors. here's what he had to say on tuesday. >> the point i was making is

that the supreme court is the final say on our constitution and our laws and all of us have to respect it. but it is precisely because of that extraordinary power that the court has traditionally exercised significant restraint and deference to our duly-elected legislature, our con. -- congress. so the burden is on those hot would overturn a law like this. >> host: 202 is the area code for all of our numbers about. we want to get your reaction to the president, supreme court and his health kara,s. 737-0002 for republican. 737-0001 for democrats a. please allah 30 days between your calls. a reminder contact us electronically.

e-mail journal@c-span.org. you can post a comment on twitter. twitter.com/c-span wj. finally continue the conversation on our facebook page. facebook.com/c-span. it is right there at the top. jackie combs of "the new york times" takes a little bit of a different tack on this issue. courts potential to go ahead voters swings to democrats is her headline. for decades republicans railed every four years against the supreme court and perceived liberal activism to spur conservatives to elect presidents who will appoint like-minded judges. now strategists in both parties this could be the democrats career to make the court a foil to mobilize voters. the prospect arises both because of president obama's comments this week implicitly warning the court against striking down his signature domestic achievement, the expanded health insurance law and because of recent court rulings, chiefly the citizens united campaign

financing legislation and affirmative action that incite passions on the left. quote, historically the court has been a rallying point for the republican base and it is now much easier to imagine it will be a rallying point for the democratic base just if as much if not more especially if the court overturns the affordable care act says jeff guern who works priority sfwrup action a group that supports the president's re-election independent of his campaign. now to your comments and calls. we'll begin with brenda in pearlland, texas on the democrat line. what do you think about all the kerful this week? >> guest: i think it --. >> caller: it is fantastic. the president is saying exactly what he should be saying. yes, if they do cancel or, if they to shoot down his, the health care deal, it will galvanize the democrats and not only that, our monies and everything else.

and the supreme court, when i think of them, they're a bunch of clowns to me now. they're a joke. and, they would only do what we expect them to do. thank you, peter. have a good day. >> host: william, republican in new orleans. good morning. >> caller: good morning. i find myself as republican in the peculiar position of just saying that activism has infected both parties. we went through the obamacare which i happen personally not to agree with but we went through over a year of the legislative process, debate, counselter debate, arguments, everyone has had an opportunity at the bite of the apple. we had the president sign it. what is the response of my party, the republicans. let's run to court and overturn it. we say, we're for judicial restraint. how can we be for judicial restraint when we are doing

the same tactics that we accuse the democrats of? and as far as this judge, this guy from the fifth circuit court of appeal which is in new orleans, i find it preposterous. if i were the justice department or the president, i would simply say, sorry, that is your order, you enforce it. you go write a three-page, minimum, single-spaced. how arrogant. talk about the fact that judges have become robed rulers? it's amazing. let the democratic process take place. >> host: we'll leave it there, william. william mentioned this issue with the fifth circuit judge. judge upset by obama's comments on health care law. this is from "abc news." a federal appeals court judge on tuesday seemed to take offense to comments president barack obama made earlier this week in which he warned that if the supreme court overturned his signature health care overhaul, it would amount to

overreach by an unelected court. the supreme court is set to issue a ruling later this year whether to strike down some or all of the historic health care law. during oral arguments in houston in a separate challenge to another aspect of the federal health care law, u.s. fifth circuit court of appeals judge, jerry smith said, obama's comments troubled a number of people who have read them as a challenge to the authority of federal courts. quote, i'm referring to statements by the president in the past few days to the effect, i'm sure you have heard about them, that it is somehow inappropriate for what he termed unelected judges to strike acts of congress that he, that have enjoyed, he was referring of course to obamacare, to what he termed, a broad consensus and majorities in both houses of congress. smith told dana, an attorney with the justice department in washington, d.c. and he goes to say i want to be sure that you are telling us that the attorney general and the department of justice do recognize the authority of

the federal courts through unelected judges to strike acts of congress or portions thereof in appropriate cases said judge smith. he went on to say that he wanted a letter, and the letter needs to be at least three pages, single-spaced, no less on, and needs to be specific. it needs to make specific reference to the president's statements. that's what judge smith had to say. and this is in "the washington times" this morning. holder, justice to answer judge on vetting legislation. u.s. attorney general eric holder said wednesday that the justice department will respond appropriately to a federal appellate judge in texas who demanded a letter recognizing the authority of the federal courts to strike down laws passed by congress. mr. holder spoke a day after fifth u.s. circuit court of appeals judge jerry smith questioned president obama's remarks earlier in the week about an unelected court possibly striking down the

president's health care law. next call comes from new canada, maine. john on our independent line. you're on the journal. what do you think about all this? >> caller: first of all, all this supreme court judge is doing is interpreting the law. that is all they're doing. and thank god for checks and balances. but i know the only president had the gumption enough to go up against them was andrew jackson. if you remember the trail of tear with the cherokee indians where, when they forced them to move to some place else. and when the court and the cherokees challenged it, and the court overruled jackson, and jackson said to the people, he says now that the, made their decision, they can enforce it too. that was the only president i knew that ever went up against the court. thank god for checks and balances. all the supreme court is doing is just interpreting

the law. nothing else. and that judge was asking a brief. >> host: we'll leave it there. mike is a republican in san diego. high, mike. >> caller: good morning. i think administration is really mistaken if they believe this country is a communist country and nothing could be further from the truth. >> host: and back to the "washington post" article. obama's comments on court stir debate is the headline. brian fitzpatrick, a former clerk to justice ability anyone scalia and now a law professor at vanderbilt university, noted republican members of congress and gop presidential candidates regularly denounced the liberal u.s. court of appeals for the ninth circuit. he said he thought obama was being similarly cute with his comments monday. some wondered if the president has a strategy to convince the public that the court with its conservative majority is thwarting his agenda. that could mobilize liberal voters who see future

judicial appointments as a key concern. two politically charged issues, important pieces of obama's base are likely to come before the justices soon. the administration's attempts to block arizona's tough immigration law and its stance opposing the defense of marriage act. next call comes from boston. darren on our democrats line. darren, you're on the air. good morning. >> caller: yes, good morning, c-span. thank you for taking my call. i have two comments. i think that antonin scalia, by the comments he made, about obamacare, it is called the affordable health care act, am i right? am i right? >> host: darren, what's your comment. just go ahead and make your comment. >> caller: my comment the republicans are nothing but hypocrites, if this guy romney gets in office, get ready for more of your jobs to be outsourced, that is my comment. >> host: upstate new york, laura, who is republican.

hi, laura. >> caller: hi, i wanted to say i was supportive of the green party because democrats interrupted my work as a screenwriter. i moved up state. we were so happy when obama got n this type of activity is still going on here interrupting sleep and causing great difficulty. i'm a screenplay writer. i have been reviewed by al lewis, who was with --. >> host: laura, i know you probably got something to say here are you going to tie it into health care and supreme court or not. >> caller: interrupt your work as a screenplay writer. >> host: laura, i'm sorry we'll have to leave it there. here are facebook comments we've gotten. often health care stated as a role for the u.s. government in the constitution? no, since it is factually no can not be miss misinterpreted. this power resides in the states. dave says, if i were a previous student in his constitutional law classes at the university of chicago

i would demanding a refund of my tuition from the university. ace says, caring for our own don't need to be outlined in a piece of paper. and, angie, i'm sorry, then we will move on to mark. he could use a refresher course in the tenets of three equal branches of government. his influence peddling is unseemly. those are some of the facebook comments we've gotten so far this morning. back to your comments on president obama, the supreme court and his health care remarks. huntsville, alabama. emmett on our democrats line. you're on the air. >> caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. >> host: please go ahead. >> caller: yes, my comment i agree with mr. obama, president obama. the reason is our supreme court when they made the decision that a business is a human being and they allow unlimited funds into our, presidential race, they became a political action

committee. and they abdicated their responsibility for being just a, kind of even-handed across the board. that is my comment. >> host: thanks for calling in. from "the new york times." americans cutting back on drugs and doctor visits. katie thomas writes that patients cut back on prescription drugs and doctor visits last year, a sign that many americans are still struggling to pay for health care according to a study released wednesday by a health industry research group. the report issued by the ims institute for health care info mat ticks said 2011 was a break-through year for the drug industry which introduced 34 new medicines, the most in a decade to street diseases including cancer, multiple sclerosis, hepatitis-c and others. the number of prescriptions issued to patients declined by 1.1% compared to 2010 and the visits to doctors fell by 4.7% the report said. visits to the emergency room

by contrast increased by 7.4% in 2011 an increase the report's authors said was linked to the loss of health insurance resulting from long-term unemployment. fort lauderdale, tom on our republican line. you're on the "washington journal." what do you think about president obama, the supreme court and his health care remarks? >> caller: two things. number one, i think the problem with president obama and the democratic party and the supreme court is they try to pull the wool over the eyes of the supreme court and when they tried it, the supreme court took the guy apart. they tried to call something that was commerce that is not commerce and they just ripped him. and, my other comment is that, you know i want viewers to think about what, where we might be today if there had been a real negotiation on this bill. what if they would have allowed the tort reform?

what if they would have allowed the interstate marketing of health plans? and given that to the republicans and put it in the bill? where would we be today? we wouldn't be arguing with each other. we would would have a solid bill. we would have a true, nonpartisan bill that could go forward. it's just a msha. thank you very much. >> host: and from poe lit he cothis morning, -- "politico", pelosi predict as 6-3 scotus health care win. i'm predicting 6-3 in favor she said during and how hour long discussion with the palin center for media. it is a lesson in civics. i respect the court and judicial review. and from the arianna huffington post this morning, that the last caller mentioned this angle. this is the "huffington post". this is mike sachs article.

president obama locks horns with chief justice roberts over the health care case. that is the headline. here is a little bit of the article. looking for a supreme court decision in the health care case, months away, president obama locked horns with chief justice john roberts over how historically significant a decision striking down the mandate would be. quote, we have not seen a court overturn a law passed by congress on an economic issue like health care i think most people would clearly consider commerce. a law like that has not been overturned at least since lochner. obama told supporters. overnew stories predicting a loss at the high court. we're going back to the '30s, pre-new deal. lochner, a name familiar to lawyers but barely known to the general public. refering to a 1905 supreme court case, lochner v. new york, that struck down a state law capping bakers weekly hours. it harkens back to an era from the 1890s to the 1990s

when a can serve tiff supreme court struck down liberal economic regulation at the state and federal levels. invoking lochner's specter of aggressive judicial activism has long been the legalese equivalent of brandishing a cross before a vampire. president obama, a former constitutional law lecturer at the university of chicago knows justice, spare clarence thomas wants to be grouped with discredited predecessors who read laissez-faire social darwin policy reference into the constitution to thwart the will of the people on issues ranging from minimum wage to child labor. that is the "huffington post" this morning. kansas city, missouri, barbara, on our democrats line. what do you think about all this? >> caller: good morning. well, yes i was calling in to say that the republicans are doing what they do best. they're saying the outrage anything over obama does say

whatever. they have cried about the courts for years whenever it is not going their way. and this bill will galvanize the democrats if it is struck down because actually it is republican bill anyway. obama did everything he could to do the bill the way they wanted it. everything in there is things they hollered about and he turned around and did what they want. so the republican bill anyway. so maybe we'll get the single-payer that america deserves because the taxes that we were paying for everybody to have like medicare for all, would not be even a fraction of what people pay for their premiums now. and the republicans are just always the screaming and jumping up and down and you're not patriotic and he's, he's a muslim and they're just, they're just,

i just don't understand them. anybody that is a republican, i think needs to have their head examined. thank you very much for my time. >> host: from "the washington times" this morning, rummy's help. former defense secretary doneals rumsfeld is coming to the aid of a former iraq war veteran trying to unseat a democrat for the second time. he stood out among iraq combatants. left a comfortable life in man hat sta to join the corpse only see marines charge him with murder in two deaths of iraqi insurgents in the violence wracked triangle of death. hearing officer ruled his main accuser was disgruntled and the autopsy showed that the two men were shot in the front not in the back as the accuser said. sew running as a republican

against representative mike mcintire, currently serving his agent term. mr. president.. antano is coming to washington april 16th to appear with mr. rumsfeld at a private reception capitol hill club. the fund-raiser is sponsored by afghanistan and iraq veterans for congress. that is in "the washington times" this morning. this is in "roll call." and senator pat toomey endoorses dave schweikert against ben quayle. representative david schweikert, who is locked in a heated gop primary battle against fellow representative ben quayle, picked up an endorsement this morning from senator pat toomey. the two arizona lawmakers are facing off in a race to the idealogical right in member versus member primary in the suburban phoenix sixth district. toomey's support helped schweickart make his case as the most conservative candidate in the race although quayle has prominent conservative supporters of his own. that is in "roll call." one

more article about a member of congress. illinois representative tim johnson to retire. representative tim johnson, republican of illinois, will retire this year despite winning his gop primary just a few weeks ago. during the redistricting process in which illinois lost a seat, johnson's gop-leaning district was made more democratic by democrats who controlled the process. that was a factor in johnson's decision according to the capital facts and illinois political newsletter which first reported the news. he will announce his decision today according to the report, which also stated johnson felt comfortable with his decision, given that perennial candidate david gill will likely be the democratic nominee. johnson easily defeated gill in 2010 and in 2004 and 2006. the name and goes on to give a little bit about congressman johnson. it says that he is a six-term lawmaker. he is known as a bit of a loaner in the house and also

got national attention for his phone calls where he tries to call everyone of his 300,000 constituents. the new congressional lines took many of those families out of his district. leading him to tell "the washington post" in june, that is agony. i tell you i thought all those relationships, all those friendships all the service. you know what is this all about? that is again is from "the hill" newspaper this morning. back to your calls on president obama, the supreme court and health care. murfreesboro, tennessee, justin you're on the "washington journal.". >> caller: hello, sir, how are you doing today? >> host: good. >> caller: good, good. i'm calling up regarding this because it seems to me a precedent the president is sending. i'm an independent and it is odd to me that the ndaa and the ndrp have not been covered on the news very much and i haven't seen too much on c-span regarding it. it seems to me all this boils down to the constitution and the health

care law seems to be the one that is getting the most press. when i find myself asking why a citizen can be arrested without charge, and without trial. and i find myself wondering why my fellow veterans have gone through all they have gone through and what we're really fighting for if we can have somebody in office who can do all these things and actually threaten the supreme court with what president obama has threatened everybody with. >> host: we'll leave your comments to stand there, justin. move on to barry in fayetteville, north carolina. barry, what do you think of all this talk about the supreme court this week? >> well it is a lot worse than what it could be. everybody is scared and stuff like that, all about the world and everything going on. i rather have everybody prepared for something crazy and everybody, than, you know, i would rather be even though these stories are kind of blown out of

proportion. i would rather have this going on rather than bad stuff. personally i, i mean he wanted, you know, he wanted different kinds, he originally stated that he wanted universal health care, something like that. and then he ended with this. so i don't even know if he is really into it. i don't see why he is taking it and making a big fight about it. like the previous woman even said, maybe the republicans are right on this one and, maybe they're going about it in the wrong way but they're still right. you know, maybe, maybe the republicans, maybe they're not such bad people. maybe they scare you more. maybe their bark, maybe their bark is bad but maybe their bite, but their bite is even worse you know? >> host: all right. that is barry in fayetteville, north carolina. this is tony on twitter. are we paying attention to the erosion of respect for our institutions? if the

court disagrees with their point of view, it is legitimate. that's one comment. and here is joseph saying, appellate court judge out of bounds. doj may well respond to diffuse issue. dumb move by the judge, very dumb. and another twitter comment here is by gary. it is humerus how each party calls the court activist when it does things which it disagrees. can't have it both ways. from "politico" this morning, obama widens lead over romney among independents. and the current head-to-head raise across the country has the president at 48% and mitt romney at 39%. again that's a "politico". here is a "huffington post" article. rick santorum trails mitt romney in pennsylvania poll says. there's the headline. very quickly, if rick santorum is tying his fate, the fate of his presidential campaign to his performance in the upcoming primary in

his native pennsylvania his candidacy may be in big trouble. a new survey of pennsylvania republicans out by public policy polling wednesday night has the former senator trailing mitt romney in his home state 42% to 37%. and mitt romney will be in pennsylvania today, talking about energy, that will be live on c-span at 2:45 p.m. eastern time. that comes right after our 2:00 p.m. live from the white house where the president signs the jobs act. one more political article. santorum taking four-daybreak from the campaign trail. this is from fox d.c. rick santorum has vowed to continue the fight against mitt romney but a note from his team wednesday announced that he will do so after taking a four-daybreak from the gop presidential campaign trail. quote, santorum for president campaign will be taking a brief break from the campaign trail so the team has an opportunity to return to their homes and spend time, spend time with

family and friends. next call on president obama's, the supreme court and health care comes from brian in vancouver, washington. on our independent line. hi, brian. >> caller: yes, hello, thank you very much for taking my call. i'm a first-time caller. i think in a sense what has me concerned probably more than anything is that we've reached this point to where we have to bring this bill to the supreme court. i think both parties have actually let us down. i'm an independent and i think it is very tragic that both parties have let us down. i think another concern that a lot of people like myself who do not have health insurance due to being out of work have is that the first year or two of mr. obama's term, he was focused on working on obamacare as opposed to the

real concerns of the country which were employment and so on. now looks as though come around to biting him. if it is going to the supreme court and so on. and i just kind of hope for the best which way it goes either way. in all essence i just think that president obama overall has been a national disgrace to the country and i wish, and i pray that he does not win the next election. >> host: madonna's comment on facebook. this is really quite troubling and unprecedented in my lifetime. the president has publicly challenged the supreme court not to overturn his health care legislation. the supreme court should be free from being politicized and the president knows it. >> "washington journal" live every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern and available anytime at the video library at c-span.org. we will take you live back now to the carnegie endowment for international peace. the day long conference on the arab uprisings. they will focus next on writing a new constitution

with a panel featuring three lawmakers from jordan, tunisia, from egypt, tunisia and libya. live coverage on c-span2. >> critical and essential to the reconstruction process in the three countries that are represented up here. we're moving from university seminar rooms to hard street politics and that's going to be something, implications of that one thing i hope we'll focus on here. the more general note i want to point out something that i heard this morning. what i heard this morning from representatives of the four movements that were up here was sort of a tremendous sense of excitement and responsibility and a real interest in essentially getting to work and to taking the programs that they have been developing often in opposition, sometimes even in prison and actually applying them to government in operation. so i want to build on that in this session and essentially take a very practical look. we have had very good general overviews in the first session but what i'm

going to try and do move with our guests permission, to move a little bit into the practical details because that's what you really have to do when you write a constitution is pay attention to the fine print. we have up here and i'm going to you introduce them very briefly because their bios are in front of you and i think we like to hear from them more than we like to hear about them. our first speaker to my right is. khalid al can sas from egypt. my immediate left is mohammed gaair from tunisia and third is -- owe psalm al saghir, and then mohammed gaair from the muslim brotherhood in libya. i will spin it differently for each of the three people here and ask them to give us an idea where the constitutional process stand and i will try to ask the question in a specific way, for egypt, what i'm going to ask you, khalid, we heard a

awful lot by need for con essential wall -- consensual constitution. how the freedom and justice party says it is acting consistently with the referendum and in the way that it has proceeded. if i listen to him i think if i were his lawyer, and i'm not a lawyer but if i were i have a very, very strong case. you have acted totally within the rules. if i were a political advisor i would say you have a got a mess on your hands. you have a, you are supposed to write a constitution in consensual process where a third of the people are refusing to take their seat. my question for you how is the freedom and justice party going to confront that? let me list all the three questions right ahead and we'll go in order. osama al saghir, my question for you is about tunis. we heard a vision of constitution, about freedom of the press and strong

state institution and judiciary, and few people in tunis and political forces would disagree b we heard about some concessions that they are willing to make. my question for you, because you have a constitutional process actually now well underway, so where are you finding that the consensus begins to break down? what are the, what are the issues that are dividing you from the other political forces? and mohammed gaair from libya, my question for you is this, when i look at colleagues from other countries, they represent places with long constitutional traditions. egypt late 19th century. they're also, gotten very well-defined processes. in libya you have a very disorganized political scene and what is supposed to be a very, very quick constitution-writing process. how are you going to be able to take this much more

unorganized environment and manage to come up with a consensus document that represents all libyans. let me first turn to you, khaled. >> thank you very much, i would ask your position to start with a statement but i still stick to the time frame. the statement i would like to make is actually an extension of what president commented on after the arab spring basically to this time. this is actually a historic moment. it's a he said a moment in history when we see actually history in the making and we, this is the statement we live by day in and day out. this is actually how we see the situation. and of course not being with my colleagues from the islamic movement in different parts of the world and here in america is also historic but the idea of actually changing reality in our region. change in reality of groups

of people who are really suffered extreme oppression and actually decided in a very idealistic way to take the message into their own hand and in a very nonviolent way. i talk specifically about egypt and tunisia and i'm sure that the even started this in the beginning and this is intense and how they wanted to proceed in bringing peace and democracy into the region by showing popular support and being on egyptians and all tunisians trying to achieve what other nations managed to achieve which is internal stability and internal peace. some governments and authorities that actually present them and speak on their behalf. we actually made it and we are on the first few steps towards democracy and we're trying to build our new reality that is based on democracy, freedom and rule of law. these are values that are

now universal and are now the majority of nations would like to achieve it and perceive it in this way. and we actually extend our hand and call out to the international community, yes, you might not be fully understandable of who we are and what we represent but you understand those values. so we actually want you to support us on these values. we want you to help us. we want you to give ideas and actually belief in these values and belief in the right of nations to achieve these values. our costution-writing process an integral part of this process. we started off with an election for people's assembly, the parliament and two chambers and before that, egyptians expressed i mean, their freedom in those elections. they came in with a very high percentage of participation, almost all gyp shuns participated in

those -- egyptians participated in those elections and even those ones like my children for example, many came in and participated in this, at this moment. so they actually came in and showed their commitment to a democracy at this particular level. we now have a parliament that is actually representative to revolution and the revolution's spirit and is committed to those buildings. this was fairest election. the second one is more challenge. parliament of course is falls back onto the ballot box and accepts the reality of political participation and political rivalry and actually winning seats and percentages, et cetera but constitution-writing has to be done by consensus. has to be inclusive. has to include all segments of egyptian society. has to prepare us, and i'm glad in this assembly it is a youthful assembly. this constitution will serve

us and serve our children right away. it has to include our aspirations. it has to prepare to be part of this small group and community that is interconnected group of community. has to put us along those lines and this can not be done by one party or one world view. in egypt we enjoyed now after suppress sieve and oppressive regimes we now have pluralistic, at least political environment and now we're still still in the spirit of some political rivalry where we have all the different views an experiences and it is a difficult process to reach consensus. what we agreed collectively through different ways through different democratic ways which basically we agreed on the process. the minimum level for it has to be democratic. again as you said, this is why in the legal sense the process now is okay. the challenge actually is

rule beyond our rivalry, our political rivalry, our different world views. find common ground on the actual issue which is constitution, which is a constitution that has to be representative. so this is, this is the challenge. sometimes particularly when there is an overbig majority, the minority feels that they're excluded and it is their right to feel this way but we have to rise above these competitiveness and start look at what it is. on our end we try to do so. we have the process itself started off by egyptian people in the referendum choosing to, choosing with overwhelming majority, 70% of the nation voted that the parliament will pick 100 people assembly. then the parliament itself would, with even a bigger majority voted on the process on how composition of this assembly. so there is actually a democratic, democratic

process there. so we, we actually decided to reduce our representation in this assembly so that more people can actually participate. our party alone from the parliamentarians in this constitution, resembles 25% to 40 to 47% actual represent in the parliament. so and, with the coalition is actually around 35% which is way beyond, way less than our representation. we understand this is the not the equation. the equation is inclusiveness. and even though it was a challenging process, agreement on this with these actually to come to people, with many parties actually refusing to be a part of the process we still are talking to them. and this discussion then was very useful because it came up with new ideas. we opened the writing of constitution not only limited to the 100 people but we extended for many technical committees open for anybody to participate and we are talking back to

those even opposition groups and to the different institutions in order to maybe sure that they are in one way or another accepting it. and i have two last things, two, i mean, gestures that actually, we feel that we are special. and it was something that is of symbolic nature to us. the last meeting that pope sharada, the pope of the community in egypt and center of the orthodox sect in the world, the last official meeting that he had was official visit came from the leader of the muslim brotherhood. this was his last meeting. and on a piece of paper written to the leader, he jotted down the names of the representation, of the cop tick church to our constitution and constituent

writing assembly for all egyptians and we actually stuck to this paper. this is where we actually take it and we actually stand, we actually stand for this. we were attacked extremely by be specifically two parties, two liberal parties and we made sure that the heads of those two parties are represented. we actually voted and all our members in the parliament voted for our two, if you call them political rivals, to be part of this constitution. we are keen and determined to have our process based on consensus and that the constitution is actually represent all the egyptian population. >> let me just ask your forgiveness if i could ask one quick follow-up question. if you don't get them back on board, if you do not come to an agreement with them, will you continue with the process as it is, or will you try and somehow go back to the drawing board and come up with a new process? >> we actually have two

challenges. one challenge is of revolution. one challenge is basically the time is not in favor of the revolution. the tile is not in favor of reform. and i'm not talking about political luxury or the luxury of having election or that election. egyptians suffer, egyptians suffer day-to-day for, from more extreme challenging conditions. we have over 30% who are under the poverty line of an income of $2 per day. and these people, even suffered more during the government having poor reforms and even making up more problems in terms of gas, bread and, transportation and many different, different problems so time is not in favor of these people who we represent and we're very sensitive to the needs of those people. as parliamentarians, they will tell you that people

are actually suffering day in and day out. even when we spoke to the, representation from the u.s. government the entire world community and imf, the entire world community is waiting for a new representative government to be able to talk to. so again, time is not in our favor. so we have to work against that. the mechanism that the, democratic mechanism that was chosen in terms of a solution chooses also an extended list. they also voted for 40 people as an extension to this list. so practically speaking, and the 40 is also diverse selection. so we have an extension of who people who can replace those who we fail to bring back. we have a problem and we have to solve but we have to move on with the process. >> okay. so let's move to tunis and find out what problems you're having there. also the good news. we want the good news as well. [laughter]

>> [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: and i noticed that this center were to open and a center in tunisia, to learn more closely about what is happening in north africa, it will be a good opportunity. in reality in tunisia there is a very strong energy or force represented in the spirit of the tunisian people who decided to launch a very peaceful revolution that represented all the various parties in tunisia. particularly the youth generation which grew up under the dictatorship and

this is the generation, the arab generation, whose spirit and energy wants to change this course. a course in which a young person, whether man, woman or even children, could not express the simplest expression of freed many do. we used to live not just in a dictatorship but in a police state which controlled every aspect of the tunisia ann's life. now with respect to writing the constitution it's clear that the tunisian people have chosen to include all political parties in the drafting of this constitution and to clarify this point i would like to, i remember that day in which the first constitutional assembly met.

it includes very, a large number of young people including myself and also some people who have also spent, like my friend, dr. ratif, 17 years in jail, including 10 years in solitary confinement and we're not talking even about torture and other people who have struggled from various parties and intellectual and idealogical background. we all met in a beautiful building of the, of parliament and then for the first time after many years the, the meeting was integrated with the -- inaugurated with the national anthem and we could not express the feeling that prevailed when all the tunisian people were looking directly at the parliament. to begin with tunisians did not even know what it looked

like but today all parliamentary sessions are broadcast live and any discussion that takes place on any issue the tunisian people will be able to view these, to view these sessions via facebook and also to express their views. so when we met for the first time, the, statement that this anthem had and it read like this is the people decided, to, so any people who, wants it respect life, it should, it is all embodied in the national anthem. and this spirit is far stronger than any difference that is currently existing when it comes to drafting the constitution. and if there are demands on different, from different

parties then it is all being expressed peacefully, and that tunisian people have proved their ability to express their views in a democratic and civilized manner. and, for example, one day we'll have a discussion of the role of the sharia in the constitution and then the next day we have a party that says they are opposed to that. this is a democratic spirit we are living even before the drafting of the constitution. so you can man how it is going to be like after the constitution is drafted. and, and we believe that the differences in writing the constitution will be very minor.

[inaudible] so i'd like to talk directly that tunisian model has very strong point which is the fact that the democratic steps are very clear and evident to all tunisian citizens. and the elections have bestowed legitimacy on us and, and the main problem that the arab countries face is that people, that leaders lack legitimacy. and that they oppress the people and use all forms of violence against the people. therefore our biggest achievement was the legitimacy and through this legitimacy we, nobody can question the authority of

the assembly to draft a constitution. and if the agreement could not be reached, then we would put the issue and referendum to the people to decide. the other issue is that we need also a legitimate government and this is another clear step in the democratic process that is very clear to the tunisians and which is that they need to elect a legitimate government and a legitimate president for the first time in the history of the country and for the first time in the history of the country also we have the ministers and the, members of parliament sit side by side. so the new government and the past governments sat side by side next to each other and this was totally