suited for shedding light on america's policy choices on the rapidly changing environment in the middle east. the sadat forum was sponsored by the sadat chair of behavioral and social sicience is organize by chair for peace and development and supplementing these events is deep and cutting edge diplomatic research that includes years of polls in the arab world and united states. today the sadat program is releasing results of a new public opinion poll about american public attitudes towards possible war with iran, the results of which are available for you outside this hall. to introduce our esteemed guests i'd like to present dr. sadat. [ applause ] dr. issadat -- we'll give a round of applause. [ applause ] dr. sadat has been a tireless

a advocate of peace and women's rights throughout her life and since her late husband president anwar sadat gave his life are for the cause of peace. she's been a member of the maryland community for two decades and has helped the university too establish the anwar sadat chair for peace development. as the ejimgs revolution continues to unfold hers has been a steady and insightful voice we've continued to hear including here at the university last spring. the university of maryland brought in the behavioral sciences have been honored to count mrs. sadat as one of us. it is my pleasure to present mrs. sadat to you. [ applause ] >> thank you very much.

thank you, dean townshend, for your kind words and for your support of the sadat chair and international studies group. ladies and gentlemen, it is my pleasure to introduce our honorable panelists of this event forum. but before i do so, i'd like to say a few words about the arab awakening that has been sweeping much of the arab world. especially my greek country egypt. in this regard i want to welcome our ambassador who is here today. egypt is, of course, going through challenges.

both economically and politically as it transitions to democracy. i know that our panelists will discuss some of these challenges, but i want to make a few comments. despite the enormous difficulties, i remain optimistic about the future of egypt. and in the greatness of our people. as i witnessed the remarkable changes that have already taken place in just over one year i think much has been accomplished. though much more needs to be done. from the outside the inevitable transition seems frustrating. but what egypt needs is patience, understanding and space to go through its inevitable transformation.

our people and leaders will, of course need to do their part. one of the most difficult challenges of revolutionary changes is how to assess and come to terms with the past. for sure there must be an accounting of previous injustices of the suffering of the many of what happened to innocent people. healing starts only with such accounting. but to move forward, to build a better future, to come together as a greek nation, we need to find it in our hearts to forgive, to invite all egyptians to be part of our brighter future. my late husband president sadat found it in his heart to overcome the bitterness and enmity of war and destruction.

and forgiveness and reconciliation is what made our friend nelson mandela great. egypt has many great men and women who would find voices to help move our nation forward. allow me, ladies and gentlemen, to introduce our outstanding panelists. i will not review their extraordinary biographies as that would take all afternoon. and i know that they are well known to all of you. i will just say a few words. zbigniew brzezinski is a dear friend whom i had met early in his tenure as early security adviser to president carter as he visited egypt. he was central architect of the camp david accords between egypt and israel.

and i know that president sadat admired his brilliance and dedication. since the days dr. brzezinski served as a professor at harvard and columbia universities, he has served his country in multiple capacities. he is currently a counselor and trustee of the center for strategic and international studies. and professor of american foreign policy at johns hopkins university. he has thankfully never stopped writing or commenting on international and national affairs. and his newest book strategic vision just released in the past few weeks and available for

purchase outside this hall has been deservedly a bestseller. he is without a doubt one of the greatest strategic thinkers on global affairs of our time. it's an honor to have you here. [ applause ] the honorable stephen hadley has never stopped serving the united states. it is hard to find anyone in washington, republican or democrat who does not respect mr. hadley. he's known for his thoughtfulness, his openness to differing views. his consensus building style. and his deep knowledge. that's why american leaders trusted him with some of the

highest positions of the land including as national security adviser to president george w. bush. he has served in multiple administrations, both republican and democrat, including briefly with dr. brzezinski in carter white house. currently mr. hadley is a founding partner of the rice hadley group. he continues to serve his country and co-chairs a bipartisan senior working group of the united states institute of peace addressing american policy in the middle east. he's an extraordinary american. steve, thank you for taking the time to join us today. [ applause ]

finally, the panel will be moderated by our own professor. for peace and development, ladies and gentlemen, i think you are in for an intellectual treat. thank you for attending. [ applause ] >> well, thank you very much mrs. sadat, and thank you dean townshend for your support. dr. brzezinski, mr. hadley, it's my pleasure to host you in my home institution. i know i usually see you in washington and all these other places. i know for some of you this may be the first time to come to maryland, so welcome and we really appreciate you taking the time to join us. i'm going to go ahead and start asking questions, but before i wanted to explain why you're

surrounded by such beautiful art. if you notice, and dr. brzezinski, being married to a wonderful artist yourself, you appreciate that a bit. if you see, we have a sculpture and a painting. these are products of an annual competition we have, which is called the sadat art for peace program. it's in conjunction with our outstanding art department. and usually the best painting and the best sculpture. these are the winners from 2011. let me tell you, the best winner for sculpture is jesse barrows which is intended to represent hearing the voices of the people in the arab awakening. the painting is by phonat chow for a piece called one and two. congratulations. i don't know if they're with us, i want to congratulate them.

[ applause ] i'm going to go right to a substantive questions. i'm going to start with you, dr. brzezinski and, not surprisingly i'll start with egypt. the sadat forum, mrs. sadat is here, but egypt is not only an important country in the middle east, but there are essential choices regarding egypt. before i ask you now what we should be doing, the crisis that came out of the ngo. when the egyptian jew diudiciark action against international ngos including americans that created a political crisis. i want to look a little bit before the revolution, i know that you have been a key player in mediating the camp david

accords between egypt and israel at camp david maryland. and when you look at american foreign policy over the last several decades, it's been anchored around a particular relationship with egypt and israel. and you can call it a triangle relationship. and that has clearly guided a lot of what the u.s. does in the middle east and a relationship that was in some ways taken for granted, but can say in ordering american political choices in the middle east. there were people even before the revolution who were saying that that really -- the triangle of the relationship has run its course even before mubarak was removed. egypt was on a path to become independent. it succeeded to do that particularly in the 1990s, but in the past decade, there was less benefit, more marginalized,

egyptians were uncomfortable with the narrow set of choices they were having even before the revolution. this is obviously now coming to the forefront in part because the country has unravelled as we've known it. i wonder, with your thoughts on this, you know, knowing that you have considered the strategic picture during the cold war in which the peace treaty between israel and egypt emerged and the new relationship was defined, how you see that, is this an accurate picture that this relationship was running its course even before the revolution? >> well, thank you very much for having me here. i'm delighted to be here. and i want to begin simply by reiterating my highest respect both for the late president sadat and mrs. sadat. knowing them many decades ago

was a source of inspiration and confidence because in president sadat, we had a partner for peace. a partner for peace, who was endowed with remarkable intelligence and great strategic boldness. i have to say, i particularly admired his strategic boldness. and it manifested itself in relationship to the two greatest issues that are involved in great strategic choices. it pertained to war, and it pertained to peace. and both of these, it took enormously difficult decisions. and gained strategic benefits from themselves more importantly for his country. it was a privilege to know him, and i know that mrs. sadat was a

close partner, a confidant a person who partook of these decisions and that respect she represents today also, a great message that president sadat conveyed to us. namely the call for strategic boldness. now, turning to your question, at this stage, if you ask me about american egyptian relationship, i would not be advocating strategic boldness at this moment, because everything has to come in its right moment. i think mrs. sadat earlier in her brief comments used two words which in my judgment cabs capsulate what is needed. and these two words were patience and space. we have to give egypt space to define itself at a time of considerable political turmoil and uncertainty.

and, therefore, also patience. we have to wait until that works itself out. but having said that, i think it's absolutely essential that we do what we can to preserve a close strategic relationship with egypt because egypt is the major player in the region. and a good american egyptian relationship is one of the key foundations of a meaningful and relevant american policy toward the region. if we have that relationship, we can also move on other issues. and, of course, one of the issues in which we tried to move forward together with egypt, and we didn't get as far as one had hoped. and subsequently we even stalled the question of the israeli

palestinian recon sciliation an peace. there's not going to be peace in the middle east, real peace without that. and worse than that, in the absence of that, other issues tend to become increasingly dangerous. and right now our relationship with egypt is additionally important because we could be on the brink if we make mistake if we are overly cautious. if we're not prepared to assert american national interests openly, we could be facing the conjunction of several significant conflicts in the area, in addition to the one i've already mentioned which cries for resolution, and which will never be resolved with direct american involvement. there is the risk of some conflict with iran. if that should take place, it is almost inevitable that our current difficulties in afghanistan will get greater, that iraq will become more unstable.

and that these unstable conditions could merge and intensify the difficulties in syria. we could have a situation in which we confront a series of interactive crisis in the region. so that cumulatively emphasizes the need for a broadly conceived and energetically undertaken american strategy in which among the key players, with whom we have to be engaged in addition to the american israeli connection is america/egypt, america/turkey. america/saudi arabia. >> now, when you endorse what mrs. sadat said about patience and space, does our political system really ever have patience? can it allow space? i mean, you know, you have the ngo crisis which on the big scale of things doesn't seem to

be a huge crisis, although obviously important for those who are involved. and you had people calling for cutting off economic aide to egypt. you have the muslim brotherhood do well in the elections, made a lot of people uncomfortable. do we have the patience? what does it take to have that patience? >> well, we better have that patience first of all. because we don't have it, we're going to be faced with other things which will not be very comfortable for us. i mentioned some of them. we have to be patient, but we have to have a strategic vision for the region. i'm afraid we no logger have a strategic vision for the region, and worse we're gradually being pushed out of the region. or maybe we're drifting out of the region. i remember when i went to the u.s. government, we had good

relations with the four most important countries in the region, iran, saudi arabia, egypt and turkey. one is terribly bad. one involves some disappointment and one involves a great deal of uncertainty. it's not a very promising picture. >> i want to come back to the strategic picture. i want to go to mr. hadley and the question i want to ask you is really a different set of choices for american policy in general in a place like egypt. you certainly highlighted and made it a priority in talking to the egyptian government and other governments in the arab world and until the arab awakening not much genuine changed in the arab world.

i wondered if we're capable given the conflict. thinking then and now the role of the military and intelligence. we were engaged in a war in iraq. we have military forces in the gulf. and every time we would push in one direction orally or with ngos we still have to consolidate all these relationships with the very institutions that were anchoring the regime that was not democratic. so is that something that is inherent in american foreign policy that is difficult? how did you manage it when you were in the white house and do the set of choices that we now face, you know, correspond or parallel in some ways?

>> the point is it is in transition to a democratic and freer society. some societies are going through that transition post revolution, hopefully some of those societies are going to go through that without a revolution in terms of some of the monarchies and the like. you said can america make freedom. no. can america impose it militarily? no, of course not. can we impose it on other countries? no. should we try to? no. freedom and democracy is always going to reflect a particular cultural and historical character of the societies but what we can do is make it clear that we stand on the side of those who want greater freedom and democracy and who want to take control of the future of their country.

we were in the middle east. that was a difficult role for us because, for decades we were perceived rightly as being on the side and supporting authoritarian regimes, the very regimes that people in the name of freedom are rising up against. and it makes it us an odd messenger for freedom and democracy but it is what we have historically stood for as a country for 200 years. every war we've ever fought has been in the name of freedom and democracy. notwithstanding that history, something president bush talked about and talked about as a historical mistake. we have been on the side of t e freedom and democracy and i still think it matters. i talked to a couple young people who were part of the tunisian revolution and they told a very interesting story. they said our revolution was stalled because the middle class

was on the sidelines and would not join in the demonstrations and then he said it all changed with wikileaks. now i personally am not a great fan of wikileaks so i was a little taken aback. i said what do you mean? wikileaks leaked a whole series of cables from the american ambassador in tunis that made it clear that the american viewed him as an autocrat just like we did and once those became public it became okay for the middle class to shift to join the people in the streets and the revolution. my point is by standing for freedom and democracy and standing back and let people fight and win their own freedom because at the end of the day they have to, we can nonetheless encourage that process, help empower that process, and that's, i think, what we need to do.

>> you know, it's interesting. you said this about wikileaks. right after the revolution and that story was actually resonating about the wikileaks and its role. i always thought wikileaks did a disservice to the state department. the state department comes across as knowing a lot more than people assume and usually professional and people in the region actually saw it that americans were not lying to themselves most of the time about the people they're dealing with, and it was more positive than negative in my opinion. but i want to put you on the spot on the current situation. and that is related primarily to the role of the military. i mean, i was talking about the choices that we faced when you were in the white house, you know, advocating democracy, having to stick to strategic relations that are essential. when you look at what's happening now, obviously the muslim brotherhood did very well in the parliamentary elections. we don't know who is going to be the next president of egypt, but i would submit to you that it's probably going to be the candidate that is going to be

backed by the muslim brotherhood even if it's not going to be one of them. so those are uncomfortable things for americans to hear even if they're elected democratically. on the other hand you have the military which is seeming to want to insert itself. we xhup kate with them day by ta. "b," you see what happened just yesterday in brokering a ceasefire between the palestinians and the israelis, something that could have gotten out of control. we couldn't do that. they did it. providing the service is really mostly the military institution that has that close relationship. that's tough. those are tough choices for america to do. on the one hand embrace the existing institutions that we're comfortable working with. on the other hand let go and allowing results we don't like to take place.

how do we deal with this? >> well, but part of that is the patience and space mrs. sadat talked about . i think there's a lot of apprehension with about what's happening in places like egypt but as mrs. issadat was saying d as we were talking before, there are very positive things. look, other than the first days of this revolution where, unfortunately, some real courageous people died, largely at the hands of the military, this has been a largely peaceful revolution. secondly, they did conduct a free and fair election for the parliament, the first really free and fair election in that country. that's an important thing to say. yes, the muslim brotherhood won more votes than any other party. is that a surprise? since president mubarak had this very shortsighted policy of consciously oppressing any centrist democratic secular

parties. he made war on them all and created a situation where it was either the mubarak party or it was the brotherhood which was the only vehicle for ex resing dissent. and so it is not a surprise that they in some sense emerge as the champion of the revolution even though that revolution was made by these younger men and women in the streets. so there is a lot to be said for this revolution for what it has done. i think we have to understand that if because a party has muslim or islamist in its name, you are not going to deal with it, then we are going to take ourselves out of the game in most of these middle eastern countries. and the issue is can we work with these parties and can we encourage them to be, which i think is the most important thing, which is can we encourage them to be pluralistic in

inclusive parties that are committed over the long term to democracy? and i think that's the challenge. you know a former deputy prime minister and foreign minister of jordan, and i was on a panel with him about three weeks ago and he said something very interesting. he said the challenge in the middle east is that neither in political islam or in arab nationalism was there a tradition of pluralism, and that's really what's missing and that's really what needs to be built. pluralism and inclusiveness and that's really what we need to try to help the countries as they make these revolutions or these transitions which is the word i would like to use. we need to try to help them find a way to pluralism and inclusiveness because that is the way to be stable over the long term.