>> good evening, ladies and gentlemen. i'm delighted to have the opportunity to join bruce johnson in welcoming you all to this the 13th forum. it's also my special privilege and honor to introduce you to a very special guest. our keynote speaker this evening. his ex len see the foreign minister of the arab -- he is well known in washington as is his wife. we're glad to have her join him this evening. he is one of the architects of the current u.s. egyptian relationship, having served as ambassador to the united states between 2008 and 2012.

in those dramatic years, his steady hand, his wise judgment, and his diplomatic skills helped navigate the relationship through stormy seas. safe guarding and preserving the partnership between the united states and egypt. he left washington with the admiration and friendship of many people, including myself. during his long and distinguished career, he served as the permanent representative of egypt to the united nations in geneva and in many central roles in the ministry of foreign affairs in cairo. he is the very marvel of jip shun diplomatic. in 2014, president called minister out of retirement, back to serve his country as foreign minister.

and in that role as the representative of the largest most powerful arab country, he is one of the key players in shaping the middle east today. a task we need not envy. as part of this mission, he has been instrumental in the all important relationship between egypt and its neighbor, israel, which he visited just this summer. and again represented egypt at the funeral of the late president. the relationship between egypt and israel is critical for the peace and welfare of the two countries, but also central to the prospects of broader piece in the region. cairo was and remains a key to regional stability and peace. the first arab leader to make an official visit to israel as we remember, egypt was the first

arab country to make peace with israel. it was the first arab capital to host an embassy and with the president's leadership and involvement, peace may again become possible. in this regard, the relations between israel and egypt naturally depend upon a third partner. the united states. it is no accident that egyptian israeli peace was cemented in a try lateral handshake between president sa dad, prime minister and president jimmy cart ter, today too, the strategic triangle between the united states, egypt and israel can serve oz the cornerstone for a better, more stable and peaceful middle east. having had the opportunity to converse with president together with the minister recently, i know that this is the egyptian president's vision. we truly honored and delighted

that he accepted our invitation to address the saban forum tonight. ladies and gentlemen please join me in welcoming the foreign minister of the arab republic. [ applause ] >> thank you for that introduction, i'm honored and delighted to be with you tonight. this important forum and i'm definitely glad to be back in washington and to see so much friendly faces. ladies and gentlemen, it is indeed my pleasure to be back in washington today and to share with you egypt's perspective on the key questions and guiding principles that govern egypt's foreign policy towards our troubled region and to explore with you how egypt and the united states can join forces to navigate such a turbulent regional environment in such

troubled times. five years ago, the dynamics that governed the middle east for at least six decades were profoundly changed. perhaps even irreversibly altered. a wave the large scale societal change shook it to its very core. launching a unique historic moment that is at once promising and alarming. how to navigate these turbulent waters is the core policy question of our time. and is indeed what will determine eventually to quote dig evens, whether we are on the eve of a spring of hope or a winter of despair. such navigation is quite inconceivable without some form of guiding principle. a framework for making sense of the epoch we are in and a guide for the policy their in. the crux over the debate of the significance of the historic

moment we are witnessing as well as over how to navigate it resolves around two contradictoriry positions. the first focuses exclusively on the opportunities for long awaited change. it's proponents argue that it is time for change. the structures of power and governance in the arab world. this is what the people want. and this is what they should get. at any cost. this is probably the thinking that has informed and continues to guide strategies of several regional and international actors that sought to support change without necessarily being too fussy about their allies. this is how several ex tree miss and handful of terrorist organizations, including isis and alqaeda found financial and military support in syria, iraq, and libya, to mention but a few examples. on the other end of the

political spectrum is another die metally opposed position that is sought in the face of messy social change to reverse the clock, decision functional governments, were unbalanced to sectarian war lords and militia leaders or the threat. all that was needed therefore was to restore the old regimes and do business as usual. however decadent and dysfunction al that might be. the price of the old ways of govern is to squash every legitimate change and crush hopes there of so be it. we're familiar with the consequences of this strategy. as well as its inherent futile at this time. in vein and any attempt to stop the legitimate calls for change and the march of progress, the question remains, however, how

to reap the benefits of this tidal wave of change. this is the core did ilemma of policy planning and execution in the region. ladies and gentlemen, our approach in egypt is to this did i lem ma is pretty straightforward. first, that orderly change is the much needed prerequisite to breaking through the historical impass that the region has reached and to fulfilling the aspirations of millions of young people in the middle east, a region in which more than 60% of the population are under the age of 30. second, that the compromise that -- compromising the integrity and stability of the institutions of nation states in the middle east is not the way to achieve the much needed and much desired change. inde indeed, the experience of the last five years has demonstrated

beyond any doubt that undermining the institutions of the nations state creates a plitd cal and social vacuum that is quickly filled by institutions, sectarian militias and outright terrorists who's ideologies are hostile to the hopes for democracy modernization and civic order. from syria to libya, to arab and yemen examples. the challenge therefore is to achieve change within the nation state. not on the ruins thereof. the nation's state remains the most viable vehicle for modern thigh sags and social change. in its more progressive versions is the embodiment of civic order and democratic principles and policies. that is the hopes that inspired the calls for change since 2011. egypt traditionally the intellectual and political power

house of the region, demonstrated through the two waves of its revolution in 2011 and 2013, that an orderly and progressive change was response to the aspirations of the vast majority of the population while maintaining the integrity of the nation's state institutions is a viable choice. egypt shuns demanded change, but they rejected the ruin of their state institutions in the process. they believed that they can have a democratic government that is at once representative, and responsive to their needs and desires. forward looking and boldly committed to ambitious reform, the foreign policy of this rejuvenated reform and revived jip shun state is guided by principles that are are deeply embedded in our values, the conspiracy theories and conflictual world views and

strictly committed to the cosmopolitan principals of peace, development, respect for the independence of nations and non intervention in their affairs. while believing that regional and international interests are essentially reconcilable and there are also opportunities for regional -- if egypt could change its government, revive its regional role and embark on the most ambitious program of political and economic reform in its modern history without undermining the integrity of the state, so can our brethren. this principle continues to guide the approach to our region. revived democratic and reform nation states are the answer to the aspirations of the civic uprisings that swept the region some five years ago. sectarian militias, bloodthirsty

war lords are been contrast the product of the civil wars that the democratic aspirations of several countries of our regions have regressed to. ladies and gentlemen, if you would disagree that orderly change based on rejuf nation reform and dem ca ti sags of nation's states would probably be the best way out of today's turbulence in the middle east and indeed this continues to be the guiding principle that governs the policies toward the region. take syria for example, half a million syrians killed, millions of refugees and disz placed persons and unprecedented rise of war lords and terrorist groups, it's difficult to remember that this tragedy started with peaceful and legitimate demands of the syrian people, are perfectly entitled to. however, between the regional international powers that supported various militias to

have regime change in syria and those who sougt to reverse it at any cost, the syrian people had to endure one of the bloodest wars. how do we break the cycle in syria. to start with, we need to accept that the attempts to reverse the clock and resort -- restore the status quo in syria are as delusional as transformation in syria. by contrast our vision for the way forward in syria is based on two pillars, the first is to preserve the national unity and territorial integrity of the syrian state and prevent the collapse of its institutions. the second is to support the legitimate aspirations of the syrian people in rebuilding their own state through an acceptable political solution that represents them all. and furnishings an enabling environment for reconstruction

efforts. this is why we continue to support the efforts of the united nations special -- and we call on him to resume political negotiations immediately and without delay. it is also why we hosted two all inclusive conferences for the various moderate syrian opposition groups in cairo in 2012 and 2015 which brought together syrians from across the political spectrum and demonstrated they can agree on a comprehensive document that included a doable roadmap for the transition from the current plight in syria. you must have all noticed that these documents were the foundations upon which every subsequent effort, syrian or international, to put forward a practical political sentiment were premised. ladies and gentlemen, the review al of a reformed national state means that external political engineering is neither desirable nor possible.

the international community is not in a position to pass judgment on the suitability of national stakeholders let alone to decide to exclude any of them on grounds of convenience. the experience in iraq and debacle in syria should have taught us alt least that much. the same applies to libya. underlying the agreement was the acknowledgment that any viable sentiment should resolve around the three legitimate state institutions, the presidency counsel, house of representatives and national army. naturally, achieving consensus is among the three institutions and in the wake of violent upheave al is not easy. problems and contradictions abound and dead locks emerge profusely. however, this does not mean that we can opt to take sides between the three legitimate institutions in mosts of disagreement. or even worse, decide to alienate one of them in the hope that this might speed up the

process of reconciliation. in all frankness, several international and regional players have opted at one point or another to undermine one of these institutions or to replace the national army with allegedly benign militias, but not egypt though. we remain convinced of political engineering and we do not think any non libyan party is in a position to award or exclude libyan stakeholders, thus or vision for libya is based on unwavering commitment to the full implementation to the agreement and follows a clear sequential approach, our duty now is to encourage the presidency counsel to fulfill its duty to present a new, more inclusive and representative government of national accord. subsequently, we should all shift our attention to ensuring that the house of representative meets to evndorse the governmen and under take its constitutional work in

preparation for libyan elections which will bring about libyan bode bodies that exercise their -- libyan national state. meanwhile we should devote our efforts to supporting the libyan national army's efforts in the fight against the growing terrorist organizations in libya. i could go on and explore other cases of troubled nation state hood in the region, say yemen or iraq, but they all follow the same pattern. troubled nations states fall terg and consider creating a vac yum filled by organizations and sectarian militias they can all benefit from the same answer, revive, form -- based on civic ethics and full citizenship. the quest for reform and modernized nation state hood is not only the answer to the emerging threats in the middle east, it is also the answer to

the oldest of the conflicts in our region, the palestinian israeli conflict. egypt, as you all know, was the pioneer of peace in the middle east. our vision was and still is based on full nation statehood for everyone in the region. we are committed to bringing to a successful end more than six decades of this conflict. without which we cannot shift the resources of our region to more productive channels. to do so, the palestinians cannot and should not be denied the right to an independent nation state. the alternative to a two state solution is open-ended turmoil even if in the short term things look deceptively quiet and manageable. december pier ration and lack of any light at the end of what is indeed a very long tunnel could only be detrimental to any hopes of stability and prosperity in the region. two state solution and the

structure there of are quite self evident. what remains is a return to the negotiations in good faith. i would like here to remind you that the president has offered publicly to support any forthcoming negotiations and to provide, if needed, post agreement security guarantees. ladies and gentlemen, the rapid and large scale developments i have talked about in more than one area of our region obviously do not occur in a bubble given the strategic importance of the middle east it is only natural that several regional and international powers may want to be involved in seeking to influence the course of developments in our region. benignly and otherwise. egypt appreciates the stakes of the middle east are of interest to several international players and while we insist on national ownership of all solutions to the arab world's problems and on reformed nation stayed hood the key response to our challenges,

egypt remains as always ready to cooperate with all our partners to bring satisfactory conclusions to the crisis that spread in our region. in so doing, we cannot accept any attempts by any regional or international actor to use sub straighten ti tees. and sectarian militias to further their interests. acceptance of the necessity of change from within, one that preserves the territorial and institutional integrity and social cohesion of national states is a core criterion of deciding whether or not we can cooperate with any regional or international stakeholders in this regard. ladies and gentlemen, i am back today in washington at the moment full of promises and challenges. i came -- i come from a country that is moving quickly to restore its leading role in a rapidly changing region. the jip shun people have demonstrated their ability to

take charge of their future through two revolutions in the span of three years. the first to initiate change and the second to preserve the nature of egypt's unique moral and social foundation. we recognize that we face monumental changes and inherent problems, but the current determination to deal with these challenges is unshakeable. egypt has changed in many ways, most important of which is the confidence of egypt shuns and their leadership and the faith of the leadership in the resilience and fortude of the people. the confidence and faith allows us to embark on a new chapter in our history, to deal with our problems head on and to take difficult decisions and rise to the occasion to rate a better future for our children and grandchildren. we recognize our shortcomings and the necessity to achieve greater progress in the areas of

political, economic and social reform, while dealing with the internal challenges associated with societal evolution, education and economic deficiencies as well as regional and global turbulences and threats. egypt has always been and will continue to be the beacon of modern in the middle east. this will be even forced by implements policies based on a moral code of conduct and values derived from our history and heritage. ladies and gentlemen, we are on the eve of a new u.s. administration that has stated its commitment to working with its regional partners to fight terrorism and restoresta kbilt to the middle east. the question of how are two countries can cooperate to address the challenges that i have outlined is therefore in order. i believe that we share with the united states and with the new administration a firm belief in the importance of restoring stability and the territorial

integrity of the nation's states through supporting 2345ish8ly owned -- reconciliation and revival of these states. how else can we face the growing threat of terrorism. and how can we bring about a peaceful conclusion to the multitude of crisis in our region? the interests of our two countries are in clear convergence, in syria, we can work together for a peaceful settlement according to the vienna process and based on the geneva declarations, in libya work to support the implementation of the agreement and all inclusive government. we both share the unrelenting commitment to thor rad indication of secretary tear nim and terrorism. we both agree on the unsustainability of the current stagnation between israel and the palestinians and the need to relaunch the efforts to achieve the two-state solution. i could go on. but i trust that you have the idea. the middle east is in turmoil.

egypt is key in cooperating with the new u.s. administration, to address the challenges thereof. i have sought to out line our vision on how to address these challenges, and i trust you will agree with me that this vision converges with the stated goals of the new u.s. administration and the middle east. there by furnishing all the necessary conditions for a revival of our much needed strategic partnership. i thank you very much [ applause ] >> thank you very much for honoring us with a very serious speech, keynote speech for which we're very grateful.

the minister has kindly agreed to a conversation in which i will have a chance to follow up with some of his points that he made. i was quite struck by what you appeared to be saying about a common agenda with the united states and the implication was with the trump administration, you spoke about restoring stability, interesting president-elect trump yesterday spoke about his focus being on promoting stability in terms of his foreign policy. do you feel that the kinds of principles you laid out about eradicating sectarianism and promoting peace are in fact the common purposes between the trump administration in formation and the government of egypt?

>> well, there is a great deal of convergence, so by the statements that have been made by president-elect trump and some of his advisers in terms of the meetings we have had with president-elect trump during the campaign, that there is a clear vision in this regard, a vision that corresponds to our objectives. our objectives is to regain the stability of the region and to create from egypt a point of expansion of what we have achieved in other parts of the region. i think this is a mutual interest that we share with the administration and it shouldn't be in any way conceived that the call for stability is a call for the maintenance of the status quo, but it is a call for a organized change and progression of a society al demands of the

region which have clearly indicated a desire to forge ahead in a new fashion of inclusivity, respect of human rights and the more inclusive society, free from the scurge of terrorists and sectarian pressures. >> when you talk about that and you spoke, i think quite eloquently in the beginning about the need for orderly change and the difference between the kind of radical change that the region has experienced through revolutions, particularly in egypt and versus the status quo and no change at all and you spoke about this model of orderly change. again, i assume that the implication in that is that egypt is going to be this model of orderly change. what does that mean actually in

terms of reform, political reform, economic reform, within egypt? >> certainly i think open to the necessary involvement of all segments of society to phrase and to achieve those common values of dem acura ti sags of social reform that are necessary for any society to develop adequately. these are values of humanity, values that i think are well embedded in our common heritage and i don't think think are any longer matters of contention or debate, but they are to be implemented within the ability of societies to absorb and taking into account the various characteristics, certainly what has happened in the united

states and having had the benefit of living in this country for a variety of years over the last 40 to 50 years, the united states is very different than it was 50 years ago in terms of development, in terms of the degree of the maturity of its systems and even its social and moral fabric. i think this is a necessary evolution ne evolutionary process, one that corresponds to the aspirations to the people of the middle east that were demonstrated in 2011 and that continue to be the motivator of reform. it is a response from governments who are keenly aware of the ability of the people to take matters into their own hands, institute change and also it is important that though necessarily always the demand for change can be vibrant and

can be overreaching, but the threat has been what has resulted in places like syria and libya and the district functionality in creating vacuums in anarchy and the potential of civil conflict that can be very detrimental. when we see more than half the city and population, the population renowned for its entrepreneur recall abilities, for its educational standards, now the status of destruction and the -- what the people have had to endure is i think an example of what we should avoid. >> when it comes to syria, you outlined an approach which, i think, if i'm interpreting it correctly, really leaves the issue of political transition to

later. that from your point of view, the first thing is to preserve the institutions, and try to resolve the conflict and then deal with the political transition. is that fair? >> not really. it's not a sequential issue, it's an issue i think has to be addressed all at once. but from the perspective of a political process, because we cannot continue in advocating the same process that we have witnessed over the last five years and expect different results. if this status of conflict and destruction continues, it's apparent that none of the proponents is able or capable of achieving any definite success. and we should change course. to change course the security

council, the u.n. much include all the participants and reach an agreement that is inclusive of all of the political entities in syria. we take it for granted that such a process will necessarily change the nature of the dynamics of syrian governance. this can only be expected in terms of the consequences that have occurred out of these last five years. it would be ludicrous to think that those who have suffered will opt for the status quo in any fashion. >> i think that's absolutely right. it's hard for me to imagine, i don't know whether you agree with this, that the syrian people could accept president as their leader given the incredible death and destruction

he has reined on his own people. >> i would think this process should be all inclusive, should take into account the interests of all participants, all segments of syrian society and it's segments of syrian society and it's up to the syrians to decide their future and the manner in which they are governed. >> that's why i called you the model diplomat. you talked about the unacceptability of countries that are supporting, i think it was -- you used the term substate entities. the use of substate entities to advance their interests. and again, i don't want to put words in your mouth, but iran uses substate entities to advance its ambitions in the region. and that is a concern of many of your fellow arab leaders in this

regard. but my sense is at egypt has a bit of a more nuanced approach to iran. could you just elaborate a little bit on how you see iran's role in the region? >> well, as i indicated, i think the arab world and egypt as a contributor and custodian of arab national security is always advocating that this is a responsibility of the arab countries. and that we do not accept interference or intervention from without the regional context from any state. this is a matter of sovereignty and a matter of the cohesion of the arab entity and though we base our policy on principles of nonintervention, of respect and sovereignty, we recognize that

there are interests. and we must all accommodate national interests but not at the expense of what might be deemed as influence or interference. we have a very clear vision, and there are -- there must be consequences to any infringement on arab national security. and that is something that the arab world and its solidarity will always rise to the occasion to defend. >> one of the things that has always struck me about egypt, because egypt is you know, the largest, most consequential arab state, and it has a long history of civilization, ancient civilization and a cohesion as a state, that you look at the region and you look at the other

regional powers there. so if egypt, saudi arabia, israel, turkey -- when you look at the broader strategic picture within the region, how do you see those other players? how do they fit into your broad strategy? >> well, as i said, i think there's a great deal of cohesion within the regional arab states. their commonality of purpose but then we recognize, of course, the presence of states outside of the arab domain. and it has always been opposition that relations should be based on principles of mutual interests and benefit and that should not overreach into positions of influence or intervention to manipulate the

proceedings or to manipulate conditions within a state. these are well-founded principles in the u.n. charter and international law and we should continue to advocate and build the international world order upon. these are core principles, and the more we are clear on the definition of the limitations that are created, the better benefit, i think, all will extract. >> finally, i wanted to ask you about what you said about peace process and there's clearly a strengthening of the relationship between egypt and israel that's been quite noticeable under president sisi. and a greater egyptian leadership role of late than

we've seen over the last five, six years. but what i heard you say this evening was -- sounded more like you would be supporting perhaps an american-led process rather than taking your own initiative to try to resolve this. on the other hand, egypt has been quite active on the palestinian front in terms of seeking a succession there. so can you just give us a little more granularity in terms of how you see egypt's role and what you think can actually be done in these circumstances? >> well, egypt is committed. it's part of its foreign policy objectives to consolidate the peace treaty with israel and to continue to regard the peace treaty as a fundamental component of stabilizing the region.

and it has, i think, served for that purpose and continues to be the guiding example for wider peace in the region on the end of conflict. but it's not only that we have supported the initiatives. most recently, president sisi indicated very directly his vision for the end of the conflict and his readiness to be an active participant in bringing together the two main proponents, israeli government and palestinian authority, in whatever form of renewed negotiations that they would deem appropriate and they would be willing to engage in. it remains stated publicly that this is how we view the way forward to the end of the conflict. but there are many other initiatives. there is the u.s. administration, the current administration's efforts led by

secretary kerry. his determination. there's a french initiative. there's the constant referral of this issue to the united nations security council to which we are currently a member. so we'll continue to promote and abdicate on the basis of the negotiations between the two sides but this has to be on the basis of a conviction of the two sides to end the conflict. to achieve the two-state solutions, the viable way forward that can be embraced by not only the two peoples but can be embraced by the region, by the international community. and we will continue to provide whatever we can to support that process within the ability of both sides to recognize this is an historic moment and that is in their best interest, the interest of the region and in the interest of international peace and security that we finally end the conflict.

>> as you know, i have a little involvement in the last go around of direct negotiations. and one of the things highly problematic there was the fact we had no agreed terms of reference. they don't really apply to the israeli/palestinian dimensions of the arab/israeli conflict. >> we have oslo. >> and we have, indeed, oslo, but it doesn't have, in terms of reference for a final status negotiation that was as you know an interim process. so i'm wonder, there's been a lot of talk of late that it would be useful to introduce via the security council an updated resolution 242 which would have parameters or principles that would lay the terms of reference for renewed negotiation. is that something that egypt would find useful? >> i think the degree of its usefulness is the degree that

the main two sides would embrace and implement such a proposal. again, i think we have multitudes of resolutions that have set the tone and addressed many of the dimensions of the conflict but have not had the necessary impact to forge ahead in resolving the conflict. but any proposal or initiative or direction, whether in the security council or elsewhere, i think it's necessary that both sides are fully committed to recognize the value of such a process to their interests. >> you have been very generous with your time. and with your insights. and we're all very grateful to you. thank you very much. >> thank you. [ applause ]

tonight a senate hearing on the proposed merger between at&t and time warner. and senator mccain and newt gingrich discuss foreign policy. and the head of the washington, d.c., public transit hearing testifies at a house hearing looking into safety lapses in the city's metrorail system. media companies at&t and time warner are seeking approval from antitrust regulators for a merger worth $85 billion. the ceos of the two companies testified about the merger at a senate judiciary subcommittee hearing. media magnate and nba