>> forest care and maintenance is something we need to do again and again, it's not just one time and we need to make sure we have sustainable funding or that which could come from the private sector if we get the proper investment in there to make sure we can add value to some of the things we are looking for. host: she is a research fellow for the opera he and environment research center. thanks for your time today. guest: thank you so much. host: that's the end of our program and right now, we will take you to a form hosted by the wilson center and a discussion on the israeli-palestinian conflict. you can watch it on www.c-span.org and listen on the radio app. we take you to that event now. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2021] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> glad to welcome president and ceo of the wilson center to introduce our panel this morning. we also welcome acting assistant secretary joey hood to give

remarks on the biden policy -- by demonstrations policy. also the ambassador of egypt to discuss egypt role in brokering the negotiation. as well as the washington institute possible david mik ofsky after his most recent trip to israel and the west bank and last but not least, and bester james jeffrey who will discuss the strategic implications of the cease-fire and conflict. ambassador green, the zoom floor is yours. >> thank you, welcome everyone to the wilson center. i am mark green and i have the honor of leading our remark team of scholars and analysts. congress chartered the wilson center five decades ago to strengthen the relation between the world of learning and the world of public affairs. in other words, we seek to discern lessons of foreign policy.

nowhere is that mission more important than more challenging than in and around gazan regarding one of the world's most persistent conflicts between israelis and, -- and palestinians. on may 10, we saw in the most graphic of ways, and escalation of confrontations involving her israelis, palestinians and police in jerusalem from peaceful protests to violent protests, to rocket fire and air strikes, from the use of rocks to the use of incendiary balloons and drones. violence took a staggering toll, many dead on both sides with an estimated half $1 billion in damage. as we all know, there are few places in the world where violence can accelerate and escalate more ugly than here. there are a few places where ideologies are more parted than right here. hamas was designated a foreign terroristic organization nearly a quarter-century century ago and still refuses to recognize

the state of israel. thankfully on may 21, 11 days after the fighting began, a cease-fire was secured and the violence came to an end. there is no doubt that egypt played a pivotal role in the mediation and communication that has helped make the cease-fire possible. we all desperately hope the settlement is permanent or at least lasting but we all fear it could be fleeting. in other words, the future of the region remains uncertain. until -- and so often unsettled. there are disagreements with the government of egypt on several fronts, on matters of human rights and civil right, for example, we also must acknowledge the role that egypt continues to play, trying to help strengthen and broaden the cease-fire. as i said when i began, the wilson center's mission is to discern key lessons and try to bring them forward for key players and key decision points. nowhere are these lessons more

important or more urgent or more complex in this troubled land. we ask what's next. the last major battle between israel and hamas was in 2014 so what made this time different? today, we have a truly remarkable group of government officials and experts who can help us explore these questions and more. we will hear from egypt's abbasid or to the u.s. to discuss his country's unique role in the ongoing conflict and recent peace negotiations. mr. ambassador, thank you for joining us at the wilson center. we will be joined by the state department acting assistant secretary, mr. joey hood, who will give us an overview of the u.s. government's role during these difficult days and as we look ahead. we will hear from david mikofsky in arab-israeli relations at the washington institute for near

east process -- policy and connect them to the broader international and historical context. finally, we will hear from wilson center's phone ambassador jim jeffries, chair of the middle east program. marissa, back to you to get this truly intriguing conversation underway. >> thank you very much, ambassador green, for your opening remarks. before i pass the floor over, i would like to remind everyone that at any time during the webcast, you may submit a question by tagging@wilson centerwp or you can use wilson center.org. >> thank you. ambassador jeffrey come investor green, mr. makovsky, it's a pleasure to be here with all of

these people and it's quite an honor for me and it's good to see you all again. i'm not planning on making big news today. i think i will give you a basic idea of what the administration's approach was which i don't think will be a lot of news to you but maybe to some of the viewers here, it will be worthwhile. basically, stop the dying, stabilize the situation, get humanitarian assistance in, and then look for ways we can actually start putting in place the conditions and parameters to be able to start talking about a two state solution again. right now, the prospect seems pretty far away. when you look at this unconditional mutual cease-fire between israel and the militants

based in gaza, we think it was a function of the intensive but quiet policy of the united states and our partners in the earliest hours of the conflict. we are grateful to our regional partners especially the senior egyptian officials who played a critical role in all of this. it was a quiet one. the king of jordan, the emir of qatar played important roles in those 11 days. the beginning, president biden was focused intensely on ending the conflict as quickly as possible with as few casualties as possible. sadly, we know from past experience, that every day the conflict continues, more innocent lives will be lost. we deplore each one of those innocent deaths. we also knew the diplomacy by twitter was not likely to achieve results, especially in that short timeframe. that's why we engaged in dozens of private calls and

consultations from the secretary, the president to myself, her deputy assistant secretary who was out in the region. we did this in person and it it by phone and out in the region. we talked to a lot of our regional counterparts along the way. we faced a lot of pressure to change our strategy along the way. but we kept our eyes on the goal of ending the conflict as soon as possible. every day the conflict went on, the bloodshed was heartbreaking, but we in concert with their partners were able to levy a cease-fire 11 days thanks to the hard work our entire national security team here in washington , our partners in the region and their colleagues in jerusalem. i think it all speaks to the utility of this approach. there is a lot of important work still ahead to avoid future flashpoints and help rebuild and then address underlying causes

that led to this crisis, as i talked about in the beginning. just as we were focused in bringing about a cease-fire, we will continue to put a great deal of thought into the longer-term as well. the cease-fire is mostly held but everyone knows the situation remains fragile. palestinian militants are launching incendiary balloons and airborne explosive devices from the gaza strip, israel is responding with airstrikes against hamas sites. fortunately, no one at either site has been injured so far but if it continues, it's a matter of time. we want to reduce the likelihood that this level of conflict happens again. that's why we think it's essential to stabilize gaza through a humanitarian response with partners from the united nations, egypt, qatar and other partners. we are committed to working with all of them to provide that assistance and martial other international support as we can for recovery efforts. we will support that recovery

and partnership with israel and the palestinian authority in a way that benefits palestinians directly but does not benefit hamas. we are working for the various actors to ensure funding goes to gaza through transparent, legitimate channels and if you've ever seen the vetting procedures we and our partners put in place, is like a 60 page memo i have to sign off on every year. let me tell you, it is intensive. through all of that, we are providing more than 360 million dollars in assistance to the palestinians. that's $38 million in new assistance for humanitarian efforts in both gaza and the west bank. of that 38 million, $33 million is going to support the operations in those locations. $5.5 million will go to other humanitarian partners. we are working with congress to

ensure these resources are available as soon as possible. and that assistance will provide emergency shelter, food, relief items, health care, mental health and psychosocial support for those who experience trauma. as i said, we will be doing this through trusted, vetted independent partners who distribute directly to the people in need, not through hamas. throughout all of this, we are committed to strengthening our engagement with the palestinian authority and the palestinian people so that we can work with them to achieve a democratic and viable state that upholds the rule of law, promotes freedom of expression and supports human rights. in recent days, we have seen with that's more important. president biden has been crystal clear in saying, he believes palestinians and israelis equally deserve to live safely and securely and enjoy equal measures of freedom, prosperity and democracy.

the state department, including this bureau, is entirely organized around this vision. to that end, we are strongly encouraging both palestinians and israelis to avoid unilateral actions including settlement activity, annexation of west bank territory, and the demolition of palestinian homes. as well as incitement to violence and providing compensation for individuals and prison tracks of terrorism. as we have stated many times, we firmly oppose the eviction of people from homes they have lived in generations. those types of actions exacerbate tensions and make it -- and make a two state solution more difficult to achieve. we will focus our efforts on affirmative and practical approach that encourages constructive, positive steps that help keep the possibility of a negotiated two state solution alive.

equally important, it just improves the lives of palestinian people and israeli people in tangible ways. we need to lift up palestinian lives so they can enjoy the same level of prosperity as israel where gdp per capita is no higher than france or japan while gdp per capita in gaza in the west valley -- in the west bank is only a few thousand dollars per year. we will reaffirm our commitment to the status quo. we hope to see a jerusalem that respects all of this diversity ensures everyone has equal opportunity to live, worship, build and thrive in that city. with that, i will turn the floor back over to you and to our other guests. >> thank you very much for your remarks this morning and we will get back to you with questions, thank you. i would like to now address the

ambassador of egypt. as ambassador greene mentioned, egypt has played a key role in brokering the cease-fire between hamas and israel last month. your country continues to communicate with the hamas leaders and also is the first country to have signed a peace treaty with israel. tell us more about egypt's role. how did these talks evolve and what are the main features of this cease fire, particularly moving forward as the situation remains quite fragile. >> thank you, marissa thank you invested a green, ambassador hood, ambassador jeffrey and also let me welcome david makovsky as well.

basically, let me start by saying that historically, i don't need to enter into history. it's known to all of us and we know who are the pioneers of peace and are parts of the world. we know what egypt has done during the sadat years. we had in egypt to withstand a huge backlash when we have opted for the option of peace. that was within the arab circle, of course within the arab world and islamic world. and other organizations whereby egypt has to either stand its ground firmly were subsided -- were subsided -- or subsided and taking the bait. we have stood our ground and as

we stood our ground, we have able been date -- able to transform. wherever we are today when it comes to the whole depiction of the region is because of that cornerstone, egypt standing strong in full conviction of peace and the need to work with large and's -- work to enlarge and stand on its peace option. we have done that and slowly but surely, we have seen the madrid peace conference happen, we have seen the oslo accords, we have seen the peace treaty with jordan and, just lately, we have seen the other arab countries and israel come together in terms of the abraham accords. this is just a backdrop. ever since the split between the west bank and gaza in 2007-2008,

we had to endure a number of escalations. but not just sit there and watch but actually to have an important cardinal, pivotal role in terms of d escalating and bringing back peace. there is a cumulative experience that egypt was able to accumulate. there was just another round of confrontation between israel and gaza and that took place for a continuation of 11 days. until we managed to broker a peace. operation jerusalem so the palestinian name or the guardians of the walls, the israeli name, was significantly different from the previous three rounds. that was due to a number of factors.

basically, an entangled political scene not only in israel were in palestine but throughout the region. let me quickly mention here that in israel, it was struggling to form a coalition government and israeli confrontations between palestinians living in east jerusalem and is really sick forces -- and israeli forces and of course convictions and civil unrest in what -- inside a number of cities within israel of a significant majority. that's the situation that prevails in israel. in palestine, let me just say that the first round of parliamentary elections were announced by the president but were canceled later on in israel had refused to allow balloting

in east jerusalem. there was violence in the occupied west bank and upgraded markedly in recent months of 2021 and the palestinian economic outlook also remains precarious and subject to numerous political security risks upping the level of frustration and the people in gaza remain deceased in under a dire economic and humanitarian circumstance. the region at large representative of national players, let me say that several bases have hit the middle east from syria to libya, iraq and yemen, putting additional burdens on their nations. messages from the u.s., some had been interpreted in different ways.

people have seen a u.s. that is probably more prone or bound to have the middle east subsided and it policy and priority but others see differently. in europe it, europe has chosen some kind of confusion when it comes to how to advance. you have also seen a quartet that is not been of much help in recent years. of course, covid-19 with its repercussions, these were extremely overwhelming but also had an impact on abilities of those players who had put all their efforts into bringing about a cease-fire to succeed. nevertheless, we have managed to do that in 11 days. let me just say that in the midst of all this, the efforts

of egypt have been relentless. the cease-fire is part of what egypt sees as a holistic approach. after brokering the cease-fire, cairo moved in three parallel tracks. one is stabilizing the cease-fire, hosting israeli delegations with negotiating teams and both -- with both the palestinian authority and hamas in proximity talk to negotiate the terms and the requests of a prolonged cease-fire. such as economic and humanitarian arrangements including reconstruction. the humanitarian needs and the need to deploy resources in gaza. all these issues are still

actually part of an ongoing effort that is exerted by egypt to sustain the cease-fire, to have the cease-fire hold and continue to hold. another track is the prisoner swap track which is also i'm going and -- in these proximity talks and will continue. the other track which is parallel here is the intro palestinian track which is one that egypt has continuously had in the split happened in the west bank in gaza, a continuous effort exerted by egypt to bring about the palestinians together under one legitimate umbrella rule. these are three important components of what we are trying to do.

revisiting the 2014 cease-fire agreement was also something that we wish to build on, meaning that we plan to change some of the roads that have somehow depicted the game. ever since 2000 14. loopholes are there and we need to be able to be more stringent in whatever plans we have in terms of humanitarian assistance, and terms of reconstruction and rebuilding gaza and some of the practices need to change. amongst them is a practice we have seen in the past that basically saw cash flowing into gaza. that kind of arrangement we have had in the past needs to change for a much more responsible

atmosphere to predict. egypt's reconstruction efforts, quick reference that i can make that the end of my presentation, palestinians in gaza cannot pay the price of regular confrontations between hamas and israel. they are the overwhelming majority in gaza. the population gaza is around 2 million the overwhelming majority have no particular political affiliation. they need to be catered to in terms of their needs, their livelihood and this is part of what we see in egypt as dissuading a segment of the palestinian society in gaza and providing the light at the end of the title, dissuading them from radicalization and

extremist kind of approaches. this is undoubtedly a cardinal point that needs to be that different occasions brought to the forefront a conversation. the confrontation left many palestinians in gaza homeless. the estimates are around 10,000. each of pledged 500 million u.s. dollars to start rebuilding and reconstructing in gaza. the difference is that there is no cash involved in whatever egypt has announced in terms of its efforts to reconstruct. but is -- but it is ashley material we will be providing an

ejection companies that will be at the forefront of these efforts in terms of reconstruction. egypt considers that all of these tracks are instrumental in terms of paving the way for the conditions necessary for direct negotiations. when the situation on the ground allows this, it is important, an integral part of the holistic approach. whatever we are doing in terms of the cease-fire, sustaining the cease-fire, rebuilding reconciliation, all this needs to cater to one direction which because of the ultimate goal, a direct negotiation resume in a peaceful process towards a peaceful outcome. this is what i can say at the beginning and i will stop here and follow the rest of the conversation.

>> thank you very much. you described the context in which egypt plays in this important move and it's not just about this particular cease-fire but it's linked to not just the is arena but the arab, israeli arena and the larger geopolitics in the region as well. i would like to turn to david now. you have been in israel and the palestinian territory and you are an expert on the political domestic scene. we have seen a change in government, benjamin netanyahu is out in naftali bennett is now prime minister. how will these internal dynamics affect the implementation of the cease-fire which continues to be quite fragile. >> thank you for having me and good to see the other just in which members and it's good to be with ambassador hood and jim

jeffrey and the ambassador of egypt, thank you for organizing this, thank you very much. coming back from there, i feel it's a very unstable situation on the round to begin with stuff to get to your point, the domestic dimension in israel. the instability, it's unstable because perceptions of what happened in this conflict are not agreed upon basically. you have the leader of hamas who politically feels he is flying high as a kite. the palestinian leading pollster who has been around for 30 years, right after a conflict says hamas wins and after three months, things settle back down. right now, he is feeling a sense

of victory. the raley's have achieved a lot of military successes as well. basically, their view is that we want the status quote. the israeli view is they want the status quo minus four hamas but not for gossip. how do you draw that distinction? that's something that ambassador hood and i think they alluded to which is a belief to find ways to help palestine without helping hamas. that means -- that means going back to the formula. there was a cease-fire but since 2018, israel and hamas have had a kind of cease-fire. the contours have been like this, you stop firing rockets, no incendiary balloons in israel will help facilitate $360

million per year that would go through the united nations for public works, money to deport people, fuel which would mean the electricity and power plants would get closer to 24 hours post that was basically the last three years until lately. what happened mid point is that hamas lost interest in the united nations. they said we want the money directly. they wanted to decide where the money goes in the money sadly went to rockets and for a tunnel . it was hundreds of kilometers around gaza. it certainly is very extensive. it's hard to understand, the opening of the gate was the last

to go in. everyone -- everyone's humanitarian aid for gaza but the difference is that the money goes directly to hamas. at a certain point, the money went directly to hamas and they used it for nefarious purposes. with israel signed off on at a certain point, the hamas view is we don't want the united nations, we want to take the money we want to decide where the money goes and that's certainly not the israeli view that is -- that has seen four rounds of rockets fired and then retaliation. i think it's an unstable situation, frankly. the qatar view of saying we will put out balloons and burn your fields. we are holding israel responsible is what they say.

these are the details you don't always read about in the newspaper but this is kind of what's going on in gaza. egypt has done a fantastic job i think on trying to be a mediator and i only have respect for cairo. the situation with prisoners is not a level playing field. israel says they have two dead israeli soldiers and to people that have had, it shows disabled people across the border and hamas wants over 1000 people. that's what happened last time. they got one prisoner out over 1000 my think over 200 the people they released went back to practicing terror. the prisoner issue is also a big complication. to your question, marissa, on top of all these object tunes and differences, where does the

domestic policy of israel play in this. the government has primarily members from the right in this government has fewer members from the right, more from the left and also an arab party for the first time is a member of the coalition. it's an islamic party actually. it's a great diverse government. but they are also united saying help gaza but don't help hamas. can you thread the needle? secretary of state tony blinken said help the pa. the question is will hamas let that happen? clear is how mosque said no, we won the war and you guys stay out and stay in the west bank and we will stay in gaza, are in

charge and we have nothing to do with you. in theory, they said we let you into the plo but we don't have to make any concessions between israel and the palestinian authority. maybe then we will talk to you. all these reconciliations have been going on since 2007. i think egypt has done a fantastic effort to ring the palestinian movement together whether it's from hamas to the west bank to gaza. it's 2007 and its 14 years later and it hasn't worked. that is hard. the final pieces what sort of negotiation, the united states under democrats and republican administrations have tried to do what's called final state, solve the conflict and that was

clinton at camp david and clint -- and condoleezza rice. under the obama administration, we had a team later this a team leader in the venn diagram doesn't extend. this should be over something that is attainable. i don't want to depressed people but saying there is some objective problems. you have a new prime minister who is trying to keep this government together. his concept as consensus, apple pie and motherhood. most israelis would want to see the palestinians having a better life but they don't one hamas firing rockets.

can they draw that distinction well? the opposition was saying you are weak and you will cave to hamas. i wouldn't be surprised, frankly, if there are those elements that want a second round, saying you are not going to get the euphoria to come down and expect a lot will happen. i don't think government wants a second round. i think some in the security services don't see a way out because they don't see the you and being able to fulfill that role -- they don't see the you and being able to -- u.n. being able to fill that role. if there someone would weigh in and says everything has to go through the united nations or the palestinian authority, either one and hamas has to join

a technocratic government, palestinians with the pa, it might make a difference. we made statements in washington and cairo and people know what we think. unless there is a concerted u.s. move and concern that this impasse is just going to intensify because hamas will say where is the money. i'm a bit concerned and i'm concerned that bennett, that he will feel more pressure from the right and they will say to him the equivalent of what people said to john f. kennedy in 1961. they are testing you, hamas is testing you the way a new young president was tested in the united states, the way omert was tested. i worried that mean the

prospects of the second round. i think the only way out, marissa, is for the u.s. and egypt, the three relevant actors in this story, to clear up until hamas there is no way out. you have to do this through the united nations and you have to become folded into the pa to be a technocratic government. it's not hamas at the table and i think there has to be a clear sense of policy direction. left on their own, i worry this will just get worse. it's a very unstable situation. i'm just being very candid in telling you why i am concerned. >> thank you so much. we will get back to you with a few questions. we will probably follow up on

some of your points about proactive u.s. engagement as key to moving forward. i would like to turn to ambassador jeffrey to give us the geopolitical implications of what happened. many in the -- many in the region continue to see the core issue as the palestinian-israeli issue and perhaps no longer the arab-israeli issue. there was the historic signing last year. others see the region in the scope of iran which continues to be the number one challenge. how do you read the geopolitics, particularly in light of what happened in gaza two months ago? >> thanks for putting this together. greetings to all of my colleagues.

i can't compete on the details of the cease-fire or the background to it as my three colleagues can. first of all, the role of regional geopolitics, particular guy ran, secondly shifting arab -israeli relations and thirdly, the united states. we will start with the first on apologies to joey hood. he has heard this from me many times. the role of a ran -- of iran and everything destabilizing in the region cannot be over emphasized. hamas recently thanked iran for his support, diplomatic and in terms of weapons systems after the last crisis. i ran not only supports hamas, it also supports more radical extremist terrorist groups in gaza who are capable of blowing

up cease-fires even when hamas just seemed to be willing to play. it goes further than that. israeli leaders and people throughout the region stressed the danger of iranian rocket and missile programs. be they in southern lebanon or increasingly in syria, be they elsewhere. we having the -- we have even seen them in iraq and yemen. israel, when it's engaging in any palestinian issue, particular a military issue with gaza, they have to keep one eye focused on iran is because of the fear that it could be drawn into a conflict or a deterrence against such a conflict could be weekends depending what it does on one front, it faces more serious problems on another. the barrage of hamas rockets

challenged but did not overwhelm the iron dome and other israeli defense systems. it may not be the case in the future, dealing with rockets and missiles out of southern lebanon, syria or out of gaza at the same time or in close proximity. that is something that israel has to think about. one thing that did turn out that her from the standout -- from the stamping of israel is the support of arab states. we begin with egypt, with jordan and with qatar but also the forced -- the fourth arab state of the abraham accords. they were unhappy with some of things israel was doing in jerusalem, they basically stood by their new friend and partner in regional security, israel, throughout this campaign and certainly did not take the side of hamas. that is a shift, not a major shift but a perceptible one from

the situation during the 2006 lebanon war when i think most of you who know the history remember initially arab states made noises but after president assad's speech, all of the commentaries went silent throughout the arab world. it's a different arab world. it's an arab world that works with the international community, the you and and particularly the united states and their contributions to peace that we just so with egypt and this recent conflict. finally, the united states. the u.s. administration, like all administrations, this is not a specific criticism but they decide the priorities -- the priorities for the international agenda, good luck stop .

the visit to asia it was brought to an abrupt halt after aircraft carriers were shipped to the middle east. and the entire diplomatic apparatus of the united states dropped most everything else to focus on the gaza cease-fire. this is the nature of the middle east that every administration has experienced. we can dream about pivoting two things that are viewed strategically and i'm the first to admit that china is the biggest threat we face but chuck the middle east is itself important and it is very hard to ignore. i think the lesson that everyone has gotten so i will stop there. >> thank you very much. before i turn back to you, i want to remind our viewers that you can send questions via twitter or email them to the wilson center.org.

you have heard from the ambassadors about the important role of the united states, a proactive role, particularly to ensure that this cease-fire holds and we are back to the negotiation table, back to talks at least. you have also described more of a minimal roach with the focus on the humanitarian assistance in gaza. there are also very high expectations from other regional leaders. the king of jordan is due in d.c. and that will probably be very high on his agenda. i am moderating this discussion from ammann and this continues to be the number one issue for the country. what are you telling your regional allies, particular those who insist that the u.s.

role in leading this remains integral to any progress moving forward? >> i think our partners know very well how active we are being on this but it's quiet and this is something new through the u.s. government, not just going back to a past administration but several administrations prior. the typical approach for the past 20 something years has been let's go for the whole mobile a, a nobel peace prize, let's try to get everything solved and it hasn't worked. with this administration is trying to do is to see if we can just make lives better for people, can we stop the dying and make lives better for people whether they are israeli or palestinians? that will take a lot of work on its own. you have heard some of the challenges right now. countries will not want to go

back and with substantial assistance without knowing that israelis in the united states and the palestinian authority is on board with the approach. egypt has an ambitious program of its $500 million donation and there will be challenges in implementing that because it's something new. we've got to try something new because we have tried the same approach over and over and it didn't work. i would not say this is a minimalist approach. it's a different approach and it why it st -- and it is quiet. i have been monitoring my email as we have been talking about how the secretary will make a phone call to a key leader. i was with him in rome and berlin when he had on-site meetings last week with regional counterparts. this issue was top of the agenda because i had to smile as ambassador jeffrey talked about

how every administration likes to pivot away from the middle east and focus on other priorities. you cannot do that fully. the human race has somehow decided that the middle east will be really important and that's been true for thousands of years. we know that's true now and it will be true going forward in the future. got to keep working on all of these issues but you are just not going to see it as the big headline and shuttle diplomacy might have seen in the era of kissinger or some other administration. we will have people going into the region, making these phone calls, having these consultations between chelators as we go along -- between key leaders as we go along. we can stop the dying and get humanitarian assistance flowing in a way that satisfies everyone and actually gets the

palestinian people and helps them. that will be something good to start with. >> thank you. on that very point, basically what egypt expects from the biden administration, what would you like to see? is it too early to say that the two state solution at this particular point no longer is viable? will it become more complicated to get there if we don't see more traction? >> let me quickly agree with ambassador jeffrey and also ambassador hood. pivoting away from the middle east i don't think is an option. i think i made a reference before that if you decide to leave the middle east, the middle east will never come to

your decision. it will continue to follow were you wherever you are. that is one and two, i think we have been very appreciative of the support of the biden administration and the role the biden administration has shown in terms of supporting the efforts toward attaining a cease-fire. what we need to see is the continued role that is proactive. proactive in terms of, and i will probably add to ambassador hood's point, yes important to secure humanitarian and reconstruction and the likelihood of people to make life more prosperous but also i will add to that that we need to see to it that the effort on the

overall comprehensive nature of peace should not be a shelf. meaning that whatever steps we take towards alleviating the suffering, attention to the humanitarian, attention to reconstruction, using the spirit of the abraham accords as well, should lead to american negotiations. this is part of our holistic approach. this is what i think the administration is capable of in a matter is timing. let me go back in time and say when has been any timing opportune?

it's a decision you take. it's a policy issue that you have to consider and to move ahead once you feel that you have been able to achieve success on the fronts you're working on. the two state solution, let me agree that it is eroding. the need to work toward peace is of importance at least to the minds over here at the embassy and my own mind and people back home and throughout the region. i personally don't see how another sort of solution would be in the interest of either israel itself and its security or the palestinian and their aspirations of statehood. that means the one state. the one state to my mind is bubbling. it does not cater to anyone's

security. the two state solution has to remain live, has to remain at the forefront of efforts at least as a target and in accordance to resolutions, international legitimacy but also in terms of providing the necessary conditions to work toward the two state solution is of extreme importance. we all know that the clinton administration was very close to reaching a true breakthrough. but it didn't happen. in the aftermath of that, we had a number of understandings with omert on land swaps and this is how you can always advance with the notion of two states.

this will be at a certain time, the core of attention whether it is jerusalem or refugees or borders. all these issues will come at their time and that is why they are called final status issues but the drive toward them, we should never lose sight. >> thank you very much. david, you mentioned earlier, the important role of the united states but also working together with egypt and israel and perhaps moving toward something attainable but you didn't talk about what that thing is. ambassador hood describes the u.s. approach is one very much focused now on bettering palestinian lives and improving conditions on the ground. is that the attainable thing or are you hoping for more? >> i'm glad you got me on that

because that's my favorite topic. define to do what the injection investor said. i completely agree with him and i think investor hood would agree with that. analogies. -- i sometimes use sports analogies. if you can't hit the homerun, hit some singles or doubles or to put it in international sport, you cannot run the marathon, run the 5k race. i like to be practical. i spoke to naftali bennett eight or nine times\ he has always said to me that most of the palestinians live in certain areas, maybe 90% of the west bank. he calls for autonomy on

steroids, a marshall plan. ok, taken at his word. this is what ambassador would was saying about approving the economics. imagine if these areas were 90% of the palestinians, you would have economic prospects, he would ring and the americans, even the gulf states in the emirates have had their problems with the pa, for example. they told me privately that if there was a private sector initiative for all the palestinian cities and the surrounding areas, we would contribute. the saudi's would contribute and a few of the other wealthier states. they would do their part. whatever the bad blood is, what about a private-sector effort to improve the zones?

what about giving the palestinian police in the area more authority? show something is moving. i'm nervous about saying let's again -- let's get them negotiating but negotiated by what? are we going to hit the homerun and when the marathon? the goal is a two state solution but we have to get there so let's do some practical things. a + focus would work forb bennett and it's not the end point, it's a way to get started. the way to get the palestinian police to have more authority. in that context, you might want to bring in more people from gaza who are fully vetted and don't become a security risk. that would be good for the gaza economy and make them less reliant on hamas. what you could do -- and this

would be more controversial and parts of the new coalition that i don't think it's impossible is to say no building outside the security area. 85% of the israelis over the greenline are in a percent of the land largely as tasha jason. -- are largely adjacent. imagine if you would say, not adding any new people, not a single new person outside the security barrier, that's 85% of the west bank. that would at least preserve the option. my point is don't shut the door. you can't solve it all now, you cannot do the final status issues. if there is one thing you remember from what i say, between solving the conflict and

managing the conflict, they are shrinking the conflict stop i think you can makeminimize the n the parties. you can bridge over a river, you cannot bridge over an ocean if the differences are so wide. i think there is something specifically that can be done, but my fear is if you don't do anything, you shut the door over time. you will be able to solve in the future. stop the slide to the one state approach. the way to get there is view the emma roddy template -- emirate template. imagine if you took partial steps.

remember last summer, it was not ancient history. there were the governments for annexation. suddenly, the emma roddy's -- emirates swooped in. 80% is a huge number. 55% would be a landslide. 80% says they would prefer peace over annexation. what if we think creatively, broaden the abraham accords -- abraham accords. that means you have to stop anything over the barrier. the israelis would say we prefer

normalization to annexation. it won't solve every problem, but it will go a long distance in limiting this conflict. it is not just between managing and solving it, is limiting the differences and we could call it the 5k or 10k race for international audience, this is in the realm of doable. >> i will get back to you to see if these ideas have traction in the new israeli government. but also in ramallah. i will go back to ambassador jeffrey for thoughts on what you have heard so far particularly what you see is feasible. >> all in all, i think on this

issue, which i have followed intermittently for 20 years, the position that the biden administration is taking is wise. there is no real alternative to the two state solution. we have general agreement on this panel for that. pursuing that, given the sensitivities involved and the long history is something that requires step-by-step work. i think that david's idea of shrinking the conflict on the one hand and the bureau's idea to do diplomacy as opposed to big dramatic diplomacy which gathers a lot of attention but also raises expectations are well aligned. also i agree with what the other ambassador has said. there is a real opportunity at this point because the region is

changing. the united states relative role is not going to be as great as in the past. there are pretty scary alternative security dynamics out there. it is also russia. -- that will encourage people to come to a lowest common denominator of what works in the region. as we just heard, the emirates managed to broker normalization over annexation. there are going to be no compromises if this architecture is to hold and less absolutist

demands are flogged. -- >> i want to turn to questions from the audience, because we have quite a few that came in. with regard to the u.s. administration, can we expect more long-term efforts in terms of ngos on the ground and when will the biden administration support these groups? i assume we are talking about ngos and the palestinian territory. >> thank you for the question. as i said in my opening remarks, other than the u.n., we do send a significant part of our assistance through trusted ngo partners in gaza and the west bank. as our funding gets released from congress and as it gets to the system, you're going to see more and more of that flowing to those organizations.

in our experience, that is what we found to be the most effective way of going around organizations like hamas and in some cases, the palestinian authority as well. because of their and ability -- inability to manage these resources. that's why we are going to be using these ngos. i'm not sure what the person meant by development work. right now, where focusing primarily on humanitarian assistance so people have water, food, health care. then, you can thinking about these types of funds that mr. makowski was talking about and we are working on the other things that he mentioned and other items as well. how can you take advantage of this new strategic situation that ambassador jeffries described so that you have emirate private sector funding

for a water project that helps them all across the board. these were not dreamed about a couple of years ago, now they are closer to reality. how can you think about beyond ngos, but governments working together may be getting assistance from ngos as well in terms of training. in terms of how do you manage the temple mount when maybe you have 100 emirate tourists and youth start throwing rocks at whomever? that is going to be a difficult and different situation than what you have seen over the past decade. these are the sorts of things we need to be working through and that could provide those ways of making the conflict a little bit smaller and a little bit

smaller, as david mentioned. >> thank you. now a question about what egypt can do to ease the transport and delivery of needed and legitimate supplies via the gaza egyptian border? >> thank you. let me say that we have the -- crossing, which is devoted to personnel. we have the [indiscernible] for construction material. what we have been able to put together in terms of assistance to alleviate the suffering in terms of reconstruction was in the amount i have mentioned. it is not cash, but it is actual projects on the ground being

implemented and they have been designed as such for the purpose that we both agreed on. we need to make sure that the resources we put are channeled through the proper means and reach their objective without any kind of diversion. this is part of what i had explained when it comes to the difference between the mechanism that we are creating today and the mechanisms that we had in 2014. on of the ideas that we are floating around as well is to create an international fund, u.n. fund that would have the ability to supervise the implementation of these projects to alleviate also the dire circumstances of palestinians living in gaza. this is an idea worth wild -- worthwhile in terms of how to advance it, i think it caters to

to the general feeling here in the u.s. that the ambassador had also mentioned in terms of making sure that these efforts are concerted, but also channeled. this is what we are doing. we have been receptive to the growing needs of the palestinians in gaza and we will continue to do so. let me make a quick reference and use the opportunity to say that ambassador jeffrey had mentioned the regional elements that are not necessarily benign in their interventions. we have seen chaos in all parts of the region. syria, libya, yemen, and others. and even in gaza itself. this is an angle that i

completely agree with. it needs our attention. it needs a lot of focus and not to somehow overlook it. it needs to be center stage in our attention. i say this because the following. if we have an f of the conflict and the tensions -- if we have enough of the conflicts and tensions, let me say that the only recipe to ease all of these conflicts throughout the region is bite tackling the core conflict in the region. -- is by tackling the core conflict in the region. we would be doing the world good in terms of really focusing on the elements that would pave the way toward that kind of direct

negotiation that we spoke about for the two state solution to remain alive as the only viable solution for the conflict. we would see as a consequence, the easing of so many conflict throughout the region if we are able to tackle that main conflict that fuels radicalization and extremists throughout the region. >> i spoke that there is basically such huge respect for cairo and the understanding of importance of bringing stabilization to gaza and a better life for people. israel and egypt are very much on the same page in wanting to not help hamas, but to help gaza. to do what ambassador hood keeps saying about improving people's

lives. i find strategic convergence, but i must say i was a bit troubled on my trip. i had six or seven israelis and another for five palestinians. they all raised the [indiscernible] c-span.org gate. it's about getting the egyptians building, but this went on for a few years. i wonder if there was some way, if it was just humanitarian. if this new bridge crossing open up in the last few years, i feel like there is no synchronization on it. i was troubled because i know the respect that egypt was held in. this seemed like a discordant note that it was not synchronized. i don't understand, and if it's

ok to have this opportunity to use and egyptian representative to explain it to us because there was a lot of concern. that this is partly where the cement is coming from for the underground tunnels. maybe ambassador, if you could solve this for me because it's coming at a time of respect for cairo. >> thank you. let me just make this point here. you refer to the tunnels, the smuggling. let me say that the joint board as we have 13.5 kilometers with gaza has been a huge headache to egypt in terms of it being detrimental to our own national security.

in sinai, and throughout egypt as a whole. i always make that analogy with our 1200 kilometers with libya. anyway, back to these 1 -- 13.5 kilometers. what was used through these tunnels were illegal and maybe some would consider judah met in terms of the foodstuff -- maybe some would consider legitimate. nevertheless, our point was that this should and and the measures that we have taken in sinai on the borders with gaza are only indicative to the amount of resolve that we have in order to shut these tunnels down.

if we have been successful in doing so, there has to be a way above ground to continue to cater to the needs of the people. the only thing i can assure you here in this conversation is that nothing that egypt does is not coordinated with either israel or the pens -- palestinians. i'm sure we will have the ability to sit and chat in the near future and we can expand on this later on. >> thank you. we have a few more questions and about 10 minutes to go. -- 15 minutes to go. what steps are the u.s. and egypt willing to take if there

continues to be increases in illegal settlements and demolitions and the occupied west bank? what does this mean for the long-term peace process? >> i don't want to speculate on what might happen if this and if that. that is always a dangerous path for a diplomat to go down. i will restate our policy, which is that we want to maintain the cease-fire and try to de-escalate the situation. it includes incendiary balloons, rockets, airstrikes, settlement activity, annexation of west bank territory, demolitions of palestinian homes and all the rest. we believe that those things exacerbate tensions. we of course believe that israel

has an absolute right to defend itself. we are not saying that if those rockets come, they cannot respond. they absolutely have to. we want to avoid that cycle of violence. no unilateral destabilizing actions on either side. the path that we are -- that is the path we are going to take and if things happen as we go along, we will have to address them as we do and we will do so quietly for the most part. >> ambassador, on the ships and steps that can be taken? -- on the egyptian steps that can be taken? >> let me just say as a general position, the two state solution is the only viable option.

anything that counters, anything in terms of confiscating land or evicting people from their homes, anything that erodes the possible peace outcome in general and runs counter to the peace spirit is something that we have always called out and we will continue to call out. this does not preclude the fact that we have our strong ties and strong links and relations with the israelis. in fact, they have been appreciative of the fact that we are honest and public and in private and this will continue.

>> the egyptian ambassador stressed the coordination with jordan and his remarks. what are the future roles of the gulf states the signed ab are him accords? -- ab are him -- abraham accords. how do you see this role particularly in the near to immediate future? >> you mentioned the a-plus be -- a plus b idea. you have your money going to government, we want private sector initiative. ambassador hood is going to appoint someone from the american private sector who is going to focus on where most of

the palestinians live to do economic projects. maybe it will be industrial zones or other things. i think there will be a security component, too to give the security forces more room and be more dominant in some areas. it is 40% of the west bank, but if you could show the people's lives are getting better and there is an actual coordinator and no one can say the money is going to hamas or other coffers, it is a private sector initiative, i have heard from senior people we are in. we will join it. i would like to see that. i also think you might be able to do some industrial zones near the gaza border, may be on the israeli side. i realize at one point --

there is no one hunter percent guarantee. some things that we give people a stake in success, i think that is possible. i talked to israelis about more gaza workers. i think we should be more creative. i would even think about this, and i heard that a senior israeli talked to a senior golf official about looking at the egyptian side. about you don't want to spend money to hamas, fine. maybe there are things it could help with in the it ships inside . palestinian workers they could come in, and they would bring money home. i think that the burden should not just follow on -- fall on egypt. but the gulf people should help, as well. >> do you see or have you heard

in your recent trip traction from the palestinians that this is something they would like to see? the gulf countries coming into help? >> i would say that hamas personally -- abbas personally, he is still angry. not about the abraham accords, but he sees his big nemesis. he doesn't want to take their money. we not asking him to take emi rate money. we are saying there would be a consortium of gulf states that would contribute to this economic --. i do think that what we need to stress in general is the abbas succession in this whole context. this is like they'd hundred pound elephant in the room, so

to speak. -- this is like the 800 pound elephant in the room. it wants to maximize its political leverage for the post abbas period. that is the meta-story here. with the people in ramallah saying to me if they want and, we are not tried to block them. we are just saying there is a price to joining this club and that is you have to accept the agreements we have signed with israel. that means that a diplomatic concession. hamas'view is no. we want it all because we feel we want etc. that is the concept to a lot of this instability is the belief that we want to be best positioned with the public and with palestinian institutions on

the eve of succession. if we don't see that story of succession as looming, i think we are missing a big piece of the picture. >> thank you. this would be a great topic for another panel discussion highlighting what is happening in the palestinian territories vis-a-vis the future of leadership. we have a few minutes left and a lot of questions, so i will try to put them all together. i will ask ambassador jeffrey to step in here. what role did iran play in the military conflict between hamas and israel? there is evidence indicating that iran shares a strong relationship -- military relationship with hamas. has this recent infighting

between hamas and israel, it definitely helped hamas rise again in the polls. david mentioned pulling changes -- polling changes months into wars. has this elevated iran's grip on that particular arena, knowing that there are talks happening regarding iran's nuclear program? >> good question. it gets to the core of iran's exploitation of israel in its regional strategy. this is very much my personal view, not something that can be totally verified. iran doesn't want to destroy israel, other than as a practical problem if israel gets in its way in some sort of

conflict. in part because iran knows it cannot destroy israel, that israel has tremendous military capabilities that iran can only dream of. iran is aware of that. the people running around -- iran are aware of the realities in the region. what they have seen for many years is as the arab world and the ambassador described the step-by-step process moved closer to israel, the arab-israeli conflict is replaced by a palestinian israeli situation or issue, iran thought that that opened room for it to achieve some kind of echo throughout the islamic and arab world by taking a hard-line position against israel.

the interesting thing is while israel is faced with this continuing hard-line position, it is seeing less and less resonance i think throughout the rest of the region. that is the point of the abraham accords having held solid as did other various partners. this raises a question of just how valid is that iranian strategy? iran will continue to pursue it, because it sees israel now as a key player in a coalition of regional states that is designed to deter and contain iran. nevertheless, it is an interesting development and i

wouldn't say that iran has benefited significantly. from the conflict. not at all like and 2006 led by assad, the hezbollah rejection is front did much better out of that conflict and they did out of this one. -- than they did out of this one. >> we have time for a final response. this has been a very rich discussion. there are lots of other questions, and i apologize we did not get to all of them. i hope that this will be the first of many other discussions on this issue. my ask to all of you is to share one take away from this discussion that you think might help the process move forward. >> it sounds to me like there is

an awful lot of convergence in terms of ideas here. to reiterate what the administration is going after, to maintain the cease-fire by avoiding destabilizing unilateral action on any side. to aid the palestinians and a way that follows the law and helps people directly and not hamas. we will be doing that with our partners like egypt and qatar. with them and others, we're going to try to set the conditions to return to real discussions about two state solution through quiet diplomacy . if we can make progress on all of those things, i think that will help us set the table once again for those talks to be fruitful. meanwhile, we will keep an eye on iran. as ambassador jeffrey said, they

are problematic here. over time, it could be increasingly -- at the same time, we are saying the iranian strategy backfire on itself as it pushes the gulf states closer together. i don't think that will be a winning solution for iranians over time. we will keep an eye on it, and pressed back on them everywhere we can with those regional partners and allies like egypt. >> thank you. >> let me just say that continuing efforts on building on the cease-fire, having a cease fire sustained and humanitarian and reconstruction, we need to show the people that there is a light at the end of the tunnel.

to be able to dismiss any fact of that adds to their frustration and to add to their hopes. we need to see that kind of hope to be able to bring about a better sense of goodness. as opposed to extremist and radicalization. when need to continue to work on a holistic approach in terms of factoring in direct talks whenever they are timely. we need to work for that and. we need to see proactive engagement -- we need to work toward that end. iran is certainly at the top of the list. let me just say on iran, i think

the nuclear file should not be dealt with in isolation. they should come into play, and they should be part of the overall package of whatever could be reached as iran is concerned. the last point i will make is on the need to support the palestinian authority. the need to support the ambassador. we should not hold our support contingent to a series of succession, although succession is important to keep in mind. as long as he is there, he is the real powerhouse behind the oslo accords and until this very day, we need to see them enabled.

we need to show the palestinian people that there is this kind of hope for us to be able to prevail. this was a very interesting discussion, and i learned from. >> thank you. david? >> i want to again extend my thanks for organizing this and for stimulating discussion. there was a great sense of convergence between assault -- between us all. to see the cease-fire being stabilized, and also the need to have a targeted two state solution. we all agreed it would take real grassroots steps. i try to focus on what is the most urgent, is to make sure the cease-fire doesn't [indiscernible] now, i worry that the perception of who did what, that left to

their own devices, i think it would lead to a second round of violence. i think there is a real effort of united states and egypt to ensure that hamas has no way out and because we are on the eve of succession, that the pa has a greater role in gaza. the general view is somebody has to disarm hamas, and when they do, they can come to us. i think they realize there is a risk for the pa if they don't be more preowned -- proactive. if they have the united states, egypt, qatar, if you could bring

that power to be and say we are not going to let you guys this thing unravel to a second round, we are going to make sure that there are some clear procedures, clear construct. if the money goes to the united nations or the pa, it is not going directly to hamas and the issue of being within the pa framework, this is what it will take to joint. these are the concessions you will need to make. without this kind of supervision of united states and others, i am afraid it won't just stagnate . it will descend into another round of violence, which i think will be tragic. >> i hope you are wrong. >> i am the first person to hope i am wrong. [laughter] >> ambassador jeffrey, last words. >> unlike david, i remain

optimistic. i think we heard realistic ways forward. i think the tenor of the international community and the states and actors in the region and the reactions to this latest tragic outburst of violence has been notably different than what we have seen in so many other ones involving israel and the palestinians, lebanon, or other competitors in the region. the consensus, the level of consensus throughout almost every country in the region on how to go forward at least in general terms -- the devil is in the details and david has laid them out, but nonetheless, the general consensus on how to move forward is stronger than we have seen in a long time. i think that is a basis upon which we can all build. >> thank you.

thank you all very much for your time today and for sharing your thoughts on this very important topic. more discussions on this will be planned for the next few months. we hope that you will also tune in and thank you for listening. goodbye. ♪ >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. >> at media, we are built to keep you ahead.

>> c-span giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> jen psaki is holding a news conference today at 12:30 eastern time. watch live as she takes reporters questions here on c-span. >> today, a conversation about how the budget reconciliation process works in congress. watch the event live on c-span. online at c-span.org, or listen on the free c-span radio app. >> the administrator for the centers of medicare and medicaid services discuss health care access, medicaid expansion, telehealth services and the impact of covid-19 on the health industry. this also includes interviews with unitedhealth group executive vice president dr. margaret mary wilson and democratic congressman berra, a doctor. from an evenho