there of this time we went too far truth and consequences of the gaza invasion and that is going to do it for now for more on the stories we cover go to r.t. dot com slash usa check out our you tube page youtube dot com slash r t america i'm christine. sure is that so much seven hundred fifty that is a fine mark let the arab awakening is often referred to as revolutions in the arab middle east there can be no doubt something in order to. download the official. i pod touch from the i.q. sampson. like. video on demand ati's minefield comes an r.s.s. feeds now an apology i want. to.

call. if. it is easy to. see.

the mission and free credit station three times for charges free. arrangement free. risk free. free. the old free blog video for your media project the free media the hard time. the british. market. find out what's really happening to the global economy with much cause or no holds barred look at the global financial headlines tune in

to kaiser report. a telemarketer broadcasting live from washington d.c. coming up today on the big picture. looks. at. the i can see.

the the in. hello and welcome across town funeral of the arab awakening is often referred to as revolutions in the arab middle east there should be no doubt something important is occurring in this region but should we be using the word rubble. lucian dictatorial regimes remain intact and foreign influences continue to prevail. can. cross talk what is happening in the arab middle east today i'm joined by michael monger in durham he is a professor at duke university in new york we have a loan ben my year he's a professor at new york university and in boston we cross to daniel pipes he's an author and director of the middle east forum all right gentlemen this is cross talk and there's only one rule you can jump in anytime you want i to go to michael in durham first do you feel comfortable with this term revolutions occurring in the arab world because there are so many different examples where you go all the way

from tunisia to yemen to bahrain egypt we could go on and on if you like to term revolution for anything that's going on in that region right now. one of the things political scientists debate is actually what constitutes a revolution and in a way a revolution is just a successful change of regime it needn't be violent they can be peaceful it's not clear that what's actually going on here is revolutions what we have is a lot of violence by organized military and government it's not clear that these are going to be revolutions in the in the sense that there's a regime change and the optimism that many people early on felt that these would not be just revolutions but democratic revolutions i think has not yet been borne out daniel finger you impossible it's very interesting here because if we can and we take the examples the two popular examples right now like tunisia and egypt to

a be they ok you're the dictator is gone but the military has taken their place and we still see the reports that came out in the last few hours that torture in remains in egypt so i mean that i couldn't see that is a revolution there i mean it just reached its east that the regime change at the top is gone let's all go ahead right you are just slightly mad which is that it's not the military took over in february for mubarak the military has been charged since nine hundred fifty two that in five military leaders now nuclear sort out the park and from far away that we've moved from more guard and i would emphasize regime continuity here. so tunisia and egypt i would say are quoted by the security military apparatus but in five other places you've got potential revolution in. the iman in libya and bahrain and syria and iran so no revolution so far but there might be some to come along van my or new

york what do you think about that i mean and should be thinking about revolution in a positive sense ok we can talk about that we will be democratic. well what we are really witnessing today in the middle east is what i call a revolutionary changes that is revolutionary changes by definition is that whether or not the status quo ante will be restored i do not believe that the status quo ante will be restored so in that sense they are revolutionary changes whether the military remains in egypt or in tunisia and elsewhere the changes will have to be to have to take place and i think all of our government with no exception in one form or another will have to introduce some kind of reform in order to meet the expectations of the hopes and aspirations of the people in that sense these are revolutionary changes or they are worlds have never experienced before and these

changes are going to continue for some time to come because the wave of instability or rouget changes is going to continue for for a while and no are apparently is going to follow the same pattern each country is going to adopt different kind of approaches ok michael i'm going to back to you and i mean is the military in the in the arab world a good midwife to bring stable democratic societies in your opinion and we don't have enough information yet. i would go farther than to say that the military is not a very good midwife i actually think i'm ocracy may not be a very good midwife the united states in urging countries to have elections before they really have the other institutions that make elections possible i think maybe making a mistake if i close my eyes and think what is it that makes the western system of government actually work what allows people self-determination it's not the ballot

box it's an independent judiciary and the rule of law so i'm worried that if we urge countries to have elections before they have any kind of institutions that are ready to do so it will be one election undone it's interesting again and i mean how do we marriage too because people are actually people are looking for change is ok and the west while i guess their knee jerk response is elections maybe elections are not going to really start solving a lot of these problems right here and i go to you daniel on that one first i go i'd go further than professor longer and say not only as a rule of law but it's all the other aspects of civil society it is freedom of speech freedom of movement and loyal opposition and these are the two all of this very subtle concepts which we in the west which we exactly which we in the west or in a sense born with are very alien much of the world and so it's a long process of developing civil society and then topping it off with marcus and

by the way democracy should begin with voting for dog catcher voting for municipal councils and then building up towards voting for the head of head of government it's a long slow process and you can't jump start it alone the a new york he wanted to jump in there go ahead case agree yeah i need sensors and yeah i know absolutely you know i think i think the the notion that you can introduce democratic reform that with the speed it's a terribly mistaken one the arab world is not the prepared united states has been pushing for democratic reform and is that going to work and is the other institution exactly what mike is. that is absolutely true either institutions are developed in particular i would say. economic development for example if you take egypt you can introduce all the political reform you want when you have fifty p. million people under the poverty line these are not going to provide what the people want people want jobs and opportunity once they feed their people and education this is the time that institution you have to create concurrently as you

move towards some kind of political reform but they would have to be rather gradual reform but moving fairly as explained this is the on economic development specifically sustainable development to empower the people from the bottom up again you want to jump in there i would disagree with yeah chicken and that's as much true of the england developed the first democracy starting with the magna carta but eight hundred years ago they were not rich by today's standards and there are plenty of countries such as sri lanka which have civil society with the rich and the plenty of rich countries saudi arabia. don't have civil society so they're really quite different when one is not in the search for the other materials daniel's point is right mina and i said i didn't really want to go my legal team had first thought it out it may not be well here you have. economic development but the thing is that egypt may actually have another

revolution just over the price of wheat they don't have a middle class developing the middle class is a strong counterbalance to the centralized power of government as long as so many people are dependent for their daily bread literally in egypt for of because of the price of wheat it's when it is very difficult so certainly gayle's right what we need it would be helpful to have some kind of independent middle class the absence of a middle class makes the development of rule of law a much more difficult ok. you want to jump into had no no. there's no question listen when you go to egypt and you see the poverty there and you talk to these people as i have and so many different occasions and they will tell you openly and clearly we do not necessarily want to avoid we are not interested as a matter of fact when you look at the further demonstration in egypt today what you see there demanding job they want you opportunities they want education they want health care they want housing they are there this time even are asking to be reversed back and put the emergency laws back in place because today it's chaotic

situation is emerging in egypt so what we're talking about here economic development from the bottom is basically you put need to provide the people with basic means so that they can they will be able to feed their kids they'll be able to send their children to school this is what is needed i am not suggesting you have the should know and their take no political reform but they said that both would have to go and in and has the united state is offering as it should and many other countries significant economic aid to egypt without which political full reform no matter how how well meant will not it will not really resolve the egyptian problems then you want to respond go in there go ahead i take exception to your i took exception to present during my years formulation if you strike the people. in effect need to be given food and jobs. that's the problem is this mentality of subservience and dependence needs to develop in egypt

and some of the other countries but egypt reflect a country i lived for three years by the way. is a sense of entrepreneurship and independence and ironically it was hosni mubarak's son gamal a banker who had experience in britain and elsewhere who was looking towards developing ships economy in this free market way and the military which is now fully back in. and in the saddle. is very socialist minded and very good handed with its vast anomic enterprises under its control and i suspect. we will see more of the state socialism that's been in place for sixty years and the kind of entrepreneurship it's necessary to create jobs and create wealth is not going to happen in the forseeable future it might michael thank you you can head to head along go ahead i thought you know you're really easy you can create jobs somebody

stop somebody and what i am talking about in the main and we've tried that in morocco is sustainable development project that is you go to villages thousands of them you get a group such as five six villagers together and they decide on the kind of project they want any kind of project that's going to create jobs empower the people and that is what you're going to need in egypt where they have millions and millions of people and get the power to like so you are not going to we're not suggesting i think it's for the government not to have economic development projects but you're going to have to start on the bottom up i sustainable development in these type of countries is a seychelle in my view to lifting them up in the future so that they can become. eventually you know it's all right gentlemen let me jump in here is we're going to go to a short reins after the break we'll continue our discussion on the so-called revolutions in the arab world stay with.

take. welcome back to prosecute about three miles you were talking about changes in the arab middle east. ok. michael if i can go to you it says change gears here let's look at geopolitics how much is the west really interested when they saying all these changes here and i think we we did a good job in the first part of the program is that it's pretty hard to define depending on what's going on to you depending on what area we're looking at civil society democracy reform the military is really very very varied right now but let's look at the region from the outside looking in how much does the united

states for example want to see the military in tunisia and in egypt stay in power more or less as they are date they will honor agreements like with for israel and they still have a good ally they that's what they want they don't they they've never really shown to be have any interest with the people on the ground they just want to country a leader they can count on. the problem is that there's no such thing as the united states when it comes to foreign policy what there is is an administration and i honestly don't know what this administration wants a lot of the democracy activists in egypt were frankly much more happy with george w. bush because there was a consistent push they didn't agree with everything he did they didn't agree with iraq but there was a consistent push in favor of saying no we're in favor of self-determination by the people of these countries the obama administration appears to just want to be on the side of whoever is winning we've recently as recently as january vice president biden was singing the praises of the libyan regime yet and now it turns out no no

libya is no good and it's always been bad so we just want to be on the side that's winning and i think people see through that the united states needs to choose some kind of consistent policy and articulate it and recognize that this takes place in the context of our only actual ally in the region which is israel. being happy having to work together ok. my or you were nodding your head here and we should talk about bahrain as well go ahead you are going to new york. you know what i think i think mike is to some extent is correct but i think the united states'. position are to be and it is this is a this what obama has been articulated three three sensual point one some reform will have to take place to that no violence should be used against peaceful demonstrators and three that the united states will reward those countries that follow the rules but we have to also remember the united states does not have the

same interest in every single country for example if you take the gulf state the united states is going to have to take an entirely different approach because of our interest because our concern about about iran hence our policy and relation with it with back rain is somewhat different so we are much easier going with bahrain and we doing says safer in libya or in syria at this point that is we have to distinguish here between american national interests in various arab countries and there's no question about it that our conduct and our reaction to each country is depending on the level of interest in each of these countries and their i wonder one other point i want to mention when it comes for example to the gulf regardless of the fact that behind has a majority of shiite the this is the majority of the population in the gulf is sunni and they are terrified for example of what iran is up to the united states doesn't have a choice but to support the current regime throughout the gulf so we have to distinguish between american interests the interests of the local government and

there is and they're very tough just to try to draw any kind of a template and say all arab states are going to follow the same result that's not going to happen ok daniel you want to jump in there i could see that you wanted to go ahead you had great head first like i'd like to correct which you sort of producing a united states has not had a consistent policy research professor monger pointed out under george w. bush there was a dramatic great contrast and three saying for sixty years we've worked with the tyrants now we're not going through the building used to be our goal now is marcos . it's a dramatic break but by two thousand and six or so given up on that sort of bonus continued giving up and we're back more or less what was pretty fast and free we had a very dramatic interlude for three years second course but was there was some way to reshape a good story change i mean you could say a change in policy did anything change on the ground mubarak was still there which is still to be still there and wait there were. to give you one example hamas won

in the past in authority. many many effects in iraq here in the us is not democracy a lot about the perceive it was not ahead and democracy brought the people we don't want to know you don't want the second point to be that i'm not so sure i don't want. most westerners don't want most muslims don't want. but the. the second point is i don't know if we have to have a consistent policy i mean in theory yes mostly this have a policy that works everywhere but i think will be very hard to thread this. through various different countries i think it's somewhat controversial to any of the not only doesn't it look at it's a very interesting point so the u.s. should just say in the in the european union should say in nato should just say we're just there for a national interest and nothing more we're not going to we're not to talk about democracy when you talk about we are also here for you know i mean exactly why we can't the hypocrisy night we likewise when we get to the park you see all the time

and i think when i go ahead go ahead in new york go ahead oh well you know you know this let's let's let's call a spade a spade the united states and the e.u. have a specific interest in the middle is no question about it they also now we have going to lucian uprising and throughout the region demanding certain changes certain reforms political reforms that are a better way their way of better life better education so that this is that doesn't mean that we cannot reconcile between our national interests and the interests of the. with the general public in this region there must be a formula but what i'm saying it's not a simple formula and it's not applicable equally to every single arab nation because our interests differ and the interests of these arab states also differ in connection with their neighbors very as i said before you can not deal with bahrain in the same manner as you dealt with libya because of iran because of our naval bases there and so and so we're going to have to do

a difference has the area of north korea kind of policies ok michael i want to go to you begin to drive home a difference malays did the firm the promote the formula is dictated by the our national interests as well while considering the interests of the lower of the nations in. as i said like the gulf and so you cannot really separate the united states cannot go totally against the interests of the gulf north can go focus only on its own there is ok mine go to hell i want you to michael and i have to find the wireless card how do you how do you mean original how do you get married how do you marry the two what's the formula. i can see it's quite right to say that we're not going to have the same policy for every country there are cultural differences there's a bottom many differences what i guess i'm looking for is some consistent principle of a way of saying this is what the united states is trying to accomplish the problem that i see i guess you could call it hypocrisy or contradiction is that we have seen the results of this with jimmy carter jimmy carter's foreign policy mostly

consisted of scolding countries that he thought didn't live up to the standards that the united states actually really didn't support itself because there were a bunch of puppet regimes around the world that we supported to try to prevent the countries from going communist now we scored countries for not having elections but we also propped up the gives dictators in the hopes that they will not become its nomic democracies well the who we have to have some more consistent principle it seems to me then you want to jump in there which would be your formula i'm not sure . i coined the term during the soviet era of friendly tyrants. i guess is self-explanatory we have now a friendly fire incident and i am not a lot of either i sure wish everyone were to come across america but i think it is in our interests and their interests to be a stability and that they move slowly and carefully towards as we talked about

earlier towards democracy and not to rush things and not have revolution not have some of them have iranian takeovers and so forth so i'm ok with with different policies in different countries caught apocryphally called inconsistency but that's the reality of making foreign policy especially for a great power ok long you are seen we've seen the result jimmy jimmy. jimmy carter it in some ways brought us the islamic revolution in iran that's very interesting let's go back into your it was democratic. other people say if you go to new york. and then you had the idea is absolutely right on this point that is we going to we cannot afford another nor should we have necessarily the same exact policy toward every single country that is not going to happen again because of the reason that measured earlier what we need to do how are we adhere to two or three principles that is we should be supporting reforms as as a general rule we should be insisting that the non use of violence against peaceful

demonstrators and we should also say that we will be rewarding those nations those countries that are going to follow the two of these two principles consistencies in that regard is absolutely necessary the president of america articulated that in a very strong go my goal for my client is not you want to stick or use a stick using if i may just play you have to use a stick some time when they don't adhere to as we have done with it with libya as we go into we need to do now in syria and elsewhere that is when the when these government do not adhere to due to to a basic initial cure a crime and then we're going to have to use a stick if it becomes necessary and i think some time we had some time too late in using the stick as we are doing say it's a program for with syria michael thank you what about these are military these humanitarian interventions is the setting an example good example of what can happen if if tyrants don't go reforms don't happen because you know there syria on the on the agenda there and this is sending messages through the entire region that

if you you know the stick can come out but does that make does that fix things or make things better. well what it seems to have happened in libya is were we there's going to be a long term stalemate and the people are worse off than they would be if there were stability and if there were. maybe even met some cases if there were addicted to a dictator so that the principle of nonviolence the principle of moving toward self-determination having us reward those i understand i'm skeptical that we know enough about which side to support we may end up supporting a group that ends up if they win will just become an islamic dictatorship ok danny let me give you the last word on this for the city of daniel the last word daniel let me end. let me end on a humorous note answer malcolm recently noted not samples times because you've got nothing to worry about if obama threatens you as in iran or. syria you've got

a lot to worry about if he doesn't say a word as in the case of libya or that lot so it's a straight it's actually true that when. u.s. president is telling us what's out there means you're ok all right gentlemen thank you very much here many thanks my guest today in boston and in new york and thanks to our viewers for watching us here on r.g.p. see you next time and remember cross topples. today violence is one.