Electrons can be spun up or spun down. And electrons can be here and be there at the same time. This is the greatest paradox in all of science. How do you resolve the fact that you can have dead cats and live cat simultaneously exist in another state before you make the observation . And if you, if you ever find a solution to this puzzle tell me first. [laughter] nobel Prize Winners debate this question. There is an alternative. The alternative vision is that the universe splits in half. In one universe the cat is dead and in the other universe the cat is alive and universes keep splitting into other universes and that eerie seems to be the one preferred by string theory. And this lends us to the last question in the last question is, is Elvis Presley still alive and another parallel universe . The answer is possibly yes. Possibly yes if this theory is correct and the universe splits then perhaps in one universe the king is still alive. Lets take one last question because i have to get designing your books and i have to get to photographs. Taking one last question. A superhero on his tshirt. Thank you. My question was if you could put someones thoughts and stuff onto a fisc could you build a robot body and put them in there and they could just live out their daily lives in a robot body . Okay if you could put the mind into the robot and you would have superpowers, this is something that cannot be ruled out. If one day and this is far in the future we put all of our pathways of the brain onto a fisc and put this discontinuity robot, the robot could be perfect. The robot could be handsome, gorgeous, beautiful, superhuman with the powers of the sideboard and looked just like us to accept have superpowers. This is something that cannot be ruled out. This is called superior. I should point out superior is 100 years away so we are not going to see it in our lifetime however it is something we cannot rule out the fact that maybe these surrogates may be will live our lives as surrogates and that is what the movie surrogates is about. They preferred to be superhuman and this of course is a hollywood movie bruce willis messes it all up and turns off all the superhuman bodies at the end. Anyway thank you so much for being here today. [applause] what i want to do now is to sign your books. You have been a great audience. Thank you so much. [applause] up next on booktv after words with guest host Joshua Muravchik from the advanced studies. This weeks walid phares and his book the lost spring u. S. Policy in the middle east and catastrophes to avoid. In it he analyzes the events of the arab spring and asserts that washington entered the conflict to bait and allied with the wrong side. He predicts a major breakdown in u. S. Middle east policy making and explains what policy changes he believes should be made. The program is about an hour. Host walid phares you have written this book that we are going to discuss today. Before we get into the book let me first start by asking you who you are. We have met at conferences and on some talk or grams but i dont know much about your background and i would would guess other stoned as well. How did you come to this subject . Guest thank you for the opportunity. Thank you for being my chat companion on cspan. Born and raised in lebanon. I was a professor of political science. I was in public politics in lebanon. I have published books in arabic and french but my American Journey in academia started in 1991 as a professor for Atlantic University in boca raton, florida. I was in charge of middle Eastern Studies. In the 90s i published articles because we need to publish to get the tenure and one book on the conflict in lebanon. It was only after 9 11 that i moved to washington and that became an analyst with msnbc on terrorism. I published a number of books in the most red book was and then the war of ideas in the confrontation and then the one that preceded this book that actually this book is volume two, the volume the coming revolution. It published in 2010 and i cited your work and the that book projected that there would be a rise in Civil Societies and eventually there would be sort of a civil war or a race between islamist on the one hand and the secularists on the other hand and it now i have published this book called the lost spring to analyze the evolution of the projection. Let me also add that i do it vice members of the u. S. Congress and the parliamentary group. Host that is a very busy and distinguished professional resume. Let me try to get a little more inside your mind. What led you to leave lebanon to emigrate to the United States . Guest actually i did not want to leave lebanon. I was teaching. I was in politics. I was also a publisher of a magazine which was focusing on precisely what became of the arab spring and that was five or six years ago. It focused on the future of minorities in the persecution of minorities, ethnic, religion but also women and democratic movements. In 1990 there was a major event. A i could not continue with that work in beirut. Beirut had a free area where we could publish in relative calm and in the syrian army invaded all of lebanon and the choice was simple. Stay in beirut and have a shrug freedom or leave to the United States and i had other personal reasons to come here and pursue a ph. D. I was offered a job in florida that is how i became american. Lets go the syrian army had entered lebanon in 1975 so what happened in 1990 that made you feel you needed to leave . Guest in 75 or 76 the syrians controlled parts of lebanon, not all of lebanon. What was known of east beirut or the free areas of lebanon did not succumb so i stayed there as long as there was a piece of land that was free. Many lebanese left from day one. I stayed throughout the 15 years of war. But definitely having been in public speech having opposed the Syrian Opposition and having published books on minorities and the freedom of democracy living under syria and occupation would not have been a choice if i wanted to continue to write. I had a dream to get an american ph. D. Anyway and teach here so both facts came together. Host thanks. Now we begin by having some sense of where you are coming from both geographically and intellectually. You start out this book with quite bold assertions saying that the outcome of u. S. Policies since 9 11 have been the inverse of what the policies were intended to do or proclaim to do that al qaeda has grown. I think you say it has grown it immeasurably and we are witnessing the rise of not only islamist but salafist meaning the most extreme form of islamist, salafist forces and regimes. That is quite a powerful statement. Do you want to defend it, elaborate explain it . Guest this is one of the cornerstones of the book. We had the an optimistic view, these are the rebels. The changes happening. It looks like Eastern Europe and it is not that then you have to view that the entire arab spring is only about the islamist and nothing could be done in the middle east because the fight has started already. In my book i make the case case that at least either none or the other, it is both at the same time so you are right. From 9 11 until 2011, that decade had gigantic efforts in the region. We removed the taliban. We may moved Saddam Hussein from the region. We gave space for societies to emerge and to play the game of democracy. Many in washington forget that the next two peaceful nonviolent revolutions which have failed but they were there, were impressed by what was happening in afghanistan. It was not only the baath party but Many Political parties. It was a mediocre democracy but that is how democracies begin. I made the case in the book that the arab spring was influenced by two president s. One was the revolution of lebanon, 1. 8 Million People in 2005 rows in the syrian occupation. It was not entirely successful because hezbollahs weapons remains and the green revolution in iran in june of 2009 that tried to rise against the arab. The arab spring had its own experiments and to answer your question the jihadist to have been removed from afghanistan, al qaeda have recreated hubs all over the region. They are back in iraq and the city triangle. They are in the yemen, in somalia. In syria where alnoosalnoos ra has expanded into lebanon. Egypt is fighting them in the sinai so statistically speaking yes we may have taken out bin laden and alawlaki but this is the generation and now we are talking about the third generation. Host apart from al qaeda is it your sense at this point that the islamists are winning in the region after what we have seen and certainly they were winning for a time but then there has been a push back. What is the pushback in egypt and tunisia, what is your sense of the state at play now . Guest absolutely. In america we are in a delayed understanding of what was happening. When we wanted the islamist warned the islamists are winning most of the answers were in egypt and tunisia in other parts the secularists are raising. Everyone is saying the islamist on control so what is happening is a race and in that raise the islamist in the jihadist are constantly getting whatever they can and then there are outflanked by egypt. If they were warned about egypt when 33 million egyptians marched on june the 30th, not just the largest demonstration in the history of demonstrations in egypt, this is because the silent majority has shifted. In the past you have on the one edge of Muslim Society a large slice of islamists and jihadist. On the other side you have liberals ,com,com ma a thin slice which will struggle and then you have on the top the regime with america or against america. What was not moving as with the case later in latin america is the silent majority is millions and millions of people who watch tv and they dont do the fight. What egypt has done not in the first revolution but significantly in the second revolution is the silent majority moved. It shows the secular camp over the islamists but that is not yet the full success of democracy because democracy needs a revolt against a dictatorship. It was done against mubarak and against morsi. The channel in terms of revolution as the case and tunisia to get in Political Party because only new Political Parties can reorganize democracy and allow all parties to function normally. Host lets stick with egypt for a few minutes because i was struck by some of the things he said in the book. One of those is you Say Something to the effect that the arab spring is back on track. Back on track isnt your exact word but finally we have it and egypt is in effect on the path to democracy. A lot of other people, including egyptians i know look at whats going on in egypt and say well what is happening is the military is back in power. There is no democracy in the democracia sort of been put on the back burner or in the closet or Something Like that. Your take on it seems to be very different. Guest it is very different because when we were reading facebook and the debates including april 6 and all that the triggered waves of january january 2011 the same critics were saying no the new reformers are the Muslim Brotherhood and the opposition and mubarak are friends. There is a third force coming. But we need to do is read what egyptians especially youth and women and other minorities. Host women are not a minority. Guest women and minorities, you are right. The American Perspective the women are a minority which is not true. Statisticstatistic ally you are right. Egypt has discovered it has a majority that doesnt want anymore totalitarian regimes. While the military are in power im contending and it would be verified in the next month that despite all that the military will try to do to keep their power, maybe general sec will be elected as president but not in uniform and this is a major change. Theres a constant maturity now that would go back to Tahrir Square if another attempt. Had for example many critics in washington are saying they are arresting not just the Muslim Brotherhood is members of liberal groups. True, and we will criticize them for that but the alternatives the critics are talking about is to go back to the Muslim Brotherhood. You will find an overwhelming majority of egyptians that will tell you we dont want mubarak, we dont want more say in anyone whos going to come to the president ial palace will have to follow a trend towards democracy. Now they are in a transitional democracy. My view is an analyst is this revolt done against the Muslim Brotherhood was not immediate but the choice the egyptians had was either islamization or or an interim state where yes access should we criticize such as the arrest of these individuals so to support the process and put pressure on the government to stop these arrests you cannot reverse it and go back. Needed to mubarak or the regime and that would be my view. Host i certainly find, i share your sense of alarm or it did the path that it was on. I felt that the Muslim Brotherhood solidified its grip on egypt that nothing good would happen neither for the egyptians nor for anybody else in it would never be democratic but right now i guess im a little less optimistic than you are about where egypt is going. I note, im not convinced that you can create a democracy on the basis that the mass of people will go to Tahrir Square every time there is a deviation from the democratic course. That will either itself and it was exhaustion and people will wont keep doing it or else at some point its just chaos if its ruled from Tahrir Square. So whats besides the everpresent threat that if the new regime becomes dictatorial that people will go back to Tahrir Square, do you see other Structural Forces that are going to push this in a democratic . Guest that is actually the question of the day that the book is trying to answer. We have not answered fully because thats another book. The book is saying is you just argued getting rid of but the brotherhood would try to establish is the biggest victory because had they been able to do it it would have been very dangerous. There would be no civilian or secular regime or the oz haar site which is the moderate sunni leadership so this is how i see it. From a liberal democratic perspective from america, from sweden in the west when we look at egypt its still behind. Egypt would be comparable to the latin american struggling democracy on their path to move forward but away from the military regime that existed before and hopefully now away from whats happening in venezuela. In egypt you have several things that change. The mass participation that we think sometimes it is one day or two days, this is a balance of power with anybody that wants to assert the unstoppable power. Second, you have the judges. The judges have demonstrated across egypt, thousands of judges have asserted the role that they want to keep things under the law. You have labor union who for the first time have shown some determination to maintain also the sort of political culture. The women that you just mentioned are now more assertive. What is happening now is a sort of a dome under which the new Political Forces are moving forward. It is not yet, im i mean egypt is not even greasy at or southern italy or spain which are struggling still, democracies with in the west but it is moving forward. So from the western perspective we cant judge egypt from a static perspective. I think there will be a crisis and i think if all egyptians do not agree on their future and even between how much they are going to keep islam or keep islam and the constitution there will be other debates. I am as an historian trying to say egypt went through a very difficult tunnel. Now it can go out. Now the liberal forces in the Democracy Forces can regulate but my no means its the end of the process. Host i want to stay with egypt for a few more minutes. You say in the look you make a recommendation for u. S. And western policy toward egypt now which is in keeping with what you have just said that very much at odds with what is our policy right now and what the prevailing wisdom is among most people who comment on u. S. Policy toward egypt. You say that we ought to step up aid and embrace egypt more warmly than in the past. Do you want to elaborate . Guest absolutely. Im afraid that if we dont then egypt is going to go into populism. They will have a strong leader and there will be more influence of the military. They will talk to other leadership in the world by the military delegation or the government of russia, so if you dont come now informs this new partnership in the new partnership should not be ideal partnership with the governmental regime. We had it with mubarak and his serve the interest of the people were not happy. Then we had it with morsi and morsi was using our partnership to create an islamist state so now we need to do it from peopletopeople. Trying to divert some of this aid from the actual sector of Civil Society in egypt and we may not have to do it on the u. S. Government to people but from the egyptian people and there are multiple ways to do that. Congress should do a lot of precalibrating for aid going to egypt. The egyptian should also do a lot in my advice to egyptians and its not very clear in the book because its mostly addressed to american readers, theyd send me to send to america english speakers. Theyre comedians and ardor should be here. This is the egypt that america does not know. Our hollywood does not know what their hollywood is in terms of Public Policy but even the cops should visit our own churches here. That is 12 of our population so i am for a strong engagement between america and egypt to regain egypt that for stables who want to be stable and move forward. Egypt now seems to be emerging as a leader for a larger block of saudi bahrain and jordan going in the path of egypt in terms of pushing back against the islam islam brotherhood. If you want to have a smarter policy despite the problems that exist in egypt the way to absorb them would not be to push back but now is the time to talk. Klesko when you talk about aid to Civil Society in egypt one of the difficulties has been that the Egyptian Government for many years under mubarak and under morsi and i dont know that it has changed, has been extremely difficult to deal with on this particular point. Egypt has never been among the most repressive of dictatorships. It was just kind of the middle of the pack dictatorship but on the point of allowing foreign aid to Civil Society they were one of the most recalcitrant and have been straight through and right now there are american ngos whose staff including Freedom House, the National Democratic institute, the International Republican institute was tried and convicted in egypt simply for channeling funds to Civil Society so is there a way of coping with better getting around it . Guest i followed what happened with their ngos there. On the one hand as an American Government we should be very firm and asking the egyptian authorities now and the next Egyptian Parliament to be elected to stop the prosecution of our ngos so on the one hand we need to be very firm. On the other hand you have to listen to the arguments of egyptians and why were they angry at these ngos . One of the answers is most of the people who they have trained were Muslim Brotherhood in the sense that you see now when the Muslim Brotherhood are coming to washington. They are basically shuttled by many of these ngos or other organizations and ngos come to washington and they are ignored. There needs to be a rebe a riester added a station that what we are doing in egypt and these ngos have thought that by, im not saying exclusively with the Muslim Brotherhood perceiving the brotherhood as reformist before they reformed their own ideology. But let me say from peopletopeople there is a window now. Egypt is fighting a huge battle against the radical Networks Inside out. Also in urban uprising along the valley of the so now any aid coming straight to villages or cities and the perspective of helping Civil Society i dont think the next government would be elected in the next parliament if we do at it the right way would object to that and we could rectify in those ngos that are our ngos should be back in egypt and they should negotiate their return in their safe work in egypt. Host walid i have to quarrel with you a little bit. They may say that the Egyptian Government is force the people that the ngos are partnering with in egypt were primarily islamist or brotherhood people but when they say it they are lying. Its not true and truth in advertising or in full disclosure i am a member of the board of one of these organizations, Freedom House so im pretty well appointed with its work and i do know the egyptian staff member of Freedom House who were arrested and tried and convicted, some of them here and some of them in absentia none of them are islamist or proislamist and i think the proof there is that the indictments of these ngos came still under the mubarak regime but they werent dropped by the morsi regime. The prosecution continued. I think if the real reason for the prosecution was that the ngos were working with the islamist then somehow the Morsi Administration would have allowed the prosecution to drop. Guest i totally agree with you that the intention and leadership of the ngos was not to back the Muslim Brotherhood and the staffers on the ground in you may know better than i do but that is not what i intended to say. The groups that we trained, most of the groups that we trained posed as ngos but they were members of the Muslim Brotherhood. To me its fine. That is what the egyptian side is saying and last morsis government is very smart. They were already pushing against the judges so was very short, one year. On the one hand i agree that our ngos and i set it in my should be back in my intervene for them but they should be smarter in the way of engaging. I have been also as you know in many meetings with europe european ngos in american ngos and they invited the people they were engaged with. Im not against it. My criticism was why was it not open for the other side . Why didnt we see people we have not been invited so now my point is not knowing the entire series of facts that we need to have a review of everything that was done in the past and go back and reengage. Host let me take this quarrel to another area. When i read your account of egypt i really felt at one with you in terms of your strong fear and dislike of the brotherhood and disbelief of those who say that they are just moderates. They are somehow the equivalent of the christian democrats in europe. I dont believe and i follow you in this that they are democrats of any kind and they have a completely different agenda. I am on the same plane with you but i was surprised in the book at how far you go in making the accusation that u. S. Policy was probrotherhood or proislamist. It seemed to me it accommodated to some extent to the islamist but i didnt think the islamist or didnt appear to me that the islamists were the ones that the u. S. Was favoring. Youll argue repeatedly in the book that in fact we were favoring islamist. Guest oh i do. I have a lot of evidence but i also have statementstatement s by people who try to knock on the doors of the state department of our other agencies to partner. I mean my argument was that the nonislamist forces and ngos have tried so hard to partner or engage with the u. S. Government only to find that the ngos are government and institutions including the opposition and im not excluding both sides, if the bureaucrats on both sides have been at i spy expertise that this is a viable force that we need to do business with and that the brotherhood eventually eventually the Good Intention in washington is thinking that the brotherhood will reform. We go back to argument number one. There are many rumors in town that say well we love the islamist. We were led to believe by academia and maybe by expertise that they will reform and my whole point was that they did not reform. They are using an interim strategy which led us to believe that we could partner with them at the exclusion of the other side. My point is not that we knew who we they were and what they were doing. We didnt know how far and we parted with them would be my argument. This go because you said the thing that struck me the most in the book was being way out there when you said that the Obama Administration embraced the demonstrations against mubarak to the extent i think we are on break here. We will have to pick this up. I see that we are going to take a quick break and then i will pick up my question to you when we come back. Guest thank you. Host walid, i was challenging you on your claims about the degree to which the Obama Administration actually favored or supported the brotherhood and let me read one sentence here which i thought was guest strong. Host strong and stronger than i would have said or believed. He said the Obama Administration dealt carefully with the offense and Tahrir Square talking about 2011. It increased pressure on mubarak only in proportion to the growth of the Muslim Brotherhoods participation. Guest absolutely. This is a strong point i made and a purpose. I was following not just a day or day but hour after hour. These were critical attacks that indeed im not charging the entire administration because when i use that term that means that everybody from state to nsc to the statehouse understood that these are our guys and we need to help them. I am making the statement that those who gave the actual advice went to ask mubarak to go down actually favored the idea that the brotherhood would be leaving that revolt. So when you have the demonstrations which basically began as a result of a call by facebook. It 85,000 likes. Thats the beginning of the revolution. Facebook was liberal. 30 or 40,000 members of that facebook came down to Tahrir Square so the original Tahrir Square april 6 and others. The brotherhood and aljazeera we stay behind. They were afraid of the regime. They did know how is going to end up. They didnt even know if the Obama Administration in the west in general were going to a love mubarak to its only when the umbrella was provided to the demonstrated second day, their day, fourth day when the Egyptian Military was brought by washington do not go. This was the beginning of the collapse of the mubarak regime. Then is as if that was coordinated through the brotherhood web site of the Tahrir Square coordinated themselves. It was when the brotherhood were in fact the statement of the white house changed. Before it was we want to see how we are going to solve this issue between the government and the protesters for the first 72 hours. When the brotherhood was in and aljazeera was covering and cardelli began to become essential than mr. Mubarak issued it. Host i would give you a different way to interpret that because the implication and tell me if im wrong but i think he just reaffirmed it. The implication of the book and i think what you said is that because the brotherhood joined and the u. S. Administration had a favorable attitude toward the brotherhood than our administration decided to go farther in saying mubarak you must go. So it sounds as if our favorable attitude toward the brotherhood is what led us to go farther against mubarak. An alternative explanation of the sequence and i dont disagree with your description of the sequence but another way to look at it was this demonstration began with secular young people, liberal minded and there have been many previous demonstrations as you know so well but they were always tiny. A small group of come out and suddenly there were tens of thousands and later more but even tens of thousands made it a watershed, a tremendous change. Something different was going on and then there were a few days later hundreds of thousands. The Muslim Brotherhood was very cautious or cagey and they at first didnt stick their necks out but when they saw that there were hundreds of thousands of grassroots egyptians going into the square, then they put out the word to their cadres to move in. But i would say, or another way of looking at the sequence which you describe is the same observation that moved the brotherhood to move in also is what moved the Obama Administration. So it wasnt that the brotherhood moved in to change the Obama Administrations line to mubarak but the explosive growth of the protest affected on the one hand the brotherhood and on the other hand the u. S. Administration. They were both drawn to a different position. Guest a different experience from different perspectives but if we are talking about the gamechanger, those tens of thousands of people who took to Tahrir Square dont have a real number it was the narrative of the administrations that its really between our allies and mubarak in these people. If they wanted to actually have these people when they would have asked mubarak. Im asking the question, why would you not because i think the brotherhood did not change the nature of the demonstration. If the brotherhood came in. That is why my criticism is that the administration was badly advised in the sense that only when the brotherhood would go and you will let go of mubarak because it may have bid been Good Intention that we want to know what the islamist going to do. There is no trust in Civil Society so there could be many interpretations, yours as well. Host i am going to i want to raise one other point about u. S. Political dynamics and its not a point where i have found your assertions in the book to be stronger than i would make and then i will leave the u. S. Behind and go back to the region because i want to touch on some other countries. The one other point about u. S. Politics where i found your assertions very strong is in your characterization of the influence of what he called the islamist lobby which i think is a very fair term and im glad youve put it on the table. Where i scratch my head a little and say gee i wonder if it is as bad as that is there is one point at which you say they have dominant influence in u. S. Policy and we have maybe not a rash of books but a series of books that claim u. S. Policy is dominated by the jewish lobby israel lobby zionist lobby and i have found them all quietly unconvincing. You seem to be bringing the polar opposite accusation that there is an islamist lobby and perhaps with all the noise of the Israel Jewish lobby its very Saudi Authority for someone to raise the question of the islamist lobby but is it really a dominant force in u. S. Decisionmaking . Guest i even taught a course on how foreignpolicy we dont even call them lobby. That is what they do. That is what every group does for a particular cause. Youre talking about the big ones, the ones that have been criticized maybe the islamist lobby but theres the armenian lobby in the fiji lobby had a specific interest so its not a notion that it always has to be negative. People and Pressure Groups. I remember from my old days in the 90s they wanted syria to get out but there is a difference between conspiracy lobbyists and control of government which of course i oppose and a lobby or a Pressure Group that focuses on their own desk maybe the country desk and the islamist lobby and while we are doing this interview today versus weeks ago. That is saudi arabia. How far islamist could ask saudi arabia and the uae in a rain. One major against qatar with the Muslim Brotherhood that they had funded for years the petrodollars. One of the largest lobbies to influence the u. S. Government. He came to that point. The past nobody in the region would accuse others of having that but now because of what happened in egypt and what is happening in arabia as coming from the inside. Funds have been invested to obtain influence. I dont think this is outside the american equation. Everybody knows that. My point was her National Security foreignpolicy establishment should have listened to many more views on the middle east not just the views of our academia and im very clear on that one in this book and the previous book that has been funded in the area of recent studies. But the petrodollars come for the middle east to be invested here if they go to medical studies or a query in studies for space studies find that when they talk about Eastern Studies and force one view we havent seen a lot of research and american academia about sudan and southern sudan. We have not had Significant Research unserious occupation of lebanon. While we have a lot of stuff on the arabisraeli conflict in the palestinian issue saw that indicates there should be a better balance in how we advise on foreignpolicy and you say to claim theres a significant Pressure Group that focuses on one view. In the arabisraeli conflict Everybody Knows a pac and the Jewish American organizations, that is what they do. The middle eastern christian groups, that is what they do. Ive point is not that these groups exist. Its that our Foreign Policy should listen to more than point three the arab world view has not been shaped by representatives of minorities, by representatives of arabamericans or the secular opposite. We have not heard a lot about that lobby because the lobby would actually lock them to get their opinion in the discussion with congress. Host i want to give back to the region but one point and one of the more interesting points in the book that is not about americorps the region but a global point is you tackle the subject of islamaphobia. I spend a little time following the u. N. And that is an arena in which the issue of islamaphobia has been raised very strongly and in fact there are various u. N. Resolutions many decrying islamaphobia. You seem to debunk the whole concept. Guest i tried because i do recognize islamaphobia exists. Its an irrational fear of islam and therefore a negative attitude towards a community im absolutely against it. If its part of xenophobia islamaphobia is nothing other than xenophobia versus one group. Any other foreign phobia is but what happened is the brotherhood lobby and the iranian lobby have hijacked the notion and made it into a weapon. Anybody who is criticizing a policy issue that has nothing to do with religion, nothing to do with the five pillars, they have been accused of islamaphobia and i think this is close to what then National Socialists in germany would have accused anybody criticizing their policy being against the german race. Even at the International Level this has become very dangerous. For example what islamaphobias dealing with number one is its against antiislam people. Now i make a distinction. If people who are antiislam on the theological ground that im not one of them because i i dont do with theology, thats a theological debate. I am very liberal on this one. Debate as much as you want. Dont have an impact on National Security meaning if you dislike judaism or islam or taoism these are ideas versus ideas. As a government i cannot, and regulate how to do theological debates. That is one. Second if people are talking about the history of the region this is where it becomes serious. People are presenting the minorities in the region and are saying well it was one of suppression and the caliphate suppressed us. You accused accuse the minorities of being islamaphobia. You accuse the syrians and the jewish and shia who are not sunni so we have to reregulate the issue of islamaphobia and the worst case that is affecting us if you were trying to help the u. S. Government in determining what is the ideology of the jihadist of the salafist for example you are criticized for being in. So went too far. That charge should go back to where it belongs. Only a call for violence, only if there is a call that you are taking away the rights of the community because you dont like the theology than this is legitimate islamaphobia. Host let me go back to the middle east. We have dwelt on egypt. The other leading country where there has been some reversal of momentum is tunisia which was the starting point for the arab spring. They won a plurality but they were thwarted in pushing through a constitution that they wanted and now there has been compromised in consensus of this constitution. What is the state of play in tunisia . Guest even in the secular analysis and assessment and its good that neither understood that they cannot suppress those demonstrations as was the case with mr. Morsi. Host being the islamist Political Party. Guest the islamist that took over in tunisia and the narrative is more moderate than they Muslim Brotherhood. But tunisia social constitution is slightly different from egypt in the sense that the islamist are smarter politically and the secularists are stronger. There is a greater role for tunisian women in the secular than in egypt for example and also in tunisia the fact that the islamist government was not able to stop one of their associates who was not with them but ideologically linked to the jihadist and the salafis some of whom have been accused of making secular leaders. That is what exploded the situation in egypt and tunisia. The Secular Movement which is mostly worker labor and women and youth intended on bringing down the government in the way the Rebellion Movement at egypt was performing. The advice from the International Committee including the french from the morsi to have a negotiation to accept a new election. Now there is a new cabinet in tunisia. Its a ceasefire but both sides intend to go back to government. I actually like that because that is going to oblige them to reform eventually and compel the opposition to accept some sort of islamist demographdemographic. That experiment has not existed in the arab world. I have not seen islamic islamic democrat. If you reform you become a democrat and we will talk about the party of turkey. Thus it different subject so i think tunisia did better than the model in egypt. Host where do you think its going now . Guest i think reality is that both are going to try to come back to power. I think the secular and some of the leaders that have suffered and they know where it was going my conclusion is if not the sits down and reform on the inside and create a new Islamic Party it may be accepted by the secularists for the future but if not they are just doing it as a practical move and if they come back later it may have the same results in the future. Now our the last polls, they are going to the elections in tunisia and 2014 in the polls i have seen show that the main Secular Party in tunis is pretty substantially ahead of them not us. Do you think thats going to stand up through the voting . Guest it reflects what happened over the last few months meaning what has happened in egypt you have so much energy with the secularists of tunisia. They would stop short of doing a straight bristol revolt and that is good. They most likely are going to form the next governmengovernmen t but this is only the beginning. When they form the next government they have to help everybody else to make a distinction. Jihadists, al qaeda out and not do and its allies should reform. If its helping the islamist to reform than they could end up coexisting with them. If they do not reform the Muslim Brotherhood and tunisia will not be. Host so you think there is still a danger that the nod of which is distinguished from the cell of the groups that already existed that have engaged in violence consistently since 2011 but another has been nonviolent and functioning as a Political Party. Do you see a danger that they could resort to violence . Guest if they moved one inch towards reforming itself and they would survive and they would become the conservative muslim party of turkey but there are slices of nada that are concerned about those that are linchpins between the salafist and they could join the cell fates. They will join the actual jihadists or salafist, the violent ones. I mentioned it before but in your book you are very alleged on egypt and you even have that inspiring sentence in there that egypt could become the model democracy for the region and certainly it has been the pacesetter for egypt so if egypt makes a real transition to democracy i think no one would disagree that would have a tremendous ramification around the region and the influence on most or all of the other countries. But tunisia is actually closer, you would agree, to getting to the point where we would judge it to be really democratic and now they have this compromised constitution that has been written which is a democratic constitution. If the elections go and the secularists form the next government and as you suggest nada adopts the role of being the parliamentary opposition rather than Something Else some kind of conspiratorial movement then tunisia would really be up there as the first legitimate democracy in the arab world. Guest i mean tunisia will be more danced and the egyptians know that. Tunisia and its Political Institutions and the emigre coming back. Look at the women in politics. It could be more danced but its only when egypt will move. When egypt would move even one or 2 inches he would. Host i take that point but you are anticipatanticipating my question which was the other side of that. Tunisia is for their fans but we havent had democracy in the arab world except lebanon until the syrians began to move in which was in 1975 which was a long time ago and eventually drove you out. But for all these years we have not had a single democracy in the arab world. Tunisia would need number one at least in the posts lebanon era. But tunisia is a smaller country. Its closer to the west geographically and culturally. Still my question is if tunisia is there is a model democracy will that have an influence on others . Guest absolutely because we now live in a global world. What happened on facebook for example have been looking at tunisia and many egyptians discussing with them. In egypt we are doing this and then tunisia youre doing that. It is completely change from the lebanon. That was not popular debate. Its a synergy between both. Tunisia is going to go fast into the realm of ideas. Egypt will go slower but its going into that direction. They will have to deal with the Muslim Brotherhood. I have a little bit of good news though. If the islamist in the region talk to each other if nada will reforming move in a good direction this would influence maybe not the entire Muslim Brotherhood but something among the people in the Muslim Brotherhood in egypt. Not the entire organization is spent on doing what they are doing right now. We need to see one model in the arab world where muslim conservatives that have a Political Party and not connected to jihadists accepting the rule of others and others reading reasonable. Im not calling them muslim conservatives because as they are. Host for this image you have just given us a billion islamist, reformed islamist Political Movement that can play the role of a legitimate little party within a democracy and share in sustaining that democracy you said it needs to not be jihadists but it needs to also, it needs to really at some level embrace Democratic Values and ways of doing things and not being conspiratorial internally and it brace