Dr. James Zogby

Viewpoint with James Zogby: January 8, 2009 Episode

Posted on Monday January 26, 2009

Partial Transcript:

James Zogby: Hi, I am Jim Zogby, and welcome to Viewpoint. Tonight I want to welcome Ed Djerejian, founding director of The Baker Institute for public policy at Rice University and a leading expert on the Middle East. Ambassador Djerejian has served under eight U.S. Presidents, from Kennedy to Clinton. And served as U.S. Ambassador to Israel and Syria. In 2006 was senior of Hamilton study group. His new book is entitled "danger and opportunity, an American's ambassadors". Thanks for joining us, Ed Djerejian, and writing the book.

Edward Djerejian: Thank you.

James Zogby: You have created a memoir and a powerful case for the need for diplomacy. And complete with policy prescriptions, there are chapters that I believe you pulled out of the Baker/Hamilton study group. And those part of the Baker institute. I want to walk you through some of this but want to back into the book looking at events at Gaza. And how they play out the themes of the book. One is the centrality of Arab theme of the book, and an issue of that you talk about in a number of places of unintended consequences when we don't engage or engage in a foolish matter. Talk about Gaza and what it represents for america today and the failure, if you will of nonengagement.

Edward Djerejian; Well Gaza really underscores one of the basic themes of my book, the centrality of the Arab/Israeli conflict. And it remains the central most important political issue in the Arab world, especially has implications throughout the Muslim world. Gaza is yet again a tragic flair up that we have seen in the past of Arab and Israeli neighbors and saw it in Lebanon. One of the major lessons that we need to draw, that i try to emphasize in my book, that the incoming American administration needs to move from conflict management to conflict resolution. What will happen, we will inevitably get say cease-fire in Gaza. But look on the ground, the Palestinians that are killed and others that suffered. But the fact remains that once the cease-fire is put in place, the fundamental issues are not resolved. And we go on other foreign policies, to find a year or two later, that this same issue will blowup who is in the administration, in Washington and the region. What is central, we know what the core issue is in terms of achieving final settlements between Israel and Palestinians and Israel and Lebanon. I hope that Obama administration will come in and engage early on, and don't make the mistake that bill Clinton did of engaging too late. Or George W. Bush of engaging too late. These presidents run out of time, and therefore I hope that the administration will engage upfront and look for a comprehensive settlement.

James Zogby: We didn't engage for the longest time. And there were some that suggested there were consequences to this. Given how you looked critically on the last eight years, was this current conflict avoidable?

Edward Djerejian: Yes, it was, that we could engage what was started later in the game, the Annapolis, that to establish for the Palestinians, and Israelis doing their obligations. Getting those security, economic from the ground up measures accomplished. With a strong leadership hand with the Arab world. And dealing with what is called the political horizon. The final issues, borders, settlements, Jerusalem, the right of return of Palestinian refugees. These are critical issues to be a part of final settlement. Much as you know Jim that has been done since 1991 of addressing these issues. What we need is the political will in Washington and the leadership to bring these parties together.

James Zogby: You opened the book with a letter to the president. At the time you wrote the letter, you said it doesn't matter who the president is.

Edward Djerejian: That's right.

James Zogby: The guide posts would be the same. I always thought that the medal of a president is tested by how they respond to the unexpected. Certainly this president comes into the white house with a lot of unexpected developments. From the economy which is in the situation it's in, and the unraveling of Pakistan and Afghanistan. And now this situation in Gaza. Would you have changed the letter at all given what you have seen in Pakistan or Gaza situation?

Edward Djerejian: The contents are the letter, but the constants are there of presidential engagement. A very strong relationship between the president and his secretary of state, in order to give the necessary adult supervision to the process, it's very important. That relationship has to be very close. And i point out in the book that we certainly have had our failures in U.S. Diplomacy in the Middle East. But we have had successes, and some of those successes is when a president stands tall and takes the political risk and demonstrates the will. We saw that in jimmy carter's administration, and in George walker bush, with the peace conference. First time in history we got Israel to sit next to its immediate Arab neighbors. It can be done. Bill Clinton tried late in his mandate and ran out of time. And bush "w" started too late also. I think there are lessons to be learned. Presidential leadership and a strong connection with the secretary of state. Why that is important, that the Israelis are negotiating life and death issues, for the people and their countries. They need to know that the president of the United States is firmly behind what his negotiators are saying. So it's important to have these relationships. It's important for the president to be engaged.

>> I mentioned the three story lines that run through the book. For me because I read the Baker/Hamilton report and the report you did on public diplomacy. Those were interesting but the more intriguing parts were the personal narratives. Your roots are in the region. And you tell in the book, pretty well, tell our listeners how you got where you are.

>> As you said many personal narratives in here that exemplify the bigger issues. But when i was assigned to Damascus in 1988, it was a low point, I was given the mandate by president Reagan and for the initial measures. And I looked at my predecessors and saw they had a very hard time having access to the president asalam. And I knew he was the decision maker in Syria. And i had to establish a personal relationship with him. And I threw the protocol book out, and didn't tell the state department. But when i went into the first meeting, I related how my mother and father in the turkey massacres escaped through Syria and eventually came to the United States. And I told him this personal story how my father had saved two girls and they had family in Massachusetts. And when the girls related to their brother that this young army saved them. He requested them to the United States. And I captured him and intrigued him. And I said, our relationship has not been a good one, and you have not seen our great country. And I said it's a shame, and if anyone had told that young teenager boy in 1918 that one day his son would come to Damascus as ambassador of the United States. He would thought they were crazy. And we established a bond which really for U.S. Interest was important because I had at least, I don't know how many meetings in the three years I was there, but I had access to the man. And we accomplished a great deal during that period.

James Zogby: Did having roots in the region, coming from the background you came from, did it help your understanding as well?

Edward Djerejian; Oh, yes. Because I was, if you will, had this cultural dimension that my family roots gave me. I was much better able to understand the culture I was working with and the people of the Arab society and culture, and the framework of Syria and Lebanon. So it helped me immensely.

James Zogby: You told about throwing the protocol book, you did that a number of times. And there was daring of adamejad. Did that follow you in the book?

Edward Djerejian: I think it stayed with me through my career. I learned, one of my first jobs in the state department as a young 20-year-old something, or in the Kennedy administration working for George ball, who wrote that sentiment on Vietnam. Through his mentorship, I learned the value of having the courage. He was a model of someone who had the courage to express a view that was not the current view in Washington. I think that was something that I carried throughout my career.

James Zogby: One of the times you relate in the book and doing it the way you weren't supposed to do it, was your adventure in Lebanon. I would like you to tell that story, because it's both instructive and quite exciting, a bit of an adventure.

Edward Djerejian: Yes at the time I was the lowest ranking diplomat, the third secretary.

James Zogby: and people he don't know who Musda is.

Edward Djerejian: I had I job that allowed me to go to the high meetings in Lebanon. And then responsible for the Arab and Muslim leaders in Lebanon. The guys on the out's, not the establishments. That was intriguing dealing with these groups. But there was an emerging leader by the name of asamad. And he was very charismatic and i decided i had to meet this man. And i put out feelers and got a call back from one of his people, saying he's ready to meet you. On this date come to the city, there is a high school. Behind it is a soccer field, a football field. There is an iron bench under a tree. Sit and wait under that tree. I was thrilled to have that opportunity, first time an American diplomat to meet this shiite leader. But i felt if i told my leaders, that it was too risky, because they said to come alone. I didn't tell them and waited on that bench for an hour-and-a-half. And then thought I was set up. Then this black mercedes came and an immense figure emerged. And we sat on that bench, Jim, for three hours. And in Arabic he narrated the situation of the Shiites. And I wrote telegrams back to Washington, and it was the first flow about this population. And the political problems emerging in southern Lebanon. This is again 1966. He was the leader, he gave the Shiites of Lebanon a political role that was much more important than he had ever had before. But he believed in close relations with Christians and Jews and Muslims. He was against religious figures that became tyrants. He said they are no better than the secular dictators of the Arab world. He was a model that the Shiites began to follow. He was cut down. Assassinated because he was a threat to some of the leftists and other political parties there. But the important thing of that whole story is the importance of the role of religion and culture, especially in Middle East politics. And when we began to get engaged with this religious leadership, we began to understand what we were dealing with. Now this same religious leader, Mamous Suder, he morphed this movement to what we have now.

James Zogby: Did you look back and what you saw and what you wrote, what you relate here, did you have the thought if only I had been listened to? This would come out differently?

Edward Djerejian: Oh, yes, that's one the pains. Sometimes you succeed in capturing the attention of the policy makers. Most of my colleagues in the foreign service understood and agreed what I was reporting on. But when you get to the policy level, that's where the cut-off can occur. And that's the most important part. In Morocco, I sent back a telegram, the conventional wisdom of the American embassy was that the military was behind king Moufa. I was told of the military generals about corruption in the regime and other issues. And that they might do something. I reported this back to Washington, and I was ridiculed for presenting a thesis that was totally not accepted. I did not predict what would happen. But six months later, there was a coup attempt and I had some information but that was discarded.

James Zogby: I want to get folks in the conversation, and we will later in the show. You talked about Haufas, and want to ask about sacraben. A person that went through a dramatic personal transformation, in just the period of time when he became prime minister to the time of his assassination. Probably more as any elected official, who started where he was, and ended up as an advocate for radical peace. Much more so than future Israeli leaders that claim to carry mantle. Talk about him, you appreciated the man.

Edward Djerejian: He was one of my heroes, I had the privilege to be ambassador of Israel when he was prime minister. He was a man that spoke little, you had to listen carefully, but he transformed from a war hero of Israel to a great statesman. Before the end of his life, when he was assassinated by a Jewish extremist. He was getting a great deal of criticism by Israeli's that were upset that he was ready to give up land for peace. They didn't buy into the fundamental concept of land for peace. They were believing peace for peace. And he said one must understand, there can't be peace for peace but land for peace. And he gave the idea to give up the heights for the peace agreement. And made references to that and was bitterly opposed. And he related to me in private, how he was so infuriated by the lack of understanding that by just holding on to the land, Israel is sacrificed against long-term security. Because there cannot be peace without giving up the land. And for him to come and make that projectory for the man that won the wars and occupied the land of the Arab neighbors. To the man that was ready to make the bold heroic decisions, I thought he was a transformational figure.

James Zogby: there was another transformational figure, and you know I am a life-long democrat. Jim Baker, not the Jim Baker from Florida, but the secretary of state. Was a bit of a heroic character of the transforming role he played in American diplomacy. Building a coalition and almost single-handedly forging the peace conference. And the other Jim Baker, a Texan that sometimes couldn't be translated.

Edward Djerejian: Yes, he had a gift for anecdotes and personable and colorful. But there are some I can't tell on television. But he was able to master the policy and the ability to get things done. And he was unparalleled in that. The way he was able to change the diplomatic framework in order to get people to say yes, was masterful. And he had a close relationship with his president, president George Herbert walker bush. And that empowered him, and they knew when Baker spoke, he was speaking for the president of the United States. And that's a good policy, to have president and secretary of state together on foreign policy issues.

James Zogby: The time of Baker, the Iraq invasion of Kuwait. The effort to build that leading to Madrid conference, a lot of heavy lifting in that period. Has there been a secretary of state since, or even before that was able to handle that many unanticipated challenges in that way?

Edward Djerejian: Well, I am not a historian, I can't speak of the past. But I think since, there haven't been those world challenges that came together at the very same time. I think that the next secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, will be facing a multitude of challenges as well as president-elect Obama. But the ability to prioritize, the ability to be a very effective speaker with the foreign audiences is critical as a secretary of state. He was able to achieve that. But that team of bush/Baker was unparalleled in terms of the cohesion of American politics. I felt when in Damascus negotiating and had a powerful chain of command, and he took me more serious and that's very important.

James Zogby: There are a number of prescriptions in the book and a number of critical observations. I will put one up and have you comment, and then have the callers. They come from the Iraq study group and the project from Colin Powell and a couple of key reports of the Baker institute. One on Syrian dialogue and the future of oil in terms of Middle East security. All that is found in the book. Let's put up the first, it's an observation, you talked about it already. But I want to put the words up.

James Zogby: It's almost become cliche, but yet continually forgotten. Where we get where we were just a month ago, where people say it's a secondary issue. We have things to focus on and don't need to deal with it. And then it flairs again and when it flairs, it's many cultures. What does it take to drill that in for people to get it?

Edward Djerejian: We are bad in the United States about our history lessons. And it does confound me that this lesson has to be relearned. You just pointed out Gaza and the repercussions through the world, especially the Arab and Muslim world. The main point, Jim, is that people come up with ideas and approaches and different administrations. For example "the New York Times" came in and said that the Arab/Israeli conflict is not central. Even if we had a resolution of it, we would still be faced with terrorism. I agree with that, but we will be taking away an extreme issue. You take that issue away from them, they can't exploit it again. That's very important. And the "New York Times" came in and stated that the road to peace is really through overthrowing the dictatorships of the Arab world and Iraq regime and then Israel will be able to negotiate peace with democratic neighbors. Well, I have a quote that i put in, if Israel had to wait for its Arab neighbors to come through democracy, it would wait 1,000 years. The road to peace, another phrase, is not through baghdad, it's through Jerusalem, and direct negotiations between Israel and Arab neighbors.

James Zogby: We will take a break, and come back with other quotes. And then get the calls from listeners. We'll be right back.

James Zogby: Welcome back to viewpoint, I am Jim Zogby, and my guest is Ed Edward Djerejian. We are discussing his new book, "danger and opportunity, an American ambassadors journey into the middle east." I will take calls, calling from overseas, is on the screen, and if you are calling from the U.S., the number is 800-528-2090. So call now, this is a quote about the Muslim world, and it's termed by the president and many in this administration. Let's put the quote up and look at it.

James Zogby: The administration didn't do that, inflated. I remember a speech that president bush gave, that he talked about the Iranians and extremists and al-qaeda and as if this is almost complating not only them but that reality with the old soviet model. That Iran is directing traffic for everybody. That's not the Muslim world you know and talk about.

Edward Djerejian: No, that's not the Muslim world that I know, it doesn't have an international headquarters and not dIran. There is a book that islam is not a mononlith but it's a mosaic. And we have to deal with that, in dealing with a country like Lebanon, you have to deal with one different from saudia Arabia or egypt. And those approaches not only based on regions, south asia and indonesia, but country by country. And that's the basis to craft American policy.

James Zogby: There was a quote on terrorism. And quite different from how the administration has framed it.

James Zogby: There are those who continue to talk about just defeating it. And you argue for marginalizing it, creating a different context.

Edward Djerejian: Fight, first of all the central struggle in the Muslim world is the struggle between the islamic radicals and moderates. And the people in the middle that have not made up their minds. It's essential to get to the people that haven't made up their minds. So that struggle of the school of modernity and tradition, what has to be done is to put the terrorism, the broader context of the struggle of ideas. It's really an ideological battle, terrorism is a lethal struggle of that set of ideal. And it has to be dealt like that. And there is not going to be raising the flag over iwa jema.

James Zogby: Our first caller.

Caller: Yes, thank you. In the camp david agreement, it's invalid. And second you stick a needle in my eyes and I shout, it's Gaza. You invaded to liberate the people. Tell me your opinion as ambassador.

James Zogby: Give me a question.

Caller: Do you believe that haumok is not to allow aid to Gaza?

James Zogby: This is not just a challenge to hamas but to the eficacy of Arab leadership that are facing a challenge now.

Edward Djerejian: Absolutely, let me candid. Many of the Arab leaders and governments in place do not support hamas. And frankly would be happier if hamas was not there. And if there was over all control of Gaza. So they are inflicted, do not forget that hamas is of the brotherhood in Egypt, that's the largest opposition group in Egypt. The egyptians don't want to open up the border with Gaza and Iraq crossing. And allow terrorists and arms to go across the borders. They have a security concern on that. At the same time they have been trying to broker an agreement between hamas and amutasan's group. And have done good work, but they are inflicted in this situation. And that's why we don't see an automatic opening of the border.
When that border is opened up because of the incredible humanitarian concerns in Gaza, when that border is opened, it will have to be controlled.

James Zogby: Let's go to Saudi Arabia.

Caller: Hi, Can I ask the question.

James Zogby: Yes, you can.

Caller: Excuse me, what is [inaudible] in Gaza?

James Zogby: He's described his feeling about those events, do you have a specific question though? I think that's all we will get. Let's go to west virginia here in the U.S. Caller.

Caller: Hi, thank you for taking my call. I believe that governments have oftentimes have hidden agendas. And Israel knows what it's doing in Gaza. It knows it will radicalize certain elements. And Israel was humiliated in 2006 and Lebanon. What i am concerned because of the backs -- backing from Iran. If there is an Arabian connection, if you believe that Israel has hopes of somehow finding excuse to go after Iran.

James Zogby: Thank you for the question, there is a nexus being discussed of Iran/hamas connection and failure in Lebanon in 2006. Evaluate that.

Edward Djerejian: That's a good question, the Iranian hand is in isabella and hamas. Iran has an interest in the destabilization of the Arab/Israeli context. In a way it's policies are succeeding. The forces its supporting are now in certain segments world seen as resisting. And that's the better path than negotiations with Israel. This gets back to the fundamental dichotomy, what is the path for Arab Israel? Is it what is working hard at and what i support, or is it resistance? We must not forget in 2000, when the Israels withdrew from Lebanon, there was an open appeal during the clinton administration, he said oh, brother arafat, learn from the lessons that we are showing. That the way forward to get rid of Israeli occupation is resistance and violence, and not negotiations. This is being played out as a major subtheme, in the Arab context and throughout the world.

James Zogby: Let's put up a quote from the book, and it's a critique of the Iraq war. You write about the Powell doctrine. That actually is a misnomer. I believe it was a casper-wine doctrine, know the consequences and have an exit strategy, do it right. They didn't do it right and we are still paying for it.

Edward Djerejian: That's right, the consequences of the drain of Iraq. The fact of the matter that Iraq has taken so much of our energies, that we took our eyes off of Afghanistan and Pakistan, and see reemergence of Taliban and the threat of Pakistan and india. So the unintented consequences are important.

James Zogby: The way out?

Edward Djerejian: In the book those are relevant today, and basically the withdrawal of U.S. Troops and coalition forces with controlled, in a controlled situation. The milestones that the Iraq government must live up to in terms of national reconciliation and government security. And in order to get Iraq's neighbors to support stability in Iraq and emergence of Iraq. And that's not a threat to it or the neighbors. And all of that and the Iraq study report outlines this. We allowed for a surge. But if you look at the recommendations we made in that report, it's as valid today as then.

James Zogby: I call the Iraqi report the most illustrated least read book around. Everyone waited for it and bought it but no one read it. Let's go to u.k. For a call. Hello.

Caller: my question is why that Iraq since it's the basic major power behind the U.S. Bombing has been totally ignored. [inaudible] ideology and of backing of Iraq. And somehow you cannot win the war against terrorism when you are with the mother of all terrors. You have to deal with them seriously and tackle them and stop their support.

James Zogby: Thank you for will call. Ed, you write about this. One of the unintended consequences of kicking the soviets out of Afghanistan, was American strategy working with saudis. We bear responsibility for it.

Edward Djerejian: Absolutely, the history has proven that and more will be written. We supported to get the soviets out of Afghanistan. We armed them. And we succeeded all too well. And then when the soviet union withdrew and we withdrew ourselves and subleted to the Pakistan intelligences and saudis that had a bit of their own agenda of supporting the militant. And then the resurgence of the taliban and hosted osama bin laden and then had 9/11. And he had to overthrow the taliban, and this is twice consequences of Pakistan. Host: this is the last quote, and a quote from president of France. The question came from condoleezza rise that said what can we do for you, and this is his response.

James Zogby: It called to mind an interesting conversation with a saudi friend. It was the 2000 election, and john kerry had been saying horrible things about saudis and the dependence on the oil. And he called me and said, is kerry going to win. And said, it looks like a bush victory. And i said why do you want john kerry, he's said bad things. He said it's better to have a president that doesn't like us, than to have a president that our people don't like. And we worked hard to get that declined image, didn't we?

Edward Djerejian: Yes, we made a lot of hard –

James Zogby: What do we do with it?

Edward Djerejian: There is a part of the book and the peace commission that i chaired for colin powell in 2003. First of all, the president of the United States is the voice of america, the prime voice of America. And he has to enunciate us. And i outlined the way to do this, and it's not that difficult but takes a strategic approach.

James Zogby: Don’t they action our words?

Edward Djerejian: I was told, ed, it's the policy, stupid, and you have to fix the policy. Our answer to that, our analysis from indonesia to nigeria, in the Muslim world, Arab world, they view our policy through three prisms. In Arab and Iraq and on democracy, they saw us as hypocrites, you support that but different through the region. That's the policy side. And that's a different set of issues that we have been discussing. But the other side of the equation, our values and American way of life. And we found a great deal of respect and admiration for the concept of life, liberty, equality before the law and pluralism, and our standards of education and especially university. Our science and achievements in this country. A great deal of positive's for America. We do have something to work with. But the trick is to transform this to foreign policy. I outline that in the book. Host: let's go to the caller.

Caller: Two quick questions, the United States is known for supporting Israel financially, which is part of the major problem. Do you discuss that it your book as a resolution? Should the United States pull back on its financing. Also what do you think about President Jim -- Jimmy Carter's book?

Edward Djerejian: Ithink that the relationship between the United States and Israel is well known. It's a strong pillar of strong U.S. Policy. The economic assistance and military assistance we give to Israel will be continued as long as there is a conflict there, in my view. But that relationship has given us the ability, if we use it wisely, to really work for Arab/Israeli peace. Because the Israelis listen to us, we are probably the only country in the world that Israel pays attention to us on critical issues. I remember being told from the leader once, sometimes i don't like what i hear from an American president when I hear their advice, but I say, I don't want to do this, but my best friend in the world is asking me to do this. That gives us some ability to craft a coherent policy, in the interest of both sides to make peace. And i think that's critical. Now the second part of the question –

James Zogby: About the financing. Let's go to california for a final call. We have about one minute left.

Caller: my question is, do you think that the barack obama administration will be engaged with Hamas government especially knowing that the last day is tomorrow, January 9?

Edward Djerejian: I advocate in my book that the United States government should engage in discussions and contacts with islamic groups. Not those that -- you have to make a differentiation, i am not talking about al-qaeda. But where we have a national security interest, we should engage in these groups.

James Zogby: Have they read the book, obama administration?

Edward Djerejian: I don't know if they have read it, but I hope.

James Zogby: Eed, I want to thank you for your career and the service for our country. And thank you for writing this book, it's a wonderful memoir written by an ambassador of long standing. Thank you ed djerejian. That's it for now, see you next time.