08 May 2008: IISS
Senior Fellow for Gulf security Mamoun Fandy speaks with secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
Mamoun Fandy
Thank you very much Secretary Rice for your time and for agreeing to do this interview.
Condoleezza Rice
It is a pleasure.
Mamoun Fandy
The first question I would like to start with is that, knowing where you came from, the southern United States with the segregation problems, how did your experience growing up in the segregated south shape your view of global justice?
Condoleezza Rice
Well, in fact, in two very important ways. The first, is that I came from a family that was very loving, and expected the best of me, expected me to succeed, and so it has for me put a premium on making certain that young people around the world should have opportunity, particularly in education. I have been starting with my colleagues at Stanford a number of new educational programmes, because I really do feel that whatever one’s circumstances, and I was fortunate that my parents were educators, but whatever your circumstances being educated gives you new horizons and you can have then a sense of how to pursue your own goals, no matter the circumstances in which you find yourself.
The second is, it did say to me that democracy is hard, it takes a long time, even in societies that consider themselves democratic, like the United States. And that justice has to be pursued on a daily basis, hour by hour, the job is never done; and particularly, when I look at a situation like the Palestinian people, I recognize how hard it must be, particularly for Palestinian parents to raise their children in circumstances in which the horizons must seem so limited. Yet, I believe that the day is coming when Palestinian children will be raised in their own state and when there will be a child who is growing up and says ”I want to be the president of Palestine”, and that’s where we really want to be. And I know too what it is like for Israelis parents to put their kids to be bed at night not knowing whether there will be a bomb overnight. So, I think it’s given me some empathy for the human side of international politics. It is very easy to study the institutions and the diplomacy and the leadership of various places and that is what I did also as an academic. It is also important in this job to have a feel for the human side.
Mamoun Fandy
The theme of some of your statements has been for the last few days that "time is running out" and there is a very narrow window, and we need to utilize this time to do something to realise "the two state solution" envisioned by the president. Do you think it is possible, and second, if there is one thing you want the Israelis to do and the Palestinians, just one thing, to do to move forward, what would that be?
Condoleezza Rice
I think that both sides are going to have to realise that long held aspirations are only going to be met through compromise; and I know that there are many long held historical aspirations, hopes for a zero sum victory, for complete victory, for all of them. It is not going to be possible. And so, it’s going to mean giving up on some long held dreams in order to have the greatest dream, which is two states living side by side.
Mamoun Fandy
Assuming all good intentions, that Palestinian leadership want to conclude at deal, and the Israelis want to do a deal, these people are honest, good people. They want to do it, but at the end there remains a gap, and they can’t do it, what are you going to do?
Condoleezza Rice
Well I think you will see, that either I or the President will to try to make that last push to point out that really the gap is not so wide. One of the things I have been doing in the trilaterals that I have been holding, and I’ve enjoyed being able to talk to the two sides together, is that sometimes you see a point of convergence that they themselves do not see, and I think that’s really the role that the President of the United State or the Secretary of State of the United States can play at the end.
You know there is a myth, that these things work better when the United States comes in and says: ‘Alright, here is the deal, that’s how you have to do it’. That’s not going to work! Because, the two sides have to come to the compromise themselves. But at the end, or even as we are going along, if there appear to be gaps that can be bridged we won’t be shy by saying: “Well, that gap seems as if you can bridge it.”
Mamoun Fandy
For the last few months you have been coming back and forth to the region. Obviously, you have got deeply involved in these issues. The Presidents of US will go back to the Middle East soon. The Arab world today is divided, between optimists who think that American can deliver and pessimists and sceptics who say "do not believe them". What do you or the President have in these visits to tip the balance in favour of the hopeful and the optimistic ?
Condoleezza Rice
Well, it may well be that we can only convince the sceptics when it is done, when the Palestinians and the Israelis come to an agreement. It may well be that sceptics are people who want to be sceptical.
I would just say let's not judge this on one trip or the next trip. The President and the Parties have said that they believe that by the end of the year they can have an agreement. That would be a monumental achievement, given the years and years that this has been going on. So I would not start trying to judge at ‘half time’. Let’s see what the final... where we are at the end of it. I understand scepticism; it has been a conflict that has gone on for so long. So many times it has looked as though it was close to resolution. And so people say "well why do you think you can do it?" And the President said recently to somebody that one of his friends said to him, "what makes you think that you can stop this conflict?" The truth of the matter is: we can’t, but the parties can, and we can help. And I see a new commitment and energy, because I do think the parties, both the Israelis and the Palestinian, realise that the opportunity for a two state solution is not always going to be there.
Mamoun Fandy
When the President was in the Middle East last time, many of the Arab leaders greeted him warmly and celebrated his visit and so on, but at the same time, after the visit, their people asked them “what did he get from this”, to justify this kind of optimism. They need something to convince their publics. Even in authoritarian states, leaders need to convince their publics. What do you have to offer them?
Condoleezza Rice
I understand that. I would say the people first of all; it is the first time in a long time that the parties have had a process for peace. Secondly, I think changes on the ground are beginning to be made in the West bank. We will try to press that. If I can do one thing it will be to make bigger improvements in the West bank; bigger improvements in the lives of the people on the ground, because I think if the people begin to feel changes in their daily lives then they will give the opportunity to peace more; give more a chance for the opportunity of peace to emerge. Again, this is intensive labour and intensive work. You have to keep coming back, even... not every trip produces an outcome, you’re just moving and moving and then at some point it all comes together. And I think that’s how we should think about my trips, but also when the President comes out.
Mamoun Fandy
You have been also working on the Kosovo question. There is the model out there called "supervised" independence for Kosovo. Can this model be applied to the Palestinian situation?
Condoleezza Rice
I would think the Palestinian state when it created will be somewhat beyond that really. Kosovo comes out of a very special set of circumstances. I expect that the Palestinian state will be fully a state. There will not be questions about its recognition or its independence. There may be some states that won’t recognise [it]. The reason we have supervised independence in Kosovo is that there are still so many unresolved issues. Now if there are unresolved issues the international community may be able to help with devices to bridge between Palestinians and Israelis until those issues can be resolved. But I suspect that when the agreement is done it will have resolved those issues.
Mamoun Fandy
Is there any stage where you can imagine the Quartet or the United States saying, “well we cannot bridge the gaps and the window is closing, let's go for a Kosovo Model?”
Condoleezza Rice
I know that... a kind of ‘interim state’ or the like. I think we are beyond that, I do. I think that, you know, there are always different attributes of sovereignty. I think everybody... the Palestinians themselves have said that their state would be non-militarised, that has been the case in... But that is a different attribute of sovereignty, it is sovereign state choosing to place limits on itself and I think you may see things like that; but I’d be a little surprised if you see anything like an interim state. Though if the parties wish to go there, if they believe that that’s a place to which they could get and they wish to go, we would not have any objection. It seems to me that the parties are moving beyond that.
Mamoun Fandy
What would you expect the Arab States to do, beyond reaching to their pockets and giving money to Prime Minister Fayyad?
Condoleezza Rice
Well that’s an important part because the Palestinians are trying to build their state institutions; they are trying to build their security forces. They need, until there is a real robust working economy, they need support and so I would hope that all states would be as generous as possible. Particularly with budget support, not just project support but budget support. But the other thing is that Israel needs a horizon for peace too. Israel needs to know that as it makes these difficult decisions, as it makes these difficult decisions not after it has made those difficult decisions, but as it makes these difficult decisions, that there is going to be a place for Israel, an acceptance of Israel, in the territory that it will share with its Arab neighbours.
Mamoun Fandy
It seems that the strategic prize for Israel and for the US is to have the 22 or 21 Arab on their side facing those big challenging issues such as radicalism and proliferation. Would you go for a settlement instead of peace to insure that these Arab states come with you? A legal settlement between the Palestinians and the Israelis makes Hamas rockets a violation of international law and a war between two states: Palestine and Israel. Would that be better?
Condoleezza Rice
Well I think, most likely is that you will have a resolution of the remaining conflicts; Israeli-Palestinian conflicts, the issues concerning Lebanon, and then also the Syrian track. And I think at that point you’ll have peace. It may not be that it will always be an easy peace, but it will be peace and at that point people can start to adjust to each other, and over time. Now of course there will be a legal foundation for it as well, but the most important thing is that when you have resolved the remaining conflicts you really will have peace.
Mamoun Fandy
Mentioning Syria and Lebanon together, first question really has to do with Syria. Are you aware of all of these mediations on the sidelines between Syria and the Israelis through Turkey and other parties and do you bless these efforts?
Condoleezza Rice
Well, I have read the reports, and, look, we believe that Turkey is first of all a good ally, Israel is a good ally. We’ve never, in any way, wanted to stand in the way of peace between Israel and any of its neighbours, including Syria. And if they wish to pursue peace, by all means they should do it, and the United States would be supportive of that.
I think the issue is that Syria has not shown the kind of interest in, and behaviour towards, the Middle East that would suggest it really seeks peace, particularly vis a vis Lebanon. And the one thing that mustn’t happen is that there is a pursuit of peace along the Syrian track and somehow Lebanon gets left out in the cold. Absolutely, the Syrians ought to demarcate the line with Lebanon; absolutely we have to resolve the 1701 issue concerning Shabaa farms; absolutely the Syrians ought to send an ambassador to Lebanon and stop treating Lebanon like a province of Syria. And you also shouldn’t have a interruption on the Palestinian track. But if those can be pursued, and the Syrian track can be pursued at the same time too, then they should do it.
Mamoun Fandy
It looks like there is possible a formula in the making where you can have "the Golan for Lebanon", that is the Israelis give the Golan back to Syria and the Syrians give southern Lebanon back to the Lebanese?
Condoleezza Rice
I don’t know if that’s how this will come out. I just know there are several issues that have to be solved. A long time ago, it’s been a long time, a long time ago Syria should have demarcated the border with Lebanon and exchanged ambassadors. And I think that should be independent of what happens to the Golan, but obviously we would like to see all the conflicts resolved, so that you could have peace. But, there is a process for delineation or demarcation of the Shabaa farms, that the UN undertook under 1701, and I think it’s probably time to start seeing what that has produced.
Mamoun Fandy
Then on to Security. Syria, next door to Iraq and then its alliance with Iran. For the Arab States as well as for the West it is important to move Syria away from Iran and put it in the Arab camp. Are there carrots or incentives that you have for Syria to move to the other side?
Condoleezza Rice
Well, Syria simply has to make a choice. I remember at the time of Annapolis, there were questions about would Syria be invited? Well of course Syria was invited. Then there were questions of would Annapolis make clear that ultimately we sought a comprehensive peace? The Palestinian track was the focus of Annapolis but would it be clear that there was an interest in comprehensive peace? That was clear. And so, at that point I think Syria could have made a choice to be among those states that are seeking to diminish extremist influences and move toward peace. Unfortunately, not long after that Syria and its allies began holding up the election of the president in Lebanon and that has continued.
So I would say not ‘what carrots are there?’ but does Syria really want to make a choice to be part of the responsible parties, or the responsible states, in the Middle East, who seek a particular kind of Middle East, in which you can have Iraqi democracy, and by the way that means cutting off flows to foreign fighters in Iraq; where you can have a Lebanese democracy and that would mean allowing, encouraging the Lebanese to go ahead and elect their president and get on with their own democratic development; a middle east in which you can have a Palestinian state; in which Hamas finally adheres to not just international standards, but the standard of the Arab world, about the two state solution and the Arab peace initiative. And so those are the questions that I would have, and Syria has to make a choice.
Mamoun Fandy
Now it looks like Iran practically redoubled its number of its centrifuges, complicating the strategic picture in the region. What are you doing about Iran in the context of the big strategic picture for the stability of the Middle East?
Condoleezza Rice
Yes, that’s a very good question, because Iran is behind a lot of problems, a lot of the trouble in the Middle East. Whether it’s a port for Hizbullah, and I believe, the inability for Lebanon to elect its president; or whether it is the support to the Jaysh al-Mahd and the militias in Iraq; or to Hamas in Gaza: it’s quite clear that Iran is the problem. Then you have Iran seeking the technology secretly for a nuclear weapon. So we have been, first of all, strengthening the capacity of our allies to defend themselves, which is why the security cooperation efforts we are making in the Gulf are very important.
Secondly, we are going to challenge and confront Iran, whenever, operating in Iraq, they endanger our soldiers or engage in activities that put innocent Iraqis at risk. And we’ve been very active against Iranian trainers and Iranian agents in Iraq and we will continue to do that. Their people that are not safe anywhere in Iraq if they are engaged in nefarious activities.
Look, the fact is that Iran is Iraq’s neighbour, so they will have diplomatic relations, and that’s fine. But when it comes to people who are planting, giving EFP, IED technology, and who are endangering our soldiers, we will go after them.
Finally, on the nuclear program we are working with the international community. I was at a meeting yesterday where we have shown Iran that there are two paths.
One is to continue down the Security Council [path] and keep sanctioning. And by the way it’s not just UNSC sanctions but it is sanctions that derive from the US’s designating Iranian banks, entities that are using the financial system for ill-gotten gain. And we will keep doing that, and that is making people worried about the reputational risk of dealing with Iran and I think you will see that increase.
On the other hand, there is another path for Iran. We certainly have no quarrel with the Iranian people, and the Iranian people are a great people, great culture, and we should be friends with the Iranian people and with Iran. You see the US does not have any permanent enemies. We’ve demonstrated that. One of our closest friends in the world is Japan, once an enemy. We have much better relations today with Libya, once a great hostile relationship. So we are capable of bridging differences. But Iran has not given an opening to do that.
Condoleezza Rice
Thank you, thank you very much.
Mamoun Fandy
Thank you very much.
