Skip to main content

tv   Key Capitol Hill Hearings  CSPAN  August 22, 2016 1:12am-3:41am EDT

tv-commercial tv-commercial
1:12 am
committingcted of crimes get to stay. our border is open. it is more of the same, but worse. donald trump cause america is secure. dangerous chemicals can out. borders secure. families at say. change that makes america safe again. trump for president. greg's i am donald trump and i approve this message. >> i am hillary clinton and i approve this message. donald trump: if i run for president, i will produce my taxes. >> what is your tax rate? >> none of your business. >> perhaps that is a reason we are seeing his tax returns. >> either he is not anywhere near as wealthy as he says he is or there is a bombshell in donald trump's taxes. >> now, the foreign policy of vice president -- presidential
1:13 am
candidate donald trump. this is just over 35 minutes. >> washington journal continues. ,ost: our guest is walid phares policy adviser to the trump campaign. how does donald trump see the world and the role of america? guest: as we heard from his speeches, he wants to see an america that is strengthened and defininged in terms of where the threat is coming, and of course, he would want to engage -- in the track of coalitions at partnership with them. he does not want the america involved in every single case alone. he wants to be with coalitions and the last point is to have a consensus by the american public if we want to intervene or not. no principle of isolationism or interventionism, but to make consulting on these
1:14 am
issues. i was involved in the romney campaign in 2011 and 2012. we had that experience and a number of republican candidates called on the previous experts and that is how i met mr. trump. he called on me only in march of the year to serve as policy advisor. one of the chum foreign-policy advisers, walid phares. our last guest said it is not a lot of detail in donald trump's foreign policy. let's start by talking about isis. aboutas donald trump said his plan to defeat isis? more generalare directions in mr. trump's approach to defeating isis then and secretary clinton's, which said we would continue more of the same.
1:15 am
basically the most important point is to end isis as an organization, not just as it is now, but end it as a future organization, meaning fighting the fight as well. as important on the ground, what is key in the right against isis is not just a military defeat of isis. it is who will take over after isis? isis came as a result of mistakes made in the way we left iraq in 2011 whereby we had defeated al qaeda but because of the political equation, isis was able to come back. asnking post isis is important as how we will dismantle isis. you spoke about how trump talked about screening methods. here's what he had to say. mr. trump: we should only admit to our country those who share our values and respect our people.
1:16 am
in the cold war, we had an ideological meaning test. -- screening test. the time is overdue to develop a new screening test for the threats we face today. i call it extreme vetting. extreme, extreme vetting. our country has enough problems. we do not need more. these are problems like we have never had before. [applause] [cheering] trump: in addition to screening out all members of the sympathizers of terrorist groups, we must also screen out any who have hostile attitudes or whoour country believe that sharia law should supplant american law. [applause]
1:17 am
mr. trump: those who do not believe in our constitution or hatred, will and not be admitted for immigration into our country. what does extreme vetting mean? guest: making sure the persons coming here are not connected to any other organization aiming at the united states. versus light vetting, and let me explain other points that are important. individuals who come to the united states to apply for immigration that is, when we do not have a war insert in areas, what is important our two things here at 22 years, i have been an expert in immigration cases. hadfended them when they cases across the nation. of the country, you have a special case. where we should begin is to see if we would solve the issue. before we leave.
1:18 am
in syria, there is a whole area ,n the northeastern part millions of syrian refugees. if you ask children, and many have asked them, where would you rather go, they say home. one policy is to make sure we should have basis for the syrian immigrants. the other would be to make sure the- it is not about -- arab countries themselves have a lot to teach us on the issue. call, dane, ohio, raymond. i had a couple of comments. i spent 18 months in turkey back when president kennedy was killed and i could not have joined it anymore here they were wonderful people. jimmy carter had the hostages and his whole life was spent in the military and reagan comes in ,nd he worked some quid pro quo
1:19 am
in 24 hours, whatever happened there? i asked karl rove that in a book signing here in dayton and he did not have an answer. he did not know. what goes on behind these doors, it is like cheney and mr. trump himself, they never served. i want people who served in our military. i cannot stand this. reagan never served. granted, mr. obama and clinton did not serve. it is trying -- time to end that here and there should be a law that requires that they had served. they do not have a clue, the mr.f they come up with, trump, his comments about our military and our heroes, it is unbelievable that anyone would consider this man for president. it just cannot stand her and sorry. thank you sir. i understand where he
1:20 am
coming from, of course, all citizens would like to see their commander in chief actually have experience, in the battlefield or service and not all of our presidents have had the privilege to do so. he named in number of presidents who do not serve, the fact that they are well advised. the fact that they have served in a private or public sector that would make them available, not just in the agencies now, but also those he for. i hope we will be able to future to have more candidates -- host: howard, independent caller. caller: i am not really a political person and never have in. arising that been
1:21 am
of john me in knee-deep and krapp. trump, with all the options we have, trump is the only option we do have because he does want to put america first. i believe in helping anybody. i believe if you are in another country, and it is that there and you want a better life, by all means, yes i open the door person border for that to come over and better their life. i do not welcome that person to come over here and start trying to change the way we live to the .ay they live we have so many problems and so many people from other countries and in our whole development all the way up to the president, you know what i'm saying? so many people trying to change the way we live. onald trump, i believe, is the right track to put america
1:22 am
back to the way it is supposed to be. i do not know, but i think i am right. host: that was howard from florida. let me talk about the critique of donald trump out there. headline recently with this letter with national they say heures, would be a dangerous president and what is your reaction? of them, iow some afford with them, we are from the same circle. as dangerousim because he will not apply their, is not said about mrs. clinton that she is dangerous. basically, when he was start acting as a president, a chief diplomat or chief executive, i would anticipate many among them
1:23 am
, i know what the agenda is and what the thinking is, when it comes to the practical issues in the region, even with the difficult issue of russia or the middle east, let alone asia, then they would come along in my view. host: hillary clinton said mr. trump is soft on russia, your reaction? guest: she was soft. the reset that in and after that, russia was expanding mostly under her and of course after she left the state department here let me talk more about mr. trump's vision. he is not about cutting a deal with mr. putin around the world. this is not what many critics are talking about. he is about being clear with where our national interests are with the united states. president obama and secretary clinton tried to go to russia and deal with those issues, such
1:24 am
as fighting jihadists send terrorist, such as all of the problems we are having. you have to have a strong leadership here perceived by peer when young put the redline in syria and then you stop, what that means or the russian leadership, is they would see us as weak. this would have to change under a trump presidency. donald trump received a national security briefing this week. what does that mean for a candidate at this stage in the race and with that impact his policies moving toward? -- forward? guest: any candidate. these are very important because they will give the candidate reality on the ground here the facts on the ground on which he could shape his own policy. that same day he met with his national security council. he is going in the direction of getting ready to be in the white house. host: back to calls, dave,
1:25 am
georgia. caller: good morning. guest: can you hit the mute button on your tv? we will be able to hear you much better. caller: ok. host: go ahead, please. caller: i would not vote for hillary clinton because she has done so many things that are terrible, that has harmed the people in this country. for years and years, could not have done no more dirty work over what she had done, or when , unseeded libya over that, she got thousands of folks killed. that is the reason i would vote for donald trump year he is a man of his word here the eight. ally. he tells the truth.
1:26 am
thanks for calling. mary is a democratic caller. hi. good morning. i have some questions, not comments. i do not see the point in allowing people to continue to disseminate misinformation. here is my first question. what is the current vetting policy for refugees who want to come into the country to apply for refugee status. howse give an example of you think the federal laws that exist now should be changed. at the senate, the house, the president, who? what country should you come religion, is your should you -- would you be allowed into the country, and please give three examples of one lie that hillary clinton has
1:27 am
told that has affected u.s. foreign policy or domestic policy. thanks for your question spared why don't you start with your background? guest: born in the united states since -- december of 1990. been here for years now. of course being a professor later at university. i have servedt, years as an 22 expert. that is vetting. for political asylum, the vetting process, which first begins with the administration theythe executive branch, want to make sure the case is strong. that is the key, that person cannot the -- and therefore has
1:28 am
for political asylum. the questions are very strong. the government would ask, if you go to another area of the country, would you be safe? there isonclude that no other place, vietnam war the soviet union, these are clear cases that when you're coming from the civil war area, you will make that determination. bob is calling from philadelphia, an independent caller. i am a little disturbed about people speaking on the , but the first guy from the center for progress, american also leading the
1:29 am
hillary campaign. i have the opportunity to go to their website and there was nothing on their but slams against donald trump. res.same way with mr. pha i do not see a political connection with him which makes me think he looks better than the other guy. whosh c-span would put out is paying these people that you have on as guests because it helps form an opinion on how valid the opinions are. any foreign policy or national security questions for our guest, walid phares? caller: i believe he is right that the united states has to be strong, that we will not take it anymore. being so policy of nice is not working. we have to find a different when -- a different way. i am a american first guy.
1:30 am
i believe strong military prevents this kind of stuff going on around the world. we need a strong leader. thank you for calling, bob. more on hillary clinton her speech back in june much he talked about donald trump's abilities. let's take a look. >> and he is not just unprepared. he's temperamentally unfit to hold an office that requires knowledge, stability, and immense responsibility. [applause] this is not someone who should ever have the nuclear codes because it is not hard to imagine donald trump leading us into a war just because somebody got under his very thin skin. [applause] ms. clinton: we cannot put the
1:31 am
security of our children and grandchildren in donald trump's hands. we cannot let him rolled the dice with america. this is a man who said that more countries should have nuclear weapons, including saudi arabia. who has't someone threatened to abandon our allies in nato, the countries that work with us to root out terrorists abroad before they strike us at home. host: sharp critique there. guest: very sharp. number one, the preparedness of an american politician before they enter public policy, mrs. clinton's first stage, she was the wife of a governor. trump was the ceo of a multinational corporation. president obama, before being a senator, was more of a local
1:32 am
politician, not with a lot of international connection. we would judge on one thing, which is the speeches. willf course, when they practice. that is the problem. if you are an incumbent, you will have more experience than the person who has not served before. yard that, what mrs. clinton is talking about, that he cannot consider situations as they are. she was secretary of state when these crises began. it was poor handling in the eyes of mr. trump. host: what has donald trump specifically said on nato? he gets knocked a lot. what is his official position? guest: yes, a lot of things have been said, but very few things have been said correctly. i am an advisor, i meet with a lot of european lawmakers. before mr. trump, there was a debate in europe between the
1:33 am
eastern european, the southern europeans and the rest on nato. they are concerned about bureaucracy in brussels. others are concerned about the russian future, the migrants. each one is concerned about one issue. it is not that perfect nato. basically, he does not want to dismantle nato. no, he wants to reorganize nato. he wants to to renegotiate nato, talk to leaders of brussels at tell them first that the second atlevel, the defense of level, and to all of us across the atlantic and mediterranean, bring nato to start helping us against jihadists in syria and libya. this is what he would like. host: we go to seaside, california. josh on the line for democrats -- for walidris
1:34 am
phares. caller: good morning. thanks for having me. my question is, wasn't donald f?ump's family named drum his name was changed because of his family's connection with the nazi party when they first came here? host: where have you first read that? caller: i haven't read it. it was discussed at a meeting i was at. they said the reason donald trump's father changed their rumpf to trump was that he was an officer in hitler's administration. host: let me ask you to hold. have you heard that story? walid: never. it is a very strange story but , we hear any story coming from
1:35 am
citizens. host: why do you bring it up why is it important? caller: because he has really, really been connected with racial and some of the ex- communist type of situations that are happening right now within the world. trumpot believe that will be allowed to represent the united states as -- all his character's references and things of that nature. he is really unfit. hopefully, we can find out about his family now. host: thank you. guest: let me take advantage of this question. russia looking at those who are , advising him and pulling names like newt gingrich and giuliani, they were part of this big push
1:36 am
back against the communist threat. i don't think you would be interested for the culture of the campaign would be one of the mr. putin over the heads of our friends and allies. host: mr. rose from ohio. go ahead, please. caller: ok, our country is in a mess. and like i said before, i have been a democrat voter for many, many years. this time around, i am going straight republican. i trust more than what they say than what i do of the democrats. having hillary clinton as our president, our country will be in more disaster. thank you. guest: well i agree with the , caller, and i think many democrats and independents, there is a general feeling over the past eight years specifically since the arab spring, and with what happened
1:37 am
in russia there is a feeling , that the administration and mrs. clinton will be a stretch of this administration is not doing it right in terms of strategic choices. one of the choices they have not mentioned yet is the iran deal. that was mentioned by supporters of mrs. clinton. this is one of the best deal they have been engaged in. we have a completely different view. number one, we should have had allies in the region part of the deal, when you sit down with the country that is deployed in syria, iraq, yemen. those countries like egypt and jordan and israel. this has to be done again. many of the directions taken by president obama needs to be changed, and i think mr. trump would do so. host: talk about some other parts of the world. libya. connecting libya to isis, because we know some bombing has begun, u.s. bombing has begun in libya. how would donald trump handle the situation? guest: how is libya connected with syria is very simple.
1:38 am
we backed the so-called rebels in the beginning of the campaign in libya against mr. qaddafi. the thing was not to prepare post qaddafi. these organizations and volunteers were sent to syria. those became a part of isis. that is the chain of events now. how we handle libya, we look at regional alliances. we have two very strong allies the united states who have their experiences in fighting isis. that would be egypt and tunisia. we have upgraded tunisia as an associate of nato. we need to have a plan for libya, not just to defeat isis. it is the same model everywhere else. what comes after isis? we need to work with civil societies and democratically elected governments. partnering with them through regional alliances. host: how about asia, china, north korea? guest: i have been speaking to
1:39 am
many south koreans and japanese, tempting on the questions to come. we have expressed concerns because they heard many speeches, many statements by mr. trump, talking about, you have to share more, burden sharing. the reality is on strategic level. there is no way the united states will lead if any of the allies if they are under attack, but we need to prevent that. one of the ways we are going to prevent that is by fixing things we need to do is fix that , relationship. but you have to go to china and sit down. china has to keep north korea. all of this has been done by the administration with north korea. and south koreans have told me it is not about restraining north korea, so we have to change that as well. host: moving on milwaukee, .ndependent caller go ahead, >>. -- go ahead, greg. caller: good morning, c-span. i just got a quick question here. i was wondering if syria and become new united nations for
1:40 am
the middle east? [laughter] caller: i know is a big question, but it is just my thought. i take my answer off-line. guest: what he meant could lead to another question is what is the future of syria in the sense that now we realize with the civil war five years, over four hundred thousand people killed, there are areas in syria where we come back to a central party, complete central party. the kurds, what would be the future of the kurds? the alloites and even the sunnis. are they going to take the path of the muslim brotherhood or the path of liberalism? it is a very good question. it needs a lot of architecture. trump host: has mr. spoken on the future of mr. assad? guest: he doesn't think the priority is to lead a military campaign against ethnic regimes.
1:41 am
one of the reasons why, first of all, because it is very late. president obama had the opportunity in 2013 when the chemical weapons were used. now, the russians are there. now it would be a competition , for russia and the west. what he is talking about is number one, taking care of isis , first. making sure that isis is terminated. making sure that the moderates are backed. and everybody should go under third, the international office of geneva or any other capital and discuss the future of syria. , host: is donald trump and isolationist or interventionist, or are those terms old? guest: they do not apply anymore. there is one term i am looking at which is functionist. ,in function of american national interests and our lives. meaning we look at each case and , see, how can we deal with that case?
1:42 am
there is no principle of where we are going to intervene everywhere we can or we should not. host: beside you, who else is on mr. trump's of for policy advisors? team of's foreign-policy advisers. guest: i will not give you names, but they are public. he has five national security policy between generals and people who have served. now, we have a former dia commander for director who was the general of defense. and not just people from the military people who have served as lawmakers and national security defense in congress are joining mr. trump. host: one more quick question. you advised mitt romney in 2012. mr. romney has not only come out against donald trump, he laid out into him quite severely earlier this year. have you spoken to him at all? no, we have not, but i have spoken with families or was, very close, joint friends,
1:43 am
people i served under him. look when he ran, i supported , him with all the strength because we had an intellectual connection and i hope actually , that he would have run again for mr. trump. but now that mr. trump is the candidate, is the nominee and i have committed to him, i do support his agenda fully. part of his agenda he is pushing now was part of romney's agenda. the difference is little boy and i do not intervene in politics. host: let's go to dorothy in marianna, georgia. hi, dorothy. dorothy, are you there? caller: hello. yes, ok. i wanted to actually ask a question. host: sure, you are on the air. caller: i want to ask a question. first of all, i want to say we are at this time, no one in
1:44 am
america is from america more than the indians that was here. at the time, there will always -- they are always talking about these foreigners coming in. who are the ones that are going to make the laws that people can sit down and say they are going to do harm? conducting donald trump with a level head he has not had throughout the whole time is putting gasoline on a fire. so, i don't think donald trump is the answer to everything today. because back in the day, people really opened their eyes. back in the day when clinton, the husband was in office, i don't think no one can actually disagree they didn't have a good life at that time. so, what makes trump, who i think is trying to get a dictatorship in america, the best candidate for america at this time?
1:45 am
host: let's hear from our guest. thanks, dorothy. guest: i understand the point she is raising, but it is probably opposite. mr. trump wants more freedom for individuals, not just political , but also economic. he want less government, less a division of them -- intervention. he is more for freedom. that would clash with ideas of his opponent, who was to see a greater role for government. again, this is a debate that has been in existence for many, many years. mr. trump, his essence here is that he wants americans to feel comfortable with each other, government. no aggression coming from government. at the same time, we need to reform economically and politically. host: teresa, republican from florida. good morning, teresa. caller: good morning. you are an excellent communicator, and i have enjoyed the program so far. thank you for taking my call. i am a woman who is
1:46 am
college-educated, and i am voting for donald trump. host: how come? caller: because i believe in a smaller government. i believe in a more efficient government. i think even though nothing has really been progressing, i think we have been regressing in the last 15 years. what is clear is the government is grossly negligent. as a woman, i have been so concerned about paternity since 911. to think our government has allowed millions of illegal immigrants to march into this country after that event it is just unheard of. i am a daughter of immigrants. i am all in favor of legal immigration. i think it is a very serious threat that we are so negligent. i am worried about my daughter's
1:47 am
-- my daughters and my granddaughters and how they are going to be, how their safety is going to be. it is very serious. i know it is complicated. i think what mr. trump does that is so cool is that he says something very outrageous, and we are all talking about it in detail, like for nato for many , years, we have heard people are not paying their fair share, and the united states is in debt, $19 trillion, and we are paying all this money to protect everybody. it has got to be fixed. we have to address it. we cannot control people. we have to talk about these issues, identify them, and fix them. this is america, we are great, we can do it. thank you for taking my call. host: thanks. anything to add? guest: as immigrants, we are part of the policy.
1:48 am
it is unusual because you had kissinger, many people who came here at a younger age including , secretaries of state, so on and so forth. i look at it from three perspectives. number you have the legal one, immigrant. i was a legal immigrant. i work hard to become a citizen, i engaged in the political, i like the society. then, you have the illegal immigrant. they are an issue of social, economic issues that we need to solve. these are one. and then, the other one, those are trying to penetrate our country using the immigration system. i would be concerned about that part from a national security perspective. i think mr. trump is trying to focus on that host: what do you one. see about the biggest difference between donald trump and hillary clinton is in foreign policy? guest: foreign policy is not to look at the map and -- i mean the obama-clinton narrative is college level, sophisticated.
1:49 am
but then, when you come and ask them, for example about syria or , libya or for that matter the iranian deal, what are the alternatives, if it goes wrong, then, trust us, we are the government. mr. trump tries to make a different school. you have to go back to your point. the more he gets national security briefings now, hopefully in transition and after, the more he can answer questions. he says there are other alternatives to the ones you have produced. host: what is the biggest national security threat to this country? guest: i think it is in ideology, not even individuals. the more the ideologies can progress and influence the minds of individuals, the more we are going to be in danger. we are going to be the continuation, the growth of homegrown jihadists. but my point is you don't fight and ideology with law enforcement and intelligence. you have to fight with ngos. those that would shut down the
1:50 am
internet to stop isis, i was that you don't need. you have to put in more reformers. in more moderates. mr. trump said i will open my arms to muslim reformers. this is important. maryland. are you there? caller: i am here. go ahead. now to name for us, sir. caller: [indiscernible] host: got it. go ahead, sir. caller: he need to push a little bit. they will be fine. [indiscernible] another thing for me, i want to -- people. am i allowed to do that, just for a second? i come from africa.
1:51 am
my country is not working. that is why i am here. america for me and my children. we have to change a little bit because in france, you see something, these people don't change. good,nd out if it is no we think. so the message, kenya, they vote for him -- if it doesn't work, you come back to democrat people. you can't do the same thing the second time. that is my point. host: you mentioned africa give , me an opportunity to speak about the continent. mr. trump has very much
1:52 am
regard for africa because many of these countries that we see the worst are going to be in africa for example, the forgotten darfur. we did not see much from the obama-clinton administration work on darfur. there are other areas in sudan, in south the civil war sudan. somalia is still a problem even after eight years. not just obama, but the bush administration. nigeria, if the boko haram problem is not addressed, you are going to have one third of the country going the way of syria. and then of course the countries , of the south and somalia, africa needs to be on the foreign policy of the next administration, whomever is in the white house. host: we have joe on the line from massachusetts, independent caller. go ahead, joe. caller: good morning. i have two questions. from the start of the syrian assad regime change policy, one of the underlying issues was the
1:53 am
gas pipeline from cutter to syria into europe. -- from qatar into syria into europe. what is donald trump's policy for the pipeline, and will be here any statement based on oil-natural gas in the politics concerning europe, russia, and china from the trump campaign? guest: thank you very much or for this question. we get a lot about the pipeline politics. there is a lot of merit to understand that below the conflicts, below the positioning of many players in syria, iraq, russia of course with its huge energy, what is happening in ukraine, has also to do with the passage of oil or other forms of energies, and it is always influential in making decisions. now, a trump administration, first of all would act like an ambulance.
1:54 am
first, you have to face the situation and the competition from being destroyed as in the case of syria and iraq and other places. so emphasis will be put on calming down the situation, so the situation of the future, this will be negotiated in the conference rooms of international diplomacy. but ending a war, first of all, you have to and the main reason of the war. it is the presence of a terrorist organization. there are other than isis. i am concerned that those who are replacing isis are not necessarily those moderates. this is the recipe for the next war. that is why the next president should be wise enough when solving one problem, he or she should be thinking of the next. and i hope it is he. darryl from battle
1:55 am
creek, michigan, republican. caller: good morning, c-span. i was wondering if you were going to take a position on mr. trumps administration? i hope so. i have seen you in a lot of speeches, and i think it would be good for his administration. thank you. guest: thank you very much or that. now i am serving very happily as , an advisor. and then of course there would , be transition, hoping he will win. he has many talents, people in my field for national policy, -- foreign policy, national security but thank you for your , recommendation. host: what is donald trump's method each day, each week to pull in all of this foreign policy information? challenges, crises, how does he take it all in and absorb it, figure out an approach? guest: this is a great question. it happened that i lived the previous cycle with the romney campaign. the world has changed.
1:56 am
what we see today did not exist then. it was the beginning of the arab spring. there was no mention of russia, and even north korea was not as strong. we did not have half a million people dead in syria. so, and we did not have a large number of homegrown jihadi attacks in europe and here. so, you can imagine what we call room," it via "situation room" with mr. trump, that is not just one specific place -- it is very busy. it is breeding him as it president. it is happening. that is why you see him sometimes making those statements not just in the speeches, addressing some of the most evolving issues, the most dangerous issues. he is being prepared to become a chief executive. host: last call, melody, ventura, california. democrat, good morning. caller: good morning, thank you. host: doing fine, go right ahead. caller: my problem is mr. trump
1:57 am
has no information on foreign affairs at all. with what is going on with putin , the kremlin, and his close ties to them, i have a concern about them, about the safety of america. do you see where i am going with this? host: keep going, melanie. caller: i cannot wrap my arms around this man, who has has businesst, ties, personal business ties with mr. putin. what is he going to do with the white house? yets our enemy, and family members are hanging out , with his family. i just can't vote for him. host: we get the point. laid out a couple different points there. guest: thank you, actually i hear this all the time. mr. trump does not have any massive interest in russia, let alone with mr. putin himself. even if this is the case, he has
1:58 am
been a businessman. he has interests around the world including the gulf and africa and asia, latin america but mostly in the united states. , that is where he is coming from. he is the ceo of a major corporation, but that is something citizens and viewers need to pay attention to. he has acted for 20, 25 years in his capacity of the boss of this huge network, meeting with many public policy persons. he has met monarchs, presidents, ministers, ministers, members of various assemblies. he had discussed with them politics way more than his opponents before they actually come to the position of a candidate for the president of the united states. he has the experience. he was not in government. i mean president reagan was an , actor. had the, of course, he experience of the governorship of california which brought him , later on. in addition to george bush the
1:59 am
first, he came to the white house knowing almost everything about international crisis and , these are choices you are going to make. you have more exposure, but the judgments when it comes to be briefed with the crisis as in libya and syria should give you food for thought. host: walid phares, thank you for coming along this morning and sharing your thoughts on the campaign. guest: thank you so much for having me. ♪ c-span's washington journal, live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up monday morning, judicial watch president talks about his organization possible in obtaining e-mails from hillary clinton during her time at the state department. ginsburg, the director of circle, the center for information and research on civic learning and engagement. will look at millennial voting and which presidential candidate millennial's are likely to support.
2:00 am
c-span's washington journal, 00fe beginning at 7: eastern, monday morning. monday, on the communicators, virginia commonwealth attorney and a seal uselessly to counsel counsel. aclu they are interviewed by reuters cyber and surveillance policy reporter. >> their way they operate is by impersonating a legitimate cell phone tower. they allow police to gather things like location, information, serial numbers of not just a specific target us from, but all target bonds in that area. >> i can think of one gruesome homicide we had in lynchburg a couple of years ago. while the case was not result by cell tower information, basically broke the case. a would have never found suspect but for the historic
2:01 am
cell tower information. atwatch the communicators 8:00 eastern on c-span two. scholarsh political and american observers reflect on the failed military coup to unseat the turkish president. panelists talked about the effect of the coup on relations with the u.s. and the european union. it was hosted by a group cofounded by one of the political allies of the turkish president. this is about one hour 40 minutes. >> that afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the
2:02 am
panel. atm the research director the seta foundation in bc. we have a very distinct panel. i will try to keep my remarks very short. the introductions will be short as well so we have enough time for a lot of questions and sessions in the aftermath of the panel. as i said, we have a very distinct panel. we have a professor emeritus. we have the general coordinator of seta foundation. we have the senior fello brookings institution. how the struggle over islam is reshaping the world. we have the executive director of the seta foundation and washington, d.c. we apologize for the inconvenience about the last-minute changes. good and bad reason.
2:03 am
the rcp tasks 100 so we decided -- the rsvp past 100. there was a power outage in our building, so anyway, it looks like this was a good decision. we will start it. he will give us an historical perspective about the coups in turkey and how should we understand the coup attempt that took place in july 15. >> this working? thank you. it is a pleasure to be here, although the reason behind it is not such a happy one. well, maybe happier in the defeat in than the attempt. i want to make two points. one is about the historical -- i think there is a problem with the microphone. ok.
2:04 am
i would like to make two points. mr. berktay: one is about -- >> back here? mr. berktay: one is about the historical specificity and the uniqueness of the july coup and its defeat, and the second is ,bout the uniqueness this time a much more bizarre uniqueness, if you want, of the organization , the network, the congregation, behind the coup. the first is more broadly historical. m, for western democracies, military takeovers or armie coups,e,
2:05 am
interventions, etc., have become a thing of the past, left behind in the 19th century. it has not been the case with the newly emerging democracies on the 20th or early 21st centuries and the rest of the world. as you all know, especially from 1945 onwards, from the moment of the great onset of decolonization onwards, once upon a time, third world emerged. this nonwestern, non-european intermediate zone between the united states and the soviet union caught in the throes of the cold war became the setting for weak democracies and strong armies or repeated and sometimes very long-lasting interventions,
2:06 am
military interventions in democratic life. central and south america witnessed numerous crews, and long-lasting military regimes that were, in general, pro-american or else the united states was set to always have a finger in the pie in these latin american interventions, but it was brazil chile, orina or t earlier in the 1950's, guatemala, etc., where else in the middle east or arab world, it was much more a matter of the soviets having their fingers in the pie. army takeovers in egypt, iraq, syria, algeria, north and south yemen at one point, and so on and so forth.
2:07 am
these armyere always takeovers, and to the best of my knowledge, they were never rather, they were never defeated by a popular and nonviolent -- army takeover attempt to go wrong, but this was because a different action of the armed forces forces came out in opposition. there was maybe civil war, some kind of interim struggles, the initiative was neutralized, and possibly overcome later, or that was a subsequent fragmentation of authority. countrywide. in all these respects, and in terms of turkish history itself in the 20th century, what on 15th, 16th july, it
2:08 am
presents a new larger. and i think we have to throw in a few things about turkey's precocity to put this in proper context. the ottoman empire was never colonized. of colonialn empires in the course of the scramble for africa, southeast asia, polynesia, and so on and so forth, when existing colonial empires were expanding, and new ones were being created or making a comeback, the ottoman empire itself was never colonized. oughtought a long -- it f against colonization.
2:09 am
it kept losing or giving up chunks of territory while gaining the time to launch its own modernize asian attempts from above, -- modernization attempts from above so would not suffer the fate of ultimate colonization. it succeeded. into the early 20th century and precisely because of that success, a second crucial moment at the end of world war i and total defeat, on top of that, there came a surprisingly successful war of national resistance against the prospect of colonization. the nationalabout resistance of 1919 to 1922. it of course was a proto-third
2:10 am
world struggle, but it was not exactly an anti-colonial war of national liberation. it was a kind of struggle to protect, redefined, and consolidate an already existing statendence and sovereignty, which again was successful because of the previous background, that is to say, the background of 19th century modernization before it. it is possible to look at it like this. with regard to the rest of the third world independence or national struggles especially after 1945, turkey had a head start of something like 25-30 years. this is what i speak of when i talk of modern turkish precocity .
2:11 am
regime, became authoritarian. it became authoritarian modernist. it set up a one-party state. until 1946,927 1940, 1950, let us face it. there was a one-party dictatorship in turkey. turkish textbooks and university and high school curricula refer to this as the one-party period, but i mean, the true name for it, the correct name for it is one-party dictatorship, which was the turkish nationalist version of what was happening in the soviet union and what would be extended to eastern europe or china after 1945. the third crucial moment is the
2:12 am
to ash transition multiparty democracy in 1946, 1950. again, we witness yet a third instance of this precocity that i am talking about. most of theen new countries so and states that have emerged since the founding of the united nations, the united nations was founded with just 50 countries, more or less, let us remember. that was all there was in terms of independence and sovereignty in the world i'm. since then, another 150 or so have been added so that, as a good index, the current u.n. membership stands at nearly 200. where have all these countries, from? out of the dismantling of old colonial empires. they were the first 10 or 20 among them when they were just
2:13 am
the coming independent and sovereign states in the 1940's. always, with that same head start of 25-30 years in terms of social, economic, and political development, was ,aunching its own experiment transitioning to a one-party democracy, what a lot of the rest of the third world would remark upon much later. -- embark upon much later. this turkish democracy, there were military coups in 1960, 1971, 1980, the so-called postmodern coup, a very forceful ultimatum which forced the ,overnment to resign in 1997 punctuating this difficult growth and development of turkish democracy from 1946-1950 onwards.
2:14 am
this was successful. nobody resisted them. the people had revolted and they had opted for this, that political party. when faced with the political might of the armed forces, they did not take to the streets, they did not oppose, they did not resist. a historian's metaphor, in medieval history it is generally said that, let us say in the 12 and 13th centuries, you have these italian city states bickering amongst themselves with constant jealousy and competition. every now and then, a german emperor chooses to come over the entries italyrman -- entered italy and everybody
2:15 am
goes quiet until they go back. ins is what the people turkey did at the time of the 1970 one, 1980 coups. i lived through all of these. i was 13, 14 years old when the first one happened. 1960. the idea becomes, let us get quiet, let us lay low, so that thatey eventually decide matters are back to normal, they decide to hold elections so that we can vote again, and they go back. this time, something different happens, and i think we have to make an effort to understand just how different and how novel what happened is. around became clear, 9:30 p.m. on that confused evening of 15 july, at least part of the army was trying to
2:16 am
stage yet another military takeover. . must emphasize this at least two hours before dogan was able to connect to a television station, in order to call out to the people on the street to anist and defeat the crew, hour and a half, maybe two hours before that, when people in istanbul and all over turkey realized that, yet again, the military or a section of the military, their time to take over the fruits of their democratic will away from them, they were trying to take away their own democracy that they had voted for away from them. onto the streets
2:17 am
-- they poured out onto the streets relatively spontaneously , and they began to undertake a series of quite creative acts of which ice, about realized, not much has been written in the west, unfortunately. operators of heavy start dragging their trucks, their lorries, their work machines, their bold so they bulldozers, people fromock exiting and joining the coup. in places in central anatolia, adjoining military districts, jet fighter bases, farmers set their own crops of fire so as to
2:18 am
create heavy smoke in order to prevent potential jet fighter planes from taking off. areine a peasant, peasants in many ways, in terms of their life habits, the most conservative people on earth. imagine setting fire to, you know, your entire hope for the next year, the own crops, in order to prevent air force action in support of the coup. policethered in front of headquarters, sensitive government offices, turkish state radio and television, istanbul airport, to first , eventually troops to talk with them, to take them the tanks orunt
2:19 am
force them to leave. at 15th july, they were actually liberated before police action or anti-coup army intervention directly by masses of turkish civilians using nonviolent means. or used,s were wielded but using, demonstrating just eight collective might of mass action to overcome -- just the collective might of mass action to overcome the plotters. think it will go down not just in turkish history , but perhaps in the history of the entire third world. another vicious attempt
2:20 am
at destroying parliamentary democracy that was uniquely defeated by civilian mass action. thank you. [applause] mr. berktay: thank you. speaker isour second the first person i called. he was really close to the breach. teamiately after, he had a widely circulated and widely cited research report on the perception of the people on the there were various important questions about why they are there, and what they are protecting, what they are fighting against, so first, let idea about what happened, and who did it, and then, i will ask him to state a
2:21 am
little bit about this. >> thanks very much. pleased to talk about of the recent experience failed coup d'etat in washington because i know that some of you are perplexed what is happening in turkey in real terms. help inn: maybe, to clarifying your perception of turkey's experiment with this , to argue that inre should be rethinking west and capitals in understanding what happened in turkey. you know, the professor made a
2:22 am
good speech in defining the parameters of what was happening in turkey, that is a civil and democratic business in the coup d'etat. this is the first time that turkish people resisted against the military takeovers, so, this understood in real , because wee of need to rethink turkish dynamics , the dynamics of turkish politics. you know, we have some understandings, some perceptions about where turkey is headed 's strongogan leadership. many people are thinking in or many authoritarian,
2:23 am
other accusations against the turkish government. deep flowthere is a of change in turkish society after this failed coup d'etat. actually, it would be proper to 8/15 for the turkish people. from different sectors of united againsty this coup d'etat for the production of the democracy and for the protection of the homeland. you know, in this study led by seta, we started actually in the atond night, we were, i was the bridge with my wife. we left the bridge when the
2:24 am
were actually captured by civil people, and then, i went to home to have sleep. in the second night, we started this research in the democracy and the main, and maybe the main finding was the protection of homelands, patriotism actually was the main motive behind his attempt of people. , whatmaybe, you know happened in turkey at that night was had to stop a tank. just after two days, my daughter gave me a tank made by pepper, paper. this is a traumatic, dramatic
2:25 am
event that you can visualize in every people's mind, the image of the tank as the beginning of for turkish democracy. all sectors of turkish society united against this coup d'etat, including anti-erdoganists. finding.the main the leader wasat not participating, not joining , "what aeting, i said what a pity for chp." maybe some of the responsible people warn him in joining this
2:26 am
meeting and actually he joined in that meeting because the ground of turkish people, very strong in supporting democratic civil resistance against the coup d'etat. from washington or any european capital, i think all analysts should consider this first point. democracy isvil supported by all people. another one is, who is behind this coup d'etat? again, 95% of the people agreed on that, this is an act of the communist movement. you watch the terrorist organization in turkish. well, it is interesting to see that the people who are
2:27 am
protesting warmaking and appearance in democracy watches night thought that, before this coup d'etat, one third of the people in the streets, in the squares, thought that movement was a service organization, peaceful service organization. 17th of december operations, they thought in that way. this coup d'etat changed all the until, and after from that night, all people thised to think that service organization has transformed itself into a secret organization, so, this is the general perception of the people. grand movement is that terrorist organization deeply rooted in
2:28 am
--tical state including military intelligence services. in they all of them should be cleansed from the critical state institutions. that is the general consensus of , of the people that take place in democracy watch nights. then, what are the characteristics of this movement? you know, it is very common to classify historic movements and groups with more that are radical. this organization was seen , byly in the literature as many analysts, as moderate. it is more than that. this mixture of secret society
2:29 am
and different layers, they have different layers of organization periphery, there are different layers. they picture themselves as different, what is really taking place in the circle. writingslook at the about the movement or some people who left the movement december, they all except that from the beginning, actually, ground movement designed itself as a structure. what was the motive behind this? that was the deep reach of the movement for the communists icause he thought that have to find a new way to get rid of this secularist, elite
2:30 am
from the state structures. and then, designed itself as organization in appearance, but in the circle severelyradical and faith-based, but at the same time, had a clear message, had a of controlling the state. struggle40 years actually produced a large course, with many connections, many international connections and networks from tocation, from schools hospitals, to media outlets, to even -- in the state structure.
2:31 am
so there is a planned phase through the years and this is toy critical for turkey now get rid of this structure. becauselony structures the issue is very critical, how to deal with the secret organization. in dealingeffective with religious organization much more then at the organization. more important. if the unitednow, states -- he will continue
2:32 am
brainwashing for the followers. for the disappointed followers of this movement. you know, this -- his messianic style of religious interpretation is very effective beginning thise religious organization was autonomous in the sense that being influenced from any other religious movements in turkey. me.they have the baton of interpreting the religious principles, that is making fairy effect if his leadership on his followers. is the idea oft success because this movement is
2:33 am
based on factors. success is sanctified by god for them for their organization but this time there is a very clear failure. so maybe this may create criticism within the organization as well. the second critical aspect for turkey in the fight is the need de-religious eyes the members. at the same time, in a way the real integration into 6i-80. -- society. tobe i should point relations between turkey and the u.s. you know, coming from washington
2:34 am
the reaction from circles, so many people in turkey actually because people expect much more than that. theearly statements made by secretary of state john kerry if they coulds not tell what success was, the u.s. would prefer to work with -- with this with this coup's plotters. this should be rehabilitated, but how? to have an if cooperation dealing with this organization for turkey, you know, this is a nation security issue for
2:35 am
turkey. if u.s. is showing in the cooperation in dealing with this lessenthis may help to thesension created by happenings. actually, -- he is finding a safe refuge in this country. this reality, whether it is a i am not goingss to -- but this will be detrimental to turkish people's understanding of the u.s. something should be done for the relationsu.s.-turkey and i do not think that will
2:36 am
help us eliminate this aspect. thank you very much. [applause] >> now a speaker will talk about this and offer comparisons with other countries in the region with experiences with coups. >> thank you. thank you for having me. 15, first of all let me just say twitter can be dangerous because on july 15 i was off twitter for a couple hours and i got back on and everyone on my twitter feed was talking about a coup attempt and i am light, this happens a lot. you get off twitter and something really bad happens. and i was settling in seeing what was going on in real time, i felt the sick feeling.
2:37 am
it reminded me how i felt on july 1, july 2, july 3 20 13 when the egyptian coup was happening and as someone who is worked a lot on it egypt, you know, i could not help but see those comparisons. that also made me think, well, response going. to be. in and i think romance and talked about this a little bit. there's no doubt in my mind that the coup plotters thought to themselves, hey in previous coups that happened in the middle east, what would the u.s. say? as an american, it is fair to say we as americans were complicit in the success of the egypt.y coup in not in it actually happening, but certainly afterwards helping to legitimize the new military regime. a dangerousedent is one that the coup plotters had
2:38 am
to be aware. the second thing is there's no doubt in my mind that if the coup had actually succeeded that the u.s. would be perhaps let's say indulgent until the -- to the coup plotters if there was a sense it was succeeding. i say this not because -- well, the u.s. does have a bad history when it comes to coups but secretary john kerry has a very soft spot for dictators. let's face it, it does. -- he does. the inclination would have been to make these with the coup if that was where turkey was going so it is understandable for me to understand why turks would be very suspicious about the u.s. response. luckily, secretary kerry made a strong statement several hours into the coup. but i think for a lot of people that was not quick enough. for think it is important
2:39 am
those of us in washington to understand where that suspicion is coming from. it is not something you can really prove because we are talking about an alternate history of what would have happened if the coup had succeeded. but it is that distrust and suspicion i think that has a corrosive effect on u.s.-turkish relations. on the other hand it is fair to say that turks, many turks do necessarily understand the u.s. position on this so it goes both ways and this is where i think the conspiracy theories we are hearing from some turkish officials, some members, is very problematic. so this idea that somehow the u.s. was complicit in the coup before the coup happened or as it was happening. there is no evidence to support this. everything we know about the
2:40 am
obama administration would suggest this was very unlikely. why? the last thing that obama would ever want to do is get more involved in the middle east. his overarching presence and middle east policy is to do as little as possible. to be involved with a coup plot takes a lot of time and attention and that is not something that to obama could conceivably be involved in from any standpoint in my view. if turkish officials are trying to make their officials to their counterparts in the u.s. it does not help to engage in those kinds of conspiracy theories. hurts the caseso for extradition because some of the rhetoric around extraditing ghulam is over the top. to meet a certain evidentiary area standard. i think it is a very good thing that the u.s. has high evidentiary or standards when it comes to extraditing people who crimes,sed of various
2:41 am
political or otherwise. so i think that is very important to keep in mind here. i think that also, you know, the had, int the crackdown my view, in die no people can disagree on this but my view has been disproportionate and the net has been cast very widely in a way that i do not think can be justified legally or according to any general understanding of ,ue process when it comes to you know, mass resignations or dismissals of members of the civil service or university deans, someone in so forth. of course, after a coup there has to be people who are arrested, detained, and question but i think we also have to talk about what would be a proportional response. and if tens of thousands of people are being dismissed or detained, there is a real discussion we have to have about whether that is justified or
2:42 am
proportional. what i would like to see here in washington is a kind of middle ground. i think that we as americans should be unequivocal in our condemnation of the two. that this was in attempted military coup against a democratically elected government. yes, in my ba problematic government. yes, it might be a government that has authoritarian tendencies. and at the same time we have to be respectful of them as a democratic. i don't think that we should stop all criticism of president erdogan. i am not comfortable bed anyone who criticizes resident the one in the post-to context is pro-coup. they should become comfortable and safe from overreach by president erdogan. for me as someone who thinks a lot about her to one's personal
2:43 am
mode -- president erdogan's motivation and how much try some, how much his religion, how much is power. i think there is a lot of miss -- misunderstanding about what drives them. if i was president erdogan, i would do exactly what he is doing. i would use it as an opportunity to clean house because from his standpoint, every day in the s, members of the party would wake up every day fearing a military coup could be imminent. i think we have to empathize with that fear and paranoia. he was someone who is imprisoned for reciting a pretty innocuous islamist pelham. if you actually read the poem, it is pretty bland. not a big deal. was imprisoned for that.
2:44 am
so i think we have to understand where that paranoia comes from wind your whole life you have lived with this idea that you had to essentially hide your personal beliefs because they could be construed as being anti-secular and as recently as 2000, as many of you know, the party was one vote away from being shut down. so this is not ancient history. this is very recent history said that is art of what is driving the paranoia. the important thing to realize about hair annoy is often time it is unjustified but sometimes it is justified. some of it was justified. if i was president erdogan, i would be doing this but as an outside analysts trying to understand what is the best for the future of turkish democracy, healthy.ot the move toward a strong gooddential system is not because one thing we learned is
2:45 am
that in polarized society you avoid presidential systems. you go for parliamentary systems where you do not have an overarching strong presidential figure. you tried to avoid 10% electoral thresholds which are really bad for parliamentarian competition. you look at the design of political structures. if i had one piece of advice for the middle east going forward it would be, avoid presidential systems. i am worried that compounding polarization going forward will happen now. a longer-term observation, one positive thing and one negative thing. the positive thing is touched on by some of the other panelists is that what was very inspiring military coups in turkey has become entrenched. the fact that no secular parties encourage the coup was good.
2:46 am
if this happened 10 years ago it would've been different. it is interesting that in a span of just a few years, this norm has been consolidated and that should be very consolidating for the future health of turkish politics. i am reminded every day now with the rise of donald trump and some of this figures in the west that norms are very important for the survival and health of democratic politics. that is one thing. on the other hand, the coup was not about an islamist secular divide because as other people of said, it seems to be the both sides oft the political spectrum. we can disagree to what extent yes, gulenist terror was involved. so it is not an islamist secular thing so let's not forget the primary cleavage in turkish politics has been in my view in
2:47 am
and will remain one that is not totally about the role of religion in public life but is partly about the role of religion in public life between what we can call broadly and perhaps in an over's way, islamist and secularist and this is what is important to understand what is driving her president of the one. i think it is a curse for turkey that this is a very strong, overbearing state. the idea is that anyone who captures it can then remake turkish society and their own image. now, president erdogan and the party believes they have that chance as well. there is a personal aspect to this because they could not live as turks and be true to their religion and express it publicly for decades.
2:48 am
and that contributes to the very personal sense of bitterness and i have mentioned this in other talks, but you know, i remember that, you know, as senior advisor he said this was a very powerful way he was talking about his wife. she was not able to work at eight turkish hospital until a couple years ago because she wears a head scarf. that is remarkable to get your head around. or the fact that president erdogan starters could not want to college in their own country besides the fact he was the most powerful man in turkey. that is crazy to me. int is something we washington, d.c., have to be willing and able and comfortable in understanding and that aspect of it which is very raw and existential. that bitterness is something that will drive turkish politics for some time to come unless turks on both sides of the
2:49 am
political spectrum can find ways to mitigate and minimize the polarization but i am not very optimistic that there is going to be a real effort from the government or for that matter those in opposition going forward to really address those sources of polarization. thank you. [applause] drags thank you. -- >> thank you. talk about one of the most controversial topics, the coup attempt and the future of u.s.-turkey relations. >> thank you for such a wide array of remarks. it makes it difficult to talk at the end of it. to restrict my remarks to the u.s.-turkey relations and how this coup
2:50 am
attempt was perceived in that regard. a quick overview of what happened during the obama administration in the eight years of u.s.-turkey relations. we started with the obama administration attempt to restart, jumpstart relations with the muslim world in the wake of the afghan and iraq wars. his first trip was to turkey, quickly afterwards to egypt. that was a very good fresh start from a turkish perspective. were never able to sort of get out of this mode where you had crises or tensions coming close to crises every six months or something like that. had in the summer of 2010
2:51 am
theincident and turkish-iran sanctions. were wondering if turkey was moving away from the west. the axis was shifting and stuff like that. that debate quickly dissipated when turkey decided to host the nato in turkey. and when we got to the arab skipping many events here obviously, when we got to the arab spring, turkey again emerged as a potential model for the middle east. and when we got to syria all of sinceissipated again and 2013 especially, because of some of the incidents and december of
2:52 am
-- political turmoil impacted this image of authoritarian this.tion and etc. of it has been up and down during the obama administration. while the administration was trying to pull out in the arab spring, we did not have a positive agenda of what was going to come afterwards and ever since i think the regional powers are trying to figure out how to deal with each other in many ways while the u.s. is not publicly sort of pulling out as we see in the anti-isil fight. administrationt for turkey has been overly focused on the strategic issues more narrowly how turkey contributes or doesn't. this is against the background of sort of refusing to deal with the syria issue as a whole.
2:53 am
turkey would like to have hezbollah resolve that issue is a collaborative effort of the west. but obama administration has refused to involve itself in that and has restrict did its narrow focus to the anti-isil fight. which meant that turkey was seen in a context where, are they helping us against isis or not. that is a very narrow focus for a country like turkey that is not just part of the middle east. talking about the middle east, it is not just part of the is partast obviously it of europe. nato, it is important for issues in europe and elsewhere. a holisticnot had approach. of course i know many in the room will say, we do not have a
2:54 am
holistic approach to just about anything but nevertheless i would just like to observe that focused with perspective in that way. narrow strategic issues carried over or ran site-by-side with sort of the ms to political -- with sort of the domestic political turmoil. there has been sort of a lack of appreciation for what was happening inside turkey domestically because i think the attitude to pull away from the region carried over to this attitude basically. we don't really need to be worrying about what is happening inside our ally countries. why do i say 2012?
2:55 am
this was the first sort of sayworks in this, let's internal for-year struggle when the humanist judges and prosecutors wanted to question --.potentially arrest saying he was having secret talk target wassaid the president erdogan himself and they were going to try to arrest him on that score. then we had the crisis with the , it wasty schools leaked the government was preparing to shut them down. soon afterwards we had the givener 17 operation there was widespread corruption so that was another attempt to
2:56 am
bring down the government and that tension into this purge we are talking about, it started long before. trying to basically -- this was -- the turkish state, not just president on the one i would say, has seen this is a national front for a while now. you are you have an organization that is acting outside the chain of command in just about any institution not just these security institutions. pointing to why are so many civilians etc. being dismissed or arrested outside the government after the coup. the answer is, you will have a lot of civilians who could override the government official 's orders by bringing orders
2:57 am
from outside the movement. they sort of -- one of the coup legend coup leaders overently came to america 100 times over the past 14 years and went to pennsylvania. so this messy sort of struggle of the turkish state itself, it is initially as pointed out, was secular. to design the society according to a certain model, in years that party try to make sure the government was more open to other things. they said no, they can be in the government but the threats became much more clear and acute
2:58 am
later. i would say especially with the start of the turkish revolution process and the opposition. but anyway, these internal dynamics are obviously hard to summarize here but they are being missed in much of the conversation. erdogan dismissed it, he is fighting against an and etc.. ps a powerful figure in turkish politics there's no denying and and our party is -- he is a powerful figure in turkish politics there is no denying it. but there is so many trends and we have seen it in the coup attempt also how the institutions unfortunately were much moral vulnerable then we thought -- were much more vulnerable than we thought.
2:59 am
and also a united common front against the coup. all segments of society opposed it to and luckily and unluckily they were too close to the bridge that night. us in the street. i think they were the real sort of heroes here. authoritarianism debate that has been going on for the past two years. i think a lot of this is lost in translation. followers may see this but they keep reverting back to this and putting erdogan back into the center of everything that is happening. so with the administration narrow focus and not wanting to toimmoral to any of this
3:00 am
some extent while demanding that, you know, or while expecting that turkey should be part of the anti-isil coalition which it should and it is, it is a erect threat to turkey. this is creating a lot of -- on top of this, turkey's extradition request going forward will become a central issue. -turkish a turkey respective -- post -- perspective it is not a question whether he did it and if it was behind it. so this is going to hamper the health or lack of health of the relationship that is already damaged or that is already struggling from the past couple years both the
3:01 am
perception of authoritarianism and the middle east. we do not want to do much about the middle east turmoil which is sort of syria is a very close example where that becomes a serious problems for u.s. allies including germany and others much more so turkey. of security sort problems affecting turkey and so many ways. forward, we will have a new administration. [indiscernible] >> they have no idea will happen if trump wednesday election and so we will see what happens.
3:02 am
moving forward, we will be talking about this, writing about this. we do need between these two countries bilateral relationship to sort of proceed in a healthy manner and for healthy cooperation on all of these regional strategic issues. they need to talk a lot more. they need to move away from this narrow focus on issues. do not forget, the u.s. syria hasn with already created a huge sort of outcry in turkey. turkish people are -- if you ask people in the street -- they are like, ok u.s. is supporting there is no question. after that, u.s. is supporting you land. others perception on the side is coupled with, you know,
3:03 am
authoritarianism and what is turkey doing on isis, that kind of narrow focus. i am repeating, sorry. when these perceptions approaches flash, they are not going to have a long-standing healthy relationship. so the next administration will have to think long and hard about this. turkish thing about military. turkish military often was sort of dealing with the west on its independent of the syrian control. this is an unfortunate moment for turkey. civilian control of that institution. several years back, we thought that was what was happening at unionists were taking over and set of the capitalists.
3:04 am
so going forward, we need true civilian control of the military. that will not come in a day or two but that can be much more healthier for u.s.-turkey relationship as well. they give. >> thank you very much. applause] >> normally to moderate the panelists, i would ask questions but since we have a limited amount of time, 20 minutes, i questions.p the please identify yourself and keep your question concise so we can have as many questions as possible. i will collect some questions. we have the microphone at the act can we start from here? can we start from here? shoddyve a question for
3:05 am
and another one for the panelists. you talked about regional implications. do you see this visit as the beginning of realignment or is it just a political gesture for normalizing relationships with russia and maybe lifting the sanctions? the director of the international students. my of the vice president of [indiscernible]. this is a question. i have a question for the panelists in general. the populist dimension, do you [indiscernible] in turkish politics and what are its potential impacts on civil
3:06 am
military relations in the region -- in the region? >> i would like to have some comments but maybe because of the time i am not supposed to. aboutwould like to ask the history of turkey, very crucial what happened here i would likeially to understand the powers. that they have the superiority and turkish people's
3:07 am
destiny. the history ofin turkey, several times, because the army had some power. this is a thing of tradition. traditioncompare this that they have this better understanding of what turkish people need and also this superiority on the turkish system. this is very interesting that also a vision.e they would not just for turkey but for all of those they have this. they would make a better world in their opinion through their attempts. it is a kind of religious vision
3:08 am
but very soon to this they believe they have superiority and all of the systems and how come the united states supports this idea which can destroy all a nation? >> ok. let's have another question. >> thank you. president of the global policy institute and the is, you alluded to in the course of your presentation in diving was quite appropriate, about the high evidentiary very burden in the u.s. for in extradition process. and take with a lot of observers is that in turkey it seems to be the perception is a it is essentially a political process.
3:09 am
it does not really work this way and perhaps you can elaborate as to the division of powers in the united states with the effective ranch and in independent judiciary and indeed what does it mean that sufficient evidence has to be presented to a judge. not the president of the united states, not the secretary of state as to what is necessary and what looks like probable cause, etc.. rap sheet can elaborate because i think it is important to clarify the general context of how u.s. extraditions work. >> thank you. >> let's have another question here. >> thank you very much. for the director or middle east program at the national endowment for democracy. is trying tone understand a little bit some of the blurred boundaries.
3:10 am
thecoup shed light that for first time may be secularists and the conservative islam and party have stood together clearly against a coup against democracy but maybe more light needs to be shed behind the scenes where this is not very clear yet there has been an element of the conservative movement. it is not very clear to what extent there is also been in the army some of the secularists or catalyst information. the second point is looking at a .lurred area in the past it was very clear, back in 1999-2000. one of the foundations that led to the rise of the party was the golan nist support to the party
3:11 am
a very mutual, deep understanding and cooperation and obviously this has eroded over the years so how and what are the dynamics now and to what extent does this deep history play in the dynamic? >> ok. let's start getting the comments from the panelists. >> i will begin with this. mission with regard is deeplykish society seated, going back to the 19th century. all right. or rather the
3:12 am
military democratic establishment, not just the military but also the civilian judiciary, and 19th-century optima modernization from the top down. generated the profound process of class formation through the state. formation through the economy. profound process of class formation through the state meaning especially education. inhough as i have said turkey, was not in the strict sense a colonial society. nevertheless it was something like a semi-colonial territory and within it there emerged an enclave of turkish this. oft is to say, an enclave
3:13 am
westernized elites. having a internalized orientalists, looking upon the rest of their society in eurocentric oriental fashion. looking at the vast majority of muslim peasants and thinking of them in terms of -- these are our primitives. these are our primitives we have to civilize. that internalized euro censures him and orientalism, they launched these from the top down. is referred toat as authoritarian modernization which does not necessarily entail democracy.
3:14 am
in history, most of the time, more damaging and modernization go hand-in-hand with democracy. therekey, in a country emerged a parting of ways between modern and modernity understood as progress and democracy. it was the military bureaucratic establishment that fashioned itself as the carriers of this mission. with regard to the rest of it saw the only way out to a against the muslim masses in the long run as keeping them forcefully at bay. in the air of prohibitions, banned parties, repressions, legal clauses, this and that.
3:15 am
excluding them from participation in the enclosing them -- excluding them from public space. the west basically went along with this. that is to say, in countries like turkey, not only in turkey of course but all over the so-called turkish world, especially islam, this basic question of this has sadly, regretfully been one of trying to prop up such western elites with military bureaucratic support against the rest of society. with us and is a legacy that lies at the heart or at the bottom of it. all of these doubts or suspicions or allegations, areuding false allegations, all the cynicism and skepticism that has now burst out into the open in turkey in the aftermath
3:16 am
of the defeat of the coup with regard to the west into specially the united states. so, it is not just the young turks in the early 20th centuries. it is not just the capitalists in the 1920's. there is a long history behind configuration of the military establishment in turkey and the resonance between it and the western outlook on countries of islam. the grill or nests -- how do they -- come into this? in my international intervention i spoke about having time to say a few things about the muzzle congregation. i feel 2 -- about the muzzle mosulgation -- about the
3:17 am
congregation. i find it difficult to describe to western audiences. think of perhaps the jesuits as in instrument of the catholic insurrection. think of the templar knights coming out of the crusades or think of china. it is something much more. sacrednk of startzations that listening to a different drummer. in an a good sense, but vicious and malignant sense. 1920's -- sorry, in the 1970's, there took place a parting of ways of turkish islam's the mainstream decided to go ahead with open political public struggles. a politicalay, if
3:18 am
party is banned, set up another party, if that is band setup a another party. persist in using nonpolitical means to address turkish islamic issues. a small group, at that time little known provincial creature and his close circle decided on a different way that they would dispense with open political struggle and try to conquer the turkish state from the inside. 1970,tarted doing this in initially they were small. i know it sounds like bazaar, hard to believe very tail. but it was actually -- a bizarre , hard to believe, fairytale. in antiterrorist discourses there's talk of super agents --
3:19 am
sleeper agents or sleeper cells that are supposed to be activated one day with a certain do-or-di-kind of mission. think of it entire sleeper organization. so patientout to be has for 10, 15, 20 years it no plan of action except to keep growing. entire sleeper organization of hundreds of thousands or hundreds and thousands of people making their way into the legal profession. whose main mission for 20, 15, 30 years is to protect one another and prevent one another from being eliminated.
3:20 am
likewise in the police, the bureaucracy. all of this is coming out now in terms of large numbers of confessions in the wake of the coop. others volunteering to provide testimony are coming out to say, we were told simply toprotect each other and prevent each other from being identified or dislocated or thrown out. kept doing this very patiently for something like three decades. enormous cleavage between the ideologies. we are taught talking about the masses. we are not talking about the movement that had any idea or intention of ever launching any kind of mass action by appealing to the masses. therefore there emerges in
3:21 am
enormous cleavage between what i provisionally call the inner ideology and the outer ideology. the inner ideology is messianic. the new -- of islam or maybe even a universal. circle as the inner you go up through various levels of initiation, especially if you're rising through the bureaucracy of the police and the army. higher and higher, ideologymore stringent will require more loyalty so that at the core there is this total obedience and loyalty. our day will come. montet patiently and the will tell us our date will come. sleeperwhat i mean by a organization.
3:22 am
now this is obviously not something you can come out into the open with. an insanebe stuck in asylum. consider especially a society like turkey were the vast majority is knowledgeable about this. they are believing and practicing sunni muslims. the ideology is within islam. it is not shiite or qualified or whatever. you cannot possibly come out. possibly be a mass communication ideology or any kind of foundation for a political program of action or agenda. is asku are trying to do various panelists -- as various palace of said, trying to present yourself as moderate.
3:23 am
more moderate than the akp, pro-western, not radical in terms of policy and in as much as alliance or potential -- asce with the real possible. certain things have been said in this panel and in terms of questions from the floor about allthese cannot be villains, they cannot be all powerful. they must've been a minority in the army. yes and no. there is a problem here and that is that in fact there turkish radio and television the night of the coup prevent --hey had to present themselves in terms of their ideology and platform as quasi-.
3:24 am
the declaration read on the night to have the 15th of july was really not much different than that of 56 years ago. let's say it was perfectly, perfectly acceptable. the 10 purposely as immaculately acceptable from a western mind of view. these are principles, moderate, legitimate. it was written by the groom of nests. and that night and the next 24 hours or so their best hope was the general staff and etc. would move over and align themselves with them. when that failed, the coup ended. thank you. [applause] remind --
3:25 am
-- iscernible] >> well, starting with the talking about is there any alliance behind this coup attempt. actually, if there was a real alliance this attempt would be much more bloody and more difficult for the government to suppress this attempt. there can be some people, some soldiers were in their a promotion offices from this coup attempt you know. in each coup d'etat or
3:26 am
situation, military officers maybe somehings so of them asked to something from this coup attempt but it was not an alliance actually we cannot the reason for? this, you know different sectors of turkish society, including kurds suffered from the act of this movement at different times. you know, when relations between our party and the good lead movement wasulen good, people suffered from the power. so when it became the last victim of the secret organization then this
3:27 am
unanimity, this consensus t movemente gulenis was established. so i do not see a real alliance, therefore the coup d'etat. the relationship between the party, president erdogan himself said we did not recognize the reason behind this movement. you know, the professor said in a smooth way how this organization is unique from other islamic movements or religious organizations. so, the relationship between the other party was somehow helping each other when facing pressure on them.
3:28 am
has very quick time, it become clear that there is much more than that. state structures in the hands of the goal on and supporters is the real game of this movement. then all the things started to part, that is the beginning -- between the -- and the gulen movement. there should be self-criticism for the relationship with the gu len movement.
3:29 am
usedther opposition even discourses of this movement. said there should be an overall self-criticism for all our wars in politics including the government as well. future or smart >> the future, we have a chance to restructure the system into the old security sector, but you know turkish government is not so much successful in reforming the institutions in the last years. so this is a chance that there is consensus in reforming the institutions. if this sense of consensus continues with the political actors including opposition parties and i believe that we have a chance to recapture state
3:30 am
institutions including the army and i hope that we will not miss this opportunity >> inc. you. -- thank you. everyone's visit to russia something a bit broader. his general sense that the u.s. toseating its influence influence in the middle east to russia. practically the last few years, i think when people are thinking is the u.s. going to disengage from the u.s. -- from the middle east? they're looking for ways to hedge their bets. if the u.s. will continue its trajectory toward disengagement. that will depend on who the next president is. i would not take into seriously. i think it is a right of passage for people who want to kiss off
3:31 am
the u.s. and to put pressure on the u.s. on the question of evidentiary standards and extradition -- there is no such thing as a a political extradition process. there still has to be some kind of legitimate judicial process. and judges are going to have to meet those standards. different --e bit there is the concern of whether or not he will get a fair trial in turkey. it is clear that he cannot get a fair trial in turkey. this is not a formal requirement for u.s. extradition, unlike eu. it is something that judges will probably take into account as they make any kind of determination whether or not
3:32 am
exhibition should go forward. i understand that all of this is not very -- does not sound good from a turkish perspective. there might be a clash in terms of what turkish interests are and what the u.s. has to do. i'm concerned about setting a precedent on ford -- going forward. people who find refuge in the u.s. are put in a very lyrical extradition process. -- a very political extradition process. i am worried that if that presidents is set -- and the future, that could be used as a judicial presidents for cases that have less evidentiary support. let's say we want to make nice with an ally and that ally is , so thatressure on us is part of what i worry about.
3:33 am
>> she wants to ask set -- he wants to ask something. >> on this question of evidentiary requirements -- i should make my own decision clear. i would have never brought this issue up. that would have been my political choice. againsthave raged justly. i would not have tried to in any way bring public pressure on the obamar the barack administration to extradite him. having said that, do you remember the conversation after 9/11? between then-president george w. bush about the possible laden.tion of osama bin
3:34 am
do you remember that conversation? >> i don't see how that would be relevant. >> the relevance is this -- i am not arguing for lowering the evidentiary threshold. i'm talking about outset the u.s. are sections of the u.s. administrations. pakistani vice president then responded that they had to have evidence that osama bin laden was involved. george w response -- george w bush response was we want him, you have to give him to us. >> i've heard this comparison. am in favor of evidentiary
3:35 am
thresholds. that theret the case is generally an assumption -- you said so. he would not be facing a fair trial. how can you be so convinced? presumption that western and american courts will always be fair, will always adhere to strict standards and that outside, for example, back in turkey -- is that really the case? quickly, i don't think it is a good strategy. i have heard this osama bin laden pearson. it is something -- laden comparison.
3:36 am
even if you think that, it is not a good strategy to convincing your american counterparts. when we hear that, you think seriously? the comparison does not make sense. everyone knew that osama bin laden was the head of al qaeda. he didn't pretend otherwise. there was no debate. i feel like there is a better way to make your case, if in fact you want to make your case. u.s. courts are more fair than turkish courts. it is not to say that u.s. courts are perfect, but i don't see how you can make the argument that an occurrence -- in the current environment where there is a lot of over the top over the -- some of it -- a criminal act. >> just one minute. extradition --
3:37 am
[laughter] cook's -- >> the trial was considered fair. it was done under observation. -- as aradition case leader of a terrorist organization -- if this extradition were to happen, extra processes would apply. we do have a precedent for that. legal question, administration has the right to point to the legal process, but i think turks understand that. there is the logical side of this. -- there is the political side of this. does notical side kerry first the message
3:38 am
and later u.s. military official statements that appeared -- then ,hen you did not have a meeting a visit to turkey -- turkish perception is politically, u.s. is not sending with us and they are using the legal process as a delay tactic. i think the channels are a bit messy. we needch is why cooperation on this issue. the u.s. needs to assure the turks who are going through this trauma that the u.s. will be there as of their ally politically but also legally. this is the issue we are having. >> thank you very much. thank you as a panelists from washington, dc.
3:39 am
turkey.ll the way from thank you very much and thank you for joining us today. [applause] >> today marks the anniversary of the welfare law. the cato -- as well as looking forward to next steps. watch live at 9:00 a.m. eastern on c-span two. at three clock p.m. eastern, the american enterprise institute hosts a discussion with some of the people responsible for the enactment of the law. that includes for michigan governor and former governor of wisconsin and u.s. senator of missouri. that is live on c-span.
3:40 am
>> at, you can watch our public affairs anytime at your convenience. though to our homepage and click on the video library search. you can type in the name of a speaker, the sponsor of a bill. review the list of search results and click on the program you would like to watch or refine your search. if you're looking for our most current programs and you do not want to search, our homepage has many current programs ready for your immediate viewing, such as today's washington journal. is a public service of your satellites provider. if you are a c-spine watcher, -- sees band watcher, check it out -- if you are a c-span watcher, check it out. kemper, general secretary of the united methodist church ministries talked about his personal experience surviving the attack in jun


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on