tv Book Discussion on Islamic State CSPAN December 5, 2015 10:45am-12:01pm EST
the pkk that is the kurdish workers party we consider that to be a terrorist organization the turks consider it as bad as i says just you understand the "alice in wonderland" nature the first largest army in nato gives support to a group that is the sister of a terrorist organization according to the second largest army meanwhile it is bombing the terrorist organization at the same time that does not exclude the russians and iranians that is how complicated this state of affairs is the the ideology exported from saudi
arabia degenerated the bosnian campaign in the balkans we're still dealing with the demons of this the al qaeda ideology from essentially what coal states or countries were doing. it is a verifiable bids people say isis cancer money from the saudis but they don't have to take this home please. he was killed but before that he become so self sufficient by running oilwells kidnapping or cuban trafficking or extortion so rich the osama bin on an ast there of a subsidiary for the lot and i don't think anyone truly knows how much
they're making but they're making millions of dollars every day and every month the board to read they take a charge taxes this is what they want people and cities and towns it is the village of a thousand people every member has to pay taxes that doesn't count what is get off the top. so we could say our allies are not doing enough but they are part of the coalition they're dropping bombs there using the former spiritual mentors in order to do that so one of the ways they made some much money is repeated governments paid hundreds of millions of dollars in ransom money the country has denied that they do this and
they are hopping mad. >> one more question. >> recently decided to keep forces in afghanistan are they interested? >> they're fighting a the taliban. when you have chaos the extremists will rise to a top takeover because they have better discipline with a more coherent narrative narrative, they kill anyone in their way because they don't care about being killed. we did it get to where they are palestine, libya, yemen they have a significant bridge in the sinai peninsula and they're not
character. islamic state from al-qaeda, there's another one that we can refer to which is social media, you know, they are not dependent on the mainstream media. all the corners of the words and they can communicate with their people, and their enemies without any intervention, without anybody to med mediate e in the middle of the process, that's why it's actually very, very sophisticated. if we talk more about it it's not dependent on one man, it's not a one-man show because it is decentralized leadership. cnn, cbs, bbc, but when it comes, he is not like that. he appears once on the screen
and we haven't seen him since. so it's very huge organization behind him. so that's what the al-qaeda from that -- >> it seems to me to be remarkable that when ever a leader or commander of islamic state is eliminated, there's another commander to take place. there seems to be backup in the leadership the way there was not so much in al-qaeda. >> definitely. >> when i say muslim state is decentralized, you know, i mean, it's not a one-man show. there's a collective leadership. and this is the real leadership. he is not actually the man who the running the show. if we go back to the root of the islamic state, you know, it is actually eminent of saddam
hussein republican god army and security forces. security organizations. it is -- it is a real state if you look at it. the structure of this, they have a cabinet, they have a police force, they have administrations, water, health, electricity. so i don't believe those so-call ed -- they are not running this state. the hard core of this state very highly experienced people and so they managed to run it perfectly well until now. this is actually f you look at it, it is most stable, most secure than the other states around them. it is more secure and there's
more law and order if you compare it with the syrian government or the syrian state or the iraqi state, yemen is in the middle east. libya. that's why those people actually running the show and they are perfectly well. >> we tend to forget that now. we tend to forget at the very beginning former officers in the iraqi army and former senior members were an important part of the islamic state preliminary organization in iraq, are any of those people still around, are there still former iraqi officers? >> yes. but before -- before we go into details, if you want to understand the islamic state there are about six or seven keywords, the first one is human
-- humiliation. it's extremely important. frustration. more than 70 million unemployed people. so we have 60% of our population under the age of 27. so you have millions of young people without any future. so frustration is extremely important. and then underestimation, when i say underestimation t problem is the outside world. when i say underestimate, they never paid attention how it was growing and getting stronger and stronger and nobody paid attention. underestimation is extremely important, the last and the other is good government. we don't have good government.
corrupt government. we don't have democracy, human rights. the lack of good governments is also extremely important. and then the other is foreign intervention. the problem we are facing in the middle east between now and then there's foreign intervention. we have seen in in iraq, we have seen in libya, we have seen it in yemen or another, we are seeing now in syria. the foreign intervention, military intervention in particular always creates, they have plan a but they don't have plan b. we know what happened in iraq. iraq was a stable government whether we like it or not. but it was a state but now you have a country which is -- so
usually when you intervene by military means you create a vacuum. who is going to fill this vacuum over the radical islamic organization like al-qaeda, like islamic state, and all these countries. the last thing that's extremely important is the social media. now the middle east is controlled by the social media with internet, the facebook. so this kind of -- there are actually playing to the hands of the terrorist organizations and also of the young frustrated people. so, you know, these keywords are extremely important to understand that how it's going to emerge. i believe the biggest mistake was made on the middle east when the american invaded and occupied iraq. what happens, first american
ruler of iraq. he bestowed and the problem is dump millions of those soldiers, those kernels on the street with nothing to do. humiliation. the seed of the islamic state now. >> the way the islamic state has been sophisticated in choosing leaders for different parts, for different territories that the state rules and so islamic state has appointed iraqis to be the governors of iraqi territories and syrians to be the governors of the syrian territories, but now as time goes by, fighters have locked to the organization through many parts of the world,
you think there are attentions inside the organization within the sir apes and iraqis on one side and the fighters on the other. >> actually the conflict is not there yet. maybe there's sensibilities between different nationalities or getting together, working together in the islamic state. but until now, you know, the hard core of the islamic state is iraqi one. you know, you can see it and mainly, mainly from saudi arabia . they are not the decision maker. they can carry out certain orders, executions, for example. we have groups and each group has its own specialty.
the largest, for example, the saudi, one, they are in charge of that side of the organization about five to six thousand of them, they are cueing to go and blow themselves up. this is the most dangerous one. gentlemen -- jihadi that execute people. he was there in massachusetts there and he was graduated from university. so each part, each group has -- the definition which is different. maybe in the coming future, we could have some split in this organization, but, you know, we have to remember that the legacy
of al-qaeda and osama ben laden made to keep al-qaeda united. yemen, egyptian, syrian, iraqi, saudi, despite that when you have a very strong from the top, i believe, you try to keep it united as long as you can and this is the case for the time being. >> you devout space to a remarkable treatis that appeared on line. might possibly been written by an egyptian islamist. as i read your summary, the face seems to lie right there expelling nonmuslims from the area from a particular territory. so the period of savagery seems
a little bit like what they used to call dictatorship in historical terms. how is it that everyday brut alty like we see in the islamic state might prepare the ground for a harmoniuos society? >> that's a very good question. savagery is the manual of the islamic state. jihadi movement in 2003, they actually concentrated on the savagery chapter and what he wants to say, look, we have to create anarchy and when the region is passing through this, this is our time to take over, to control this savagery and use
it to maximum, what he means by that, he means we should actually go and attack societies and when we create this anarchy, it is the best environment for us. and if you look at what is happening now at france, for example, it's a very good example of the savagery to kill max muim of the dead. they use it for two reasons, first to terrorize their enemies to give fear among them. always a state of fear and worries. that's what happened because savage, brutal organization killing everybody in their way. so this actually ahead of them so the people run away.
this is one thing. they use savagery as recruitment. fighters all over the world. they want to say we are very strong and we are going to prevail and we actually those people who are against us who are nonbeliever and nonmuslim according to their definition. you can see. when they send eight men to paris, they were killing simply because they want to pass this message and they created the fear. if you are in europe now, you will see this fear everywhere in airports and train stations. also the other point is to destroy the economy. if you know that they started
when alone actually fighter opened fire and killed 40 people, 40 tourists, now they are trying to repeat the same. the french government income from tourism is more than $70 billion. they went to paris. the jewel, crown is tourism. they managed to down that russian airplane, against the most sought-after resort. they know what they are doing. it's not coincidence. no. they actually organize their act very well and savagery is very important chapter of their ideology of their manual. >> it has become a hotly debated question, at least here in the
united states to what extent the islamic state epitamizes, is there anything important that's part of the ideology of this group? what would you think about that? >> actually, you know, if you go to that literature of the islamic state, you will find it is a revival of scholar who actually started in 18th century, beginning of 18th century as he called the puritan islam. the government try today dump this and the clear image because it came a burden on the shoulder of the saudi royal family. islam state decided -- actually
they are repeating the same steps and legacy. for example, when together they send their troops and they committed massacres there. there are imitating the same group and that's why there are -- they have very attractive in saudi arabia. 92% in saudi arabia are sympathetic of the islamic state, you know, ideology. they are very attractive. asked scholars to answer those people because it's not a security solution, but has to be , ideoligal, none of the
scholars responded to his call. they know that, this kind of doctrine is deeply rooted and the saudi. so ideology of the islamic state. >> your book makes a very strong case for that. as i was reading your book, it seemed to me that there also seem to be influences of deliberation party that begins in palestine. do you see any evidence of that kind of thinking as well? >> yes, definitely. it was established in palestine during the british mandate of palestine. it is there. it was not actually -- ideology is a peaceful one. they don't actually adopt military actions, they never,
all the rhetoric. when it comes to the islamic state, no, they have some part of the ideologies there, some teaching there, but the hard core of the islamic state ideology actually adopt violence, terrorism, terrorize the enemy. that's what they did when they actually -- they massacred thousands and thousands of people there. ideology is -- they are crazy, islam the hard core of the ideology. the most important thing and that's why they are very brutal, very violent, very actually terrorizing people in a way or another and so i believe is the doctrine. >> and your book certainly does show the close connections
between saudi arabia and between islamic state and other of the militant islamic movement. you say part comes from the rulers of saudi arabia considered themselves to be the leaders of all muslims. i must say i was surprised by that. what grounds to -- do you have for saying that the leaders of saudi arabia think of leaders of muslims? >> look at them. that's absolutely clear. located in saudi arabia, the leader of saudi arabia consider himself or start to call himself the custodian of shrines.
the people, the muslim people will take it seriously or not, this is a completely different question. what they consider themselves is something and what the people call them is completely. i believe that saudi royal family is less, and less popular than they used to be. they always aligned themselves with the west. they take the american side. they help the american of when q and they are sending sophisticated war planes so i believe their image as not as pure as they want it to be.
their image is very shaky because of intervention with yemen and intervention supporting brotherhoods and animosity with bigger states in the middle states, like egypt, for example, syria, like iraq and because also of the division which is now taking place and the muslim between sunni. now, they are representing one side of islam which is the sunni islam. they cannot say they are the leader of the muslim. >> it was my impression that saudi arabia was opposed to the muslim brothers and was a rival of them in egypt and in syria, do you not see it that way? >> it used to be that way. but now if you look at it, when i say a sunni triangle, turkey,
saudi arabia and qatar. this actually as huge force against the shia and actually adopting now because the president of turkey is presenting himself as as present caliphate. they are united now in one alliance and this actually supporting muslim brotherhood and this creates and other governments that consider muslim brotherhoods force of actually instability on the region itself
. >> true for the syrian muslim brothers as well. >> yes, exactly. saudi arabia when they were -- they were suppressed, but after that the relation because muslim brotherhoods decided to establish themselves strongly in the saudi society. they pose a threat to the royal family. so that's why saudi and the later stages they were scared of them because they are very well organized. they have some sort of international leadership. it was frightening so they
decided to dump them, to fight them. they are adapting them in iraq and syria. >> i have one more question but i know the audience is interesting in posing questions as well. perhaps they can think about the question and prepare to come to the microphone as i ask you one more thing z i think one might argue that the movement is trying to protect the muslim community from attack and to protect the muslim from interference and intervention like the western armed forces. what would you say about that tension?
>> you know, when we look at the ideology, doctrine, different from al-qaeda, al-qaeda wanted to take revenge from the american and crusader as they put it. when it comes to islamic state,y, they want to take revenge but major is to expand. that's what happens. they actually manage -- by the way, symbolic, has the historian meaning for them. why? because used to be temporary or summer resort of, you know, caliphate, one of the upper-side well-known. they didn't chose to be capital.
but because they consider also external should be medina. it's extremely important to them how they look at history and read it very well and try to apply it. so first, you know, to conquer lands, consolidate and expand on the surrounding, so i believe now -- so this change of ideology or strategy is extremely important. is -- they were against al-qaeda
taking revenge. look, we want to be -- we want to concentrate on the region, establishing the state and after that, you know, when we establish the state we will look at other things, but seems now the way it's contained and part of syria, part of iraq maybe they decide it is the time also to use terrorism and it seems, it seems, it is a huge turning strategic turn in their legacy. do you think it's broadly been
contained? >> now, there are not expanding, at least, but we have to remember that it's only two years. they were conquered actually the kurdish police in northern iraq. we have to remember also biggest iraqi refineries so, they start to lose some of their territories. maybe this could explain why they decided to actually send the fighters to the west to paris in particular. >> very thoughtful, i agree with you. so there will be questions from the audience and i've been asked
to repeat the questions for purposes of skype just to be sure. so please. >> thank you very much. >> can you hear that question? >> no. >> i'll try to repeat it. >> i want to ask him to focus on saudi arabia and the united states. saudi arabia for the last 60, 5 years or so has been very close ally of the united states, primarily based on our need for oil. as i look at saudi arabia and its policies and what it has been doing in the middle east, i do not see a friend in the saudi peninsula, i see someone who has been undermining many of our objectives in the middle east and it concerns me deeply.
>> thank you. saudi arabia has had strong connections of strategy and economics with the united states but for some americans saudi arabia does not look like much of a friend of the united states at the moment. does saudi arabia look like it is still a partner of the united states to you? >> well, i believe that the relationship is very shaky at the time being. the question is fair and reasonable. when i say reasonable because saudi arabia used united states for its own purposes. the strategy of saudi arabia or saudi royal family based strong doctrine which is to weaken everybody around them, you know, so they want the american and west to intervene and try to defeat him in order to neutralize threat. when saddam hussein the saudi
wanted americans to destroy iraq and remove him from power and they have succeeded to use the united states as their own police and the same thing, saudi arabia, they resented that and live off of it and they use the financial muscles, oil muscles and that all to actually push the west to remove gaddafi from power. but i believe now there is a change of the american strategy. they realize that they cannot fight the war. they cannot be actually the god goats of saudi arabia. president obama is aware of this and when interviewed with "the new york times" he said clearly, okay, we can't protect you from
iran t major danger is internal danger. you to look at their own people, young people who are unemployed who are frustrated, who would like to have their share in power who recollects would like to participate the process, so i believe now there is some sort of awareness in the united states. saudi arabia wanted the american government to send troops to fight the islamic state in iraq and syria. boots on the ground. obama said, no, we cannot do it. we did it and look what happened to us. we are not going to send troops on the ground. ..
>> i asked other people, some of them said yes, some people said no. and because now he is actually in saudi arabia the royal family used to be, you know, patient rulers, they are not actually, you know, they are not reacting quickly like other -- >> [inaudible] not impulsive. >> exactly. self-restrained. but when you look at the rulers now, because of the illness of -- [inaudible] you know, his son who is 30 years of age, is taking over. and he is young.
he is not really highly educated and in a prominent university in the west, and he believes that by sending troops to yemen, he could create some sort of legacy in order to promote himself as a future king of saudi arabia. this created a lot of actual resentment among other, you know, grandchildren of the founder of saudi arabia -- [inaudible] and so this is the problem. yes, there is a huge resentment. there is rivalries and people who are, actually, scared about the future of the royal family. so you are absolutely correct. >> thank you. a second question, please. >> okay. again, i'd like to thank you very, very much more your comments, especially the comparison of al-qaeda who are, basically, an amateurish one-man show as opposed to an isis, and that's something we
really don't understand. and certainly when you've got any enemy to deal with, you need to understand them well. so my first comment is a thank you for that. now, when we compare world war i and world war world war ii, kaiser wilhelm had a very well organized government. the japanese, very strong. the furor, likewise in us austr, very well organized, but we beat them. so every organization, every government has weaknesses. as we try to understand isis, how can we defeat them? >> thank you. there have been powerful adversaries of the united states in the past like japan and germany in the 1940s. very well organized, very strong administration, but those entities were defeated. so every organization has a weakness, every organization has some vulnerability.
do you see any important vulnerability in the islamic state? >> yes. i can see this vulnerability. you know, if you look at the enemies of islamic state, you will find more than a hundred countries actually would like to root it out completely. they understand the danger of the islamic state, and you have actually the paradox, the contradictions. you've got, for example, for the paris time since the second world war, we have the american and russians working together to defeat the islamic state. and it is, you know, unprecedented for the last 80 years or so. this is one. also, look, we have the enemies in the middle east are working together to root out the islamic state like iran and saudi arabia. so you can see they are arch enemies, they are fighting each other, they are launching a war against each other by proxy in yemen and syria. but when it comes to the islamic
state, they realize it is a danger for both of them, and they are working together now to defeat the islamic state. so it is defeat bl. i cannot say it is not defeatable. but the problem is what will happen after you defeat them. this is, you know, the problem is if you look at west, okay, they defeated gadhafi, they defeated saddam hussein. they had plan a, but they never had plan b. this is the question. that's why middle east is in turmoil all the time. usually, okay, we want to bash his head, we want to remove him from powerful, whoever he is, islamic state, saddam hussein, gadhafi, but the morning after, this is the biggest question. that's what happened in afghanistan. okay, they removed communist ruling there, but they never had a plan of how to rule afghanistan. they invaded afghanistan, occupied it, but they never created stable afghanistan. the same thing in iraq. okay. they managed to defeat saddam
hussein, removed him from power and then execute him, but what happened after that? the problem is, okay, victory can be achieved, but we have to have plans after victories. even if -- do we have any plans -- what will happen to the middle east after we defeat, if we defeat the islamic state? nobody can tell us about the future of syria. nobody can tell us the future of iraq. how can we create coexistence between the sunni and the shia in that part of the world? this is the most important thing. >> you mentioned some external vulnerabilities of islamic state. the question, i think, was about internal vulnerabilities. do you see anything inside the administration that might weaken the organization? >> yes. you know, external and internal are actually related. we cannot separate the external from the internal vulnerability. that's the most important thing, you know, because usually the internal vulnerability is feeded
by outside. i mean, the region itself or the western power. this is the most important. yes, it is vulnerable inside. vulnerable because, as i mentioned in the beginning, because of the lack of good government. because the people, actually, they are not involved, they are not determining their future. this is the problem. you have autocratic regimes there running the whole country and depriving the people of having a say in their future and their present. this is the most important thing. look at saudi arabia. okay, now they are trying to cover the internal vulnerability by actually intervening in syria, intervening in yemen, intervening in libya. all to cover their shortcomings inside saudi arabia itself. so this is the most important thing. yes, we can defeat the islamic state. it is not undefeatable. but the problem is we have to have alternative examples, good example, alternative models for
the people of the islamic state, the people of the middle east. you know, as i mentioned, it is the most secure state in the whole of the middle east. you know, the problem is look at the middle east now. people are emigrating from syria, from iraq, from yemen to the west. but when it comes to the islamic state, people are immigrating from the west to the islamic state. it is counterimmigration. you see the paradox here. so we have to sit up a good example, you know, alternative models to the people of the middle east. say to them, look, you know, forget about islamic state. we have in this model for you, model of coexistence, model, actually, of modernity, model of prosperity, model of human rights, independent judicial system. we have to actually say, look, you know, we are working for a long-term future, not a short-term future. we are not going to repeat our
mistake in afghanistan, in iraq, in libya. no. we have our a plan, and we have our b plan, and this is our b plan. until now in the middle east we neverheard anything like this. -- never heard anything like this. destruction, not construction. >> do you see any sign that western governments have those sorts of plans for the post-islamic state in syria? >> to be honest, i can't see it, you know? i remember i was invited by the foreign office in britain to talk to the junior minister before, actually, the nato intervene in libya bombarding libya. and i say to him look, listen, sir, i know you are preparing for some sort of intervention, military intervention in libya. you have to be very careful because libya will be a -- al-qaeda will be there. and there are about 2,000
kilometers seashore on the other side of the mediterranean. this will be a springboard for immigration, and i wouldn't be surprised if terrorists actually smuggle, you know, or mingled among those migrants to europe. so you have to be very careful. you know, he did not like what i am saying. seriously. you know, the meeting ended in six minutes, you know? honestly, my coffee was still warm -- [laughter] hot even. it wasn't actually. so the minister, they don't want to listen. there are so-called think tanks and also -- [inaudible] of people who are talking about the middle east from distance. they don't know the feeling there. and look what happened in libya. okay, we removed gadhafi. he was a brutal dictator, no question about that. but what happened to libya after that? have we established good governance there? have we established strong security forces? nato is the most sophisticated alliance in the world. you know, has about 28 countries, you know, modern countries.
why did this not actually establish institutions in libya after gadhafi? why did it not actually keep the same institutions and try to reform them and develop them? the same thing in iraq. okay, united states is the most advanced country in the world. it's the biggest empire, the strongest empire in our history. okay. they invaded iraq. why they introduced sectarianism to iraq? you know, you are a multicultural country. you actually sit up a very good example for melting people in a pot there and establishing equality. religion aside. the most important thing, how to build that country, how to make people coexist with each other. we did not apply the same principles to iraq, and that's why we are facing a problem in iraq and in syria and all of the region. sorry. >> thank you, sir. yes. another question, please. >> my question was do, does he
have any further comments to make about the role of iran? but to follow up on what he was saying, some say that the middle east is not ready for democracy, we can't import it there. could he comment on that? a very different history from that. >> thank you. so when we think about the future of the region after the islamic state, scholars disagree about whether liberal democracy is possible in this parking lot of the world. in this part of the world. do you think liberal democracy with constitutions and elections and freedom of the press is possible in the arab countries? >> it is possible, but the problem is we don't have the culture of liberalism, we don't have the culture of democracy in our part of the world. it is not a case of -- [inaudible] on and off. you cannot actually import democracy and say to the middle eastern people you have to adopt it. the problem is we have to prepare the grounds for democracy and for liberalism. unfortunately, the west never
did. they were supporting autocratic regimes for the last 60 or 70 years in the middle east under the name of stability. we should actually encourage liberalism. we should actually encourage coexistence. it's, you know, i would like to draw the distinguished audience's attention to one point. have you noticed that, you know, most of the countries in the middle east which is facing instability now are the secular countries where the people coexist, the christians, the muslim, the shia, the arabs and the kurds? this is the irony here. nobody actually looked at that. for example, syria, iraq, libya, yemen, tunisia, egypt, these countries actually -- it is the strong base of coexistence of people living together. and now under the so-called arab spring -- and people in the
middle east believe in the conspiracy theory, and now they start to think, ah, arab spring actually is the introduction of the west. they actually destabilized the countries which has coexisted. okay. there were brutal dictatorships, no question about that. but the societies used to live together. so we need to actually, you know, to spread coexistence. this is the problem of, you know, marginalization is actually that central element of the emergence of islamic state, because the sunni were marginalized in iraq because of the american occupation, because of those people who were working with the american administration to topple saddam hussein. those people actually, they had a theory that we should consolidate t the majority rule which is the shia rule and marginalize the sunni sect under the pretext of, you know, they
are bathist, they are saddam hussein supporters which is absolutely wrong. we have to look at that. syria, libya, yemen, egypt, this is the problem. >> as you know, there was a moment of liberal democracy across the arab world with elections in egypt and iraq and syria and libya. but during that liberal moment, the parties were tied to westerners. they were tied to outside powers. that gave a bad name, a bad reputation to liberal institutions. >> you are absolutely correct, sir, here. but, you know, the imperialist power in that time, actually, they were looking at a long-term solution, a long-term stability. so they introduced liberalism, and they introduced democracy by
civil means, not military means. they educated the people how to be liberal, how to communicate, how to coexist, how to actually go to a political process where they could, where the ballot box will decide, will determine who to rule them. unfortunately, the new imperialism in the middle east or the new imperialist power are not repeating that experience at all. this is the paradox here. why, for example, you know, the american drive for democracy in afghanistan did not work properly. why it did not work, for example, in iraq. why it's not going to work many libya. this is the problem. when i say there is no plan b, that's what i mean. we should educate people. we should be kind to them, we should look for long-term strategy, not just a short-term strategy. okay, we are going to remove them, we are going to bash their heads. no. we have to have, you know, parallel plans, a parallel strategy to make people love
that foreign intervention in a way or another if it is a human -- you know, they would love it. most of the people are looking if you open the gates of immigration to the united states tomorrow, you will have 300 arabs actually knocking on your doors. why? because they believe america is the example for prosperity, for coexistence. so this is -- why we don't actually transfer this culture to the middle east in amicable way, not by force, not by war planes, f-15, f-16 and so on. >> we, i think we can have two more questions if we're lucky. yes, please. >> yeah. my question is if there's going to be a plan b if we, in fact, defeat the islamic state, don't you think that the plan b has to become, has to come from the islamic world rather than from the west? and do you see any signs of that happening? >> thank you. so if there is a plan b for
syria or lebanon or yemen, might that plan b might better come from the arab world or from some other part of the world than the united states and europe? >> it's true. you know, we have to convince the arab rulers that, look, you know, especially in the gulf region, saudi arabia, just tell them, look, you know, you cannot continue living like that. you cannot accumulate, you know, hundreds of billions of dollars on the western accounts, bank accounts. you have to actually put this money in your surrounding, in your neighborhood. you know, yemen cannot be the poorest country on the world and at the same time adjacent to the richest countries in the world. you cannot have that. you cannot have prosperity in dubai and saudi arabia and while the people are starving in yemen, in egypt. this is wrong. so i believe the combination of both the western power and the
regional power to work together to develop the region. once, you know, you create, for example, look at what happened in northern ireland when they, there was some sort of coexistence, you know, economic plan to actually create prosperity, jobs for the people there. they have forgotten about the war between, you know, the protestant and the catholic. so we need this in the middle east. we need, you know, arab monies with the western intelligence to work together and developing the whole region. once the people find a job, good education, good governance, i think they will coexist, and they will try to keep this. but if they are frustrated, humiliated, marginalized, i think this will create the roots or the seeds of instability in that part of the world. we have a lot of money there in the middle east. it should be spent by, you know, by wise guide of the west on the
region in order to make it much better, to make it develop. and in this case we will have technically a much better middle east. plan b is to develop the middle east and to encourage the coexistence be and liberalism -- coexistence and liberalism in that part of the world. >> terrific. next question, please. >> it was only two years ago when obama declined to bear screen when the world was presentedded -- intervene when the world was presented with chemical or weapons used by assad. and i think our impression still is the islamic state is a wunsch of militarized -- bunch of militarized men that continue to flood the territory. even putin recently said they are mercenaries and he knows the price at which he can buy them back. you're presenting us with a different view of what is happening there, that this is an organized government. they have a health care system. can you give us better information than what we're receiving through western media
with how societal fabric is evolving there? and -- in addition to your book. [laughter] for example, are children going to school? what is happening really? we hear women being recruited to be wives there. what is society like? how will it change in the coming years? >> thank you so much. so in the western media we see the pictures of the executions and the brutality and the chaos that might be present in islamic state. can you say just a bit more about the day-to-day administration, the way health and education and public services are being done in raqqa and mosul today? >> you know, a year ago i was, actually, lecturing, giving a talk to a book fair, and while i was talking and then after that there was a signing ceremony for the arabic version of my book. a very nice, smart man, westernized man came to me with his two daughters, and they were not wearing the veil. he said to me i arrived three
years ago from raqqa. a year ago exactly, yes. i said, from raqqa? he said, yes. from the islamic state? he said, yes. i said, you know, you look very westernized. how do you see the situation this? he said, sir, you know, it is the most secure part of iraq. i said, what? but they are imposing the islamic code in women, and, you know, girls are in, westernized women. how it comes -- [inaudible] he said, look, people in the middle east, people in iraq in particular looking for security, looking for law and order. before the islamic state, there were several militias there, warlords. they were pill aroundizing the people -- pill rising the people. now you have one government to deal with. they said electricity is there, water is there, safety is there,
police is there, traffic is there, you know? so he said, you know, the needs of the people are satisfied. yes, it is brutal. yes, it is actually savage. but theyou don't actually provoke them, if you accept their laws at least temporarily, you are not touched. so they have, as i said, they are -- the underestimation here. many people think that islamic state consists of those people with a dirty beard and with baggy trousers, and they are -- they can't manage one thing is to kill people, to burn them to death. but this is a very wrong concept here. they have highly educated people. the -- [inaudible] of saddam hussein, they were educated in west point and other universities in the west. and they brought this expertise, administered the expertise to
the islamic state. iraq was a very modern state. okay, the dictator was very brutal, but the country used to be run, it was under siege for 13 or 12 years, but at end of every month, everybody has, actually, food and medicine and equal terms without any differentiation. so those people are running now the islamic state. so as i said, water is running, electricity is running, taxes are collected. okay. you know, they don't want a christian to be there, they don't want the yazidi to be there. okay, maybe they raped, maybe they -- but the problem is that the majority of the people, okay, they try to live under this rule. it is brutal, and i wouldn't live one day under the islamic state, because i am living in the west. i know, i can see the differences, i can see the democracy, the human rights, the rule of the law. but in that part of the year in comparison with the surrounding,
it is not bad. >> i saw a remarkable picture a couple of days ago of a city worker in raqqa fixing the water main under a street, and he had the uniform on, and he was part of the public service of the water department in raqqa. we've kept you very late this evening. it's almost time for you to wake up -- [laughter] in london. so we very much appreciate you getting up and spending such time with us. [applause] invite you to thank -- [applause] >> i'm really, i'm really thankful. i will stand with you, and i wish i am with you in person. i really was looking forward to come to your highly reputable organization but, unfortunately, it's, you know, that visa question actually deprived me from actually being among you and know you face to face which is a great loss, honestly, for me. >> we look forward to hosting you when your next book comes
out, which is probably three months from now, yes? [laughter] very good. alabama bell -- abdel bari's latest book is available in the lobby thanks to book inc.. thank you all very much. good evening. [applause] [inaudible conversations] >> you're watching booktv, nonfiction authors and books every weekend on c-span2. television for serious readers. >> and now on booktv we want
to introduce you to brian murphy. his book is called "81 days below zero." mr. murphy, who is leon crane? who was leon crane? >> guest: oh, it's an amazing story. this is a kid from west philadelphia, was assigned to an air base outside fairbanks. the year is 1942, winter of 1942. and what they were doing at the time, among other things, was doing cold weather testing of aircraft. and the idea was that they were worried next war front might be greenland, norway, manager like that. something like that. so he went up with four crew members and himself, five members on the plane in a b-24 bomber, and they were going to do something called prop feathering which is closing down the prop and trying to make it more aerodynamic. so, basically, shutting down an engine. the plane went into a spin. he bailed out, leon crane,
lieutenant crane bailed out through the bomb bay. another person dirked as well, but e -- did as well, but he certainly died leaving the aircraft. it was -70 probably at that altitude. and crane parachutes down, lands by a frozen river. the plane is burning up on a hill, and for the next 81 days being considered dead by everyone, the military, his family, through huge luck his adaptability, his resilience, he managed to walk out of the yukon wilderness after 81 days. >> host: where'd you find this story? >> guest: it's, well, for a long time i was a foreign correspondent. i worked for "the washington post" -- i work for "the washington post" now. and at the time, this was 2007, i was covering iraq and getting
all sorts of pentagon press releases. and they found the remains of one of the pilots in 1997, and ten years later they did the burial in, at arlington national cemetery. at the bottom of this press release which i normally wouldn't have read anyway because i was busy with iraq, but for some reason i read this press release, and at the bottom they said this pilot who was buried was among four people who died in this crash. and by the way, one guy survived and walked out of the wilderness after nearly three months. so it was a story that i didn't have the time to do then, but like so many of these things, it just stuck with me, i kept thinking about it, thinking about it and finally got around to doing it. >> host: well, the book is called "81 days below zero."
brian murphy is the author. >> here's a look at some books that are being published this week. editor-in-chief of "forbes" be magazine, steve forbes, and co-author elizabeth ames, outline the policies they argue will resurrect the country in "reviving america." t in "we have the technology," a report of the latest developments in the science of sensory perception. historian michael mcdonald documents the great lakes indians' contribution to the making of america in "masters of empire." "the invention of science" by professor david wooten examines the scientific revolution and how it transformed our understanding of the world. science writer brian clegg explores the world between science fiction and real science in "10 billion tomorrows." look for these titles and watch for the authors in the near future on booktv.
>> welcome to monterey on booktv, located along the central coast of california. this waterfront community was founded in 1770 and has a population of about 28,000. it was the capital of alta, california, when the state was part of mexico, and later it would become famous for its abundant fisheries serving as the inspiration for the novel "cannery row." for the next 90 minutes, we'll visit with the city's literary community beginning with the history and preservation of monterey bay. >> i'm a marine biologist. i go all over the world talking to people about the dangers the ocean is under right now, the threats from people, the overfishing and climate change, habitat destruction, pollution. and then i woulde