When we scheduled this talk about nine months ago. I think it was we really didn't know where the world was at and what I should talk about so we came up with we thought was the broadest headline possible the Clinton Administration a report card and then a few things happened that happened to be near and dear to my heart including a very famous handshake on the White House lawn and I thought I really should devote some energy to talking about that handshake, but then there was the problem of the title of the speech so I couldn't I couldn't work it out. So I just decided if you don't mind I'm going to give two lectures today and one is going to be on the handshake and one is going to be a report card and it reminds me of a joke. In fact that I once heard a long time ago. There were they were building a tunnel under the English Channel remember digging this tunnel and they put out bids in Europe for for the tunnel and they get bids three billion dollars forIn dollars four and a half billion dollars. They are one bid 450 thousand dollars from this company called Goldberg and cone on the east side of London. They figure well, we gotta check. You know, I mean what can you know you got to check so they sent a guy out to their office and he sighed and Goldberg cone. The plaque was on the door. They knocked on the door. Mr. Cohn answered Goldberg was on the road and they said mr. Cohn tells us, you know, how can you dig this tunnel for $50,000? This is what's the problem. He said, I'll take a shovel. I start on one side Goldberg will start on the other will dig until we meet. What's the big deal? The guy said? Well, what if you don't meet this is what's the problem you'll have two tunnels then so it's so I don't know if this is going to be one speech or two speeches, but hopefully hopefully it'll come together. Let's begin with the handshake. It was a dramatic moment for me personally. It was terribly exciting to be there. And I know to all of you who watch that event to saw it on television who saw pictures of it what you saw was a handshake between Yasser Arafat and it's Hawk robbing. But what was going on out there on the White House lawn was not really a handshake what you were really seeing was one man Yasser Arafat sinking beneath the waves his mouth had already gone under the water and his nostrils were just about to go under and another man who of all people Yitzhak Robin was over at the dock throwing him a lifeline. Very interesting. Our father was just about to go under he's at that moment between your mouth and your nostrils and who of all people is throwing him a Lifeline but eats Hawk Robbie. That's what was really going on there on the White House lawn that day and what I'd like to talk about is how each one of these men got in this very interesting position are fought just about to slip beneath the waves and who of all people throwing him a Lifeline eats Hawk Robin and I think there were several factors that were waiting are fought down and literally almost drowning him. So what I'd like to do is talk about what I think were the four most important things pulling our fought down. First and foremost was the end of the Cold War the end of the Cold War stripped are fought in particular and the PLO in general of to enormously important assets guns and votes. By destroying basically the Eastern Bloc the Communist Bloc the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union which was the Prime supplier of the PLO those guns on the streets and votes in the United Nations. Our fought was put in an increasingly weakened diplomatic position because not only could he not count on those votes from Bulgaria from Mel Bay Nia from Czechoslovakia from Yugoslavia from Poland, but the new regimes that took over in these formerly communist countries were actively hostile to the PLO because it was associated with the old communist era regimes and that's why it was no accident that in 1974. The UN branded Zionism is racism and 16 years later. I believe it was 1990 or 1991 after the fall of the Berlin wall that same un body reversed that vote. So the end of the Cold War deprived are fought of to very essential assets of the PLO guns and votes and then came along the Gulf War. And the Gulf War stripped are fought of money. And that was truly what was sinking him down on that cimber September 13th morning at the White House are fought sided with Saddam Hussein in the Gulf War against Saudi Arabia Kuwait and the other wealthy Arab Gulf States, these wealthy Arab Gulf States retaliated by withdrawing all of their financial support for the PLO and for our font in that vacuum moved in Iran and Iran instead of giving money to are fought in the PLO gave money to our fathers archenemies, the Hamas Islamic fundamentalist organization and you can simply trace the flow of funds and you can draw a curve with the flow of political influence in Gaza and the West Bank as the pl o--'s bank balance went down and Hamas is went up. So Hamas is influence Rose and our thoughts began to dwindle. There was one other thing that happened that again was pulling our fought under the waves that day the end of the Cold War the end of the Gulf War. He lost guns votes and money and one last thing and that was Illusions and the illusion was that the road to peace ran through Washington that he could count on somehow the United States to deal with the Israelis for him. So he could kind of keep his hands clean didn't have to shake hands with anybody the Americans would do it somehow, you know, we get the Americans do it Bush and Baker. They seem very disposed to doing it and then lo and behold came November of last year in Bush and Baker replaced by Clinton and Clinton came in with a very very pro-israel team pro-israel policy and basically said to the PLO look my friends you want to do deal with the Israelis. You're going to have to do it yourself. In fact the terms that the Clinton Administration was Offering the PLO we're harsher terms than our fought was getting in secret from the Israelis themselves. And so he was stripped of that illusion that the road to peace with Israel ran through Washington and therefore once stripped of that. He recognized he was going to have to do the deal himself directly with the Israelis. So those were the factors really pulling him under the waves. He was in very serious trouble by the end of August of this year as he was wrestling with himself. Whether to make this decision real anger in the Palestinian movement salaries weren't being paid refugees weren't getting money families of the martyrs of Palestinians who died in the wars with Israel were not getting paid. He was facing a real revolt. Well, that's where he was and that's how he got to that point where his nostrils were just about to go under but what about robbing robbing? Why robbing of all people would be the one throwing this man a Lifeline what produce that will again? It was it was several things. And again it begins with the end of the Cold War because the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union suddenly flooded his real with a million Soviet Jews looking to be housed fed and employed requiring a lot of infrastructure putting unusual demands on the Israeli economic system. And of course you remember during the Bush Administration Israel came to the United States for ten billion dollars in loan guarantees, and the Bush Administration used that Israeli need that Israeli vulnerability to get the Israelis to do something. They had never done before in the Shamir government and that was sit down and talk to Directly in Madrid now Baker and Bush did it on terms that were acceptable to Israel. But the important thing about that event, which Shamir resisted to the end was that it was really a play and everyone knew it that the Palestinians who were sitting at the table. We're leaving the room getting on their cellular phones and calling are fought in Tunis from outside the room door and everyone knew it and the essential importance there though. Was that for the first time the play basically had begun Israel was indirectly involved in a negotiation with the PLO. And so it would only be one step removed to pull the shade up and make it a direct negotiation that would come in a little bit but it would require a couple more factors pressuring robbing the second and I think critically important factor was a change in the Israeli perception of their Already and in particular a change in the Israeli perception of the West Bank and Gaza Strip in terms of their security two things happened that basically got Israelis to think that these territories instead of being a source of security were actually a source of insecurity. Very important. Now what those two factors were were the Iraqi scuds from on high and the Palestinian War of the knives from on low. Let me explain the importance of the Iraqi scud attack psychologically during the war was that it obliterated in the Israeli psyche. I believe the whole notion of the front line. What is the front line for years Israelis lived in a world? Basically where you served on the Golan Heights and you came home for the Sabbath you served in the West Bank and you came home on the Sabbath you served on the Sinai front and you came home on the Sabbath. There was the front and there was my living room. There was the front and there was my bedroom and the two were very separate and distinct the importance of the scud missile attacks. I believe it was highly symbolic that the first Israelis killed by scud missiles were people killed in their bedrooms. and the message was the front is your bedroom there is no front anymore the front is everywhere and these territories that you think are a buffer between your home in the front are really meaningless so from on high from One Direction the scuds began to diminish the importance of the territories as a security asset and then from a whole another direction from on low through the intifada the Palestinian Uprising and more particularly what became known as The War of the knives where Palestinian would literally go into his kitchen pull out a kitchen knife walk up to any Israeli he could find at a bus stop or restaurant and stick a knife through hither or her heart Sent the message on low that these territories are sourced not of protection but of knives and that was driven home when Robin when he came to power sealed off the territories from the rest of Israel. He literally prevented Palestinians from coming from those territories into Israel and Israelis ha sighed in relief. Well, that was crazy. The territories were supposed to be a source of security. But in fact Israelis only felt secure for the first time not when the territories were open, but when they were closed And it was that change in the whole perception of these territories in the Israeli psyche and their relationship to security which was essential for Robins decision to throw out that lifeline. The fourth Factor also critical in making this possible was that rise of Hamas and that fall of the PLO because Hamas and the PLO were two very different organizations Hamas was a Muslim fundamentalist organization dedicated unremittingly to the struggle and destruction of Israel. The PLO was talking in totally different terms really had passed several resolutions about its willingness to negotiate with recognize and deal directly with Israel. So a crazy thing happened over the last couple years with the rise of the PLO and the fall with the rise of Hamas in the fall of the PLO in the Israeli mind suddenly the PLO looked reasonable. When the PLO is compared to itself and only itself. Well, they Israelis could Bandit as terrorists or whatever and a bunch of wild crazy people. But when you had the Hamas there who were truly uncontrolled in the Israeli psyche suddenly Yasser Arafat looked like a reasonable man. And that was essential for Robins decision. And that was really the moment that we were at on the eve of this handshake. Our thought was still strong enough to make a decision stick within his organization, but not strong enough to demand the old terms. He had demanded from the Israelis. Strong enough to make it stick but weak enough to accept Robbins terms and that's exactly where Robin wanted him. Now. There were two other factors one from each side that made Robin on the one hand throw that rope and are fought on the other hand take it and they were personal factors to each man. Robin's personal Factor was that he understood that they had tried everything. They tried to destroy the PLO. They had tried to replace it with the village leagues and other movements. They tried to delegitimize it but it kept coming back and he understood through the Madrid peace talks at these West Bankers that they were talking with really were not an effective replacement for a decision maker like are fought in robbing had run for office had promised Israelis that he was running on a piece ticket that he would deliver. Peace. He had nothing else. In his agenda. He couldn't say I improve the economy that wouldn't have done it. He had to produce a breakthrough and I think it was the combination of all those large historical forces and his personal need to produce something and is personal awareness that they really tried everything and nothing had worked that got him to throw out that Lifeline that day. What God are fought personally to catch it? Oh, yeah, he was thinking he was going down. But let me tell you folks. He would have gone all the way under if Robin hadn't offered him something very personal and the personal thing was you get to come back. You don't have to be the Moses of your people to lead them to the mountains of Moab and peer in while your people go home. You get to be Joshua. Also, you get to come home to Gaza or Jericho and it was only when robbing through in that last personal inducement that are fought though. He was going under grab that rope. And that's what really happened on that remarkable morning of September 13th. Now, how should we feel about this moment? Should we be optimistic or pessimistic? I'm sure you're reading all kinds of things. Well, let me let me really confuse you and give you two reasons for optimism and two reasons for pessimism, whatever you you know. I'll let you decide let me begin at least with the reasons for optimism. Now, you know a lot of people say it's very easy columnist, you know writing. Well, of course, they shook hands they made peace but so much difficult negotiations remain at so many hard things. Well, you know, we all know that but one cannot exaggerate it is impossible to exaggerate the importance of that handshake. Why was it important? Because that handshake transformed a conflict that was about rights to a conflict that was about interests now rights when you're in a conflict about rights when we're fighting about whose Podium this is well rights come from God writes are immutable. They are not really open to compromise because I say it is this Podium is my right and if you come here and challenge it, I'm sorry. I'm going to Elbow your way. But if we if we can both agree one day that you know what this Podium belongs to both of us. Maybe we can finally begin saying well, you know to tell you the truth, I only need this part of the podium. And I bet you could fit in over there. And that's the important of that handshake. It transformed a conflict about ideological issues pure ideology to one about practical issues. It transformed it from whose Podium this is to tell me exactly how much this podium do you need? Well, I think you can get by with six inches. You say you need 18. Let's split the difference of 12, but we can't begin to have that conversation until we first acknowledge to each other a legitimate right to this Podium and that is so important because for a hundred years, we've been focused on rights and not interests people of negotiating on the basis of rights, which are immutable and not interests which are open to compromise. I have a friend who says whenever my wife and I get in a fight. She gets historical. Said no. No you mean she gets hysterical. No. No, she gets historical. She starts telling me about all the bad things. I've been doing all of these years the whole catalog comes up. Well, that was the problem between these two people for a hundred years. They've been getting historical every time they talked now, let them just get a little hysterical but hysterical about practical issues that is critically important. Another reason I think for optimism and it's related to this first point, but it's a second is that the Palestinians have finally acknowledged the power realities here? You and I can't have a serious conversation. I want to buy a house if I wanted to buy this building and you have it up for sale for a hundred million dollars. You say I'm sorry. This building is worth a hundred million dollars. We can't even begin to talk because I come and tell you look this pill thing is only worth three million dollars and you're going bankrupt. You have no money in the bank. You have 10 leans on this building and you keep asking a hundred million dollars for it. How can we even begin to have a discussion about selling this building? Well that in a way what was going on between Israelis and Palestinians. It was like that cartoon after the 672733 war showed Anwar Sadat in a boxing ring with Golda Meir and Sadat's flat on his back was boxing gloves out and Golda Meir standing over him with her boxing gloves and Sadat saying I want the trophy. I want the prize money. I want the trophy. The there is a power reality here. Now, we those of us who are pro-arab might not like it those of us who are pro-israeli might like it that doesn't matter to me. The fact is there was a power reality here. There was an enormous asymmetry in power. There was a very powerful country called Israel. There was a very weak Community called the Palestinians and at a certain point for these negotiations to go anywhere the weaker party had to acknowledge its weakness and negotiate on the basis of its real weakness not to come to the Israelis and say we want to State tomorrow. We want half a Jerusalem. We want all of your settlements of rooted. That's a wonderful wish list. I wish you well. But the fact is in the real world. There was no Israeli government given the asymmetry in power and the superiority and power that Israel had that was going to grant that wish and as long as the negotiations were on that unrealistic basis. They really had no chance to go anywhere. In fact for years. I was advocating that Israelis and Palestinians change the shape of their negotiating table that instead of it being flat like this. It should be like this and the Israelis would get to sit up here and the Palestinians down here. So every Palestinian proposal would slide back down the table because the problem with a flat table is that it created the illusion that Empower terms these people were equals and in power terms, they were not equals and a negotiating table at the end of the day cannot level a battlefield. It only reflects the battlefield and the power realities and sooner or later people have to negotiate on that basis and the good news here. Is that exactly what Yasser Arafat did in cutting the steel over Gaza in Jericho? So much for reasons for optimism. What about the reasons for pessimism? Well there again to that I would point to and I don't think either one is fatal, but they have to be watched. The first reason is called Syria now Syria is the odd man out here Syria Syrian president hafez. Al-assad is the arch rival of Yasser Arafat hafez. Al-assad's hatred for Yasser. Arafat makes Robins feelings toward him look like a love affair. Okay, these people hate each other the way only Brothers not cousins, but Brothers can hate each other. And it is deep and it is venomous. So imagine as a Syrian Ambassador said to me imagine how hafez Assad felt sitting in Damascus watching on Cable News Network Yasser Arafat being received at the White House welcomed in the Congress offered financial aid by the United States while hafez Assad was still on the state Department's terrorism list. He is not a happy camper. Okay. Now when I saw God is upset other people know about it and other people are meant to feel it and the Really delicate issue here as this thing moves forward is how does Israel and the United States work together to bring Syria and Assad into this process but not so quickly and so fat so fast that you overload the political circuits in Israel. Robin's greatest fear now is that politically he cannot ask the Israelis to swallow Yasser Arafat in Jericho and hafez Assad in the Golan Heights in the same week month or maybe even year. Yet if Assad isn't brought into this if he isn't given to feel that the Golan Heights are going to be open to negotiation. He is going to use his influence which is considerable on our fats opponents in order to subvert this deal and the biggest challenge right now for the United States something that they are truly puzzling over in Washington is how do we get our Assad involved but quick enough to make him feel that this thing is moving in a direction he wants but not so quickly that you overload the political circuits in Israel. I will move Syria into the optimistic column once I see the answer to that dilemma now, the last reason for pessimism has to do with water. Hold on. It has to do with practical problems like water that have to be resolved between Israelis and Palestinians for this deal to work because now the now the hard part truly does start and it's not to minimize that importance of that handshake as I said, but there is a really hard nut to crack here. We've agreed to share this Podium. Well, how much is mind and who gets the water underneath? That's very serious question. The other water they drink in Tel Aviv comes from Aqua fears under the West Bank under Bethlehem. In fact So simple question who is control who gets control of water appropriation. Simple question in Israeli is driving from Jerusalem to the Galilee through Jericho a Palestinian Shepherd is out with his flock crossing the street the highway with his sheep. The Israeli driver doesn't see him. He runs over one of the sheep or God forbid. He runs over the shepherd. Who's police come? Who's Court adjudicates how much the Shepherd gets for his sheep. These are all critically important practical issues that are going to have to be sorted out in the coming months before that handshake can be returned and transformed into a practical reality. Now, let me close this speech. With just this thought a lot of people have asked me. Can you really trust Yasser Arafat? Can you really trust this guy? We called him a terrorist for all these years. I mean cover of Time Magazine. Can you really trust this guy? And my answer is absolutely not and each sock Robin hasn't okay and let me explain what I mean with two thoughts one from the Quran and one from the talmud. The Quran there's a wonderful phrase in the Quran where a man asks the prophet Muhammad. Should I tie up my camel or should I leave him loose and pray to Allah that he doesn't wander off. What should I do? It's a good question and the profit answers tie up your camel and pray to Allah that he doesn't wander off. Okay? And that in effect is what Robin has done here. This deal is not structured around Yasser arafat's, you know, good word a good faith. It is built in that in each stage are fought in the PLO will have to perform in a certain way. And if they don't this whole process will be reversible. So, you know, I don't think the trust issue in my mind is really relevant. I think Robin has it well under control now the other issue is well, you know that I get at least are fought hasn't apologized. I mean does he really mean it? He hasn't done Penance. Really. I mean he recognized he did what he had to do in diplomatic terms, but does he really mean it? Well maimonides, you know teaches that there's two kind of patents. There's Penance. There's Penance were I common avowedly say it and there's Penance by what I do behaviourally. And in my world in my view are fought in behavioral terms has certainly satisfied that criteria you want it perfect. You want it crystal clear. You want it in writing you're going to break him in half. And I will leave you with this rabbinical thought as the rabbi's teaches teach where there is peace. There is no truth and where there is truth. There's no peace. And what they mean is that if you want everything In Living Color in Technicolor, you're only headed for trouble. It is gray compromises that make life possible that make daily life possible. And so yeah, there's a little gray in this deal, but I would argue that it's that gray that will make this deal possible end of speech number one you can clap now. Now I promised you a report card on the Clinton Administration and I let me let me give you a real quick report card and then we can open it up and flush it out with some questions. The Women's Club doesn't know yet, but they have to pay me twice for this. It's fantastic deal. Let me look at a just a few very quick issues that I get asked about a lot one is Health Care One, very interesting thing about the health care debate is that it is the lower and middle classes which understand the health care issue far more than the elite and upper classes because for the elite and upper classes their Healthcare tends to be perfectly fine taken cared for by their employer and it is really something they take for granted and they it's a very odd thing are the ones who need to be educated the most about the intricacies and problems of the Health Care system. When you go to these Town meetings and debates is very interesting. It's really the lower classes and the middle classes who really people who either don't have health care or on the verge of losing it or have lost it who understand in detail. Exactly where the difficulties in vulnerabilities of the system are another thing which is interesting about this issue and it's appropriate I think for this audience is that women are far more educated than men about this issue because women tend to make most of the healthcare decisions in this country for their families and they tend to be the ones who interact with the family doctor on behalf of their children more than men. So that tells you where kind of the education of this thing has to be focused and I really see that as we go out but the overarching difficulty of educating people and you really see this when you go with Clinton like to a place like a queen's Diner is that there is only what they call retail politics when it comes to selling Health Care reform. There's no wholesale politics because everyone's issue and everyone's situation is different and it's quite remarkable to see the president almost sounding like an insurance agent saying to people like at a diner. Okay. What is your premium? Okay, eight thousand a month or not. How many kids do you have 3 okay, your employer picks up 60% of it under my plan. You'll come out $100 a head at the end of each month. Now, how do you do that for 220 million people and that is the really challenging issue in selling Health Care. You really have to sell it one policy at a time one by one by one because at the end of the day everyone rightfully and understandably is asking the question. What does it mean for me? This is a very personal very kitchen table issue and everyone wants to see exactly how it's going to be translated for them personally before they decide whether or not they're going to approve of this plan. And that I think is one of it's one of the real challenges before the president the other great challenge, which were already seeing is how to fund it and if I would have one criticism I think of the way the president has approached this is that as you know, the legislation has not been introduced yet because the Administration has not nailed down yet how it's going to be funded. But I think that if there is a mistake there if that having gone out and basically told people that we can have all of this and it's not really going to cost you very much unless you're a male age 25 in perfect health living by yourself is that I was struck by a woman at this Queens Diner again to at the end sort of raised her hand said, mr. President. I've been living this country a long time. And as long as I've been living here, you know, everything is gone up and not down. And I think there are still enormous suspicion about these numbers the great danger in this whole healthcare issue is that if people believe that they are getting less health care for more money and not more health care for less money. The whole bottom could fall out of the political constituency in support of healthcare. Second question I get a lot is on the Press. What are Clinton's relations with the Press like these days. Usually the question I get is why are you so mean to the president? And I would say that relations between the president and the White House Press Corps have quite stabilized but I would argue they have stabilized for the very reasons that they were unstable in the beginning and what do I mean by that? I'm a firm believer Color Me naive if you like that you are what you eat in this business. And what I mean by that is that if your Administration has no appointments in place, you're getting $200 haircut at LAX. Your economic package is unfocused. You've gone through three choices of attorney general and to for a supreme corn seat that are basically the talk of Washington leaving bodies strewn in the battlefield. You're not going to get good press. I mean, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out and it doesn't take a hostile journalists to hold a mirror up to that reality. And make it somehow look distorted. The reality was as the clintonites will tell you this Administration. Got off to a very Rocky start. The reason relations have stabilized. The reason the president is getting a better press is also rooted in substance. The term came when his economic package passed Congress albeit by one vote, but nevertheless passed his national service package pass his NAFTA program got out there his foreign policy. Look very good on the big issues and suddenly people say oh David gergen arrived. Is he taking you to lunch? Well, I'll tell you a secret don't tell anybody outside this room, but I never talked to David gergen. Okay, I'm just out there covering. What I think is the reality and is the reality changed. So too did the coverage that's why I do believe that you are what you eat and believe me when the reality changes. So will the atmosphere change if it changes in a negative way, so The bottom line is yes relations are stable. But because first and foremost the president I think has found his sea legs as president. The third thing that really strikes me as I travel around the country in regard to this Administration is how much people whether they're Republicans Or democrats Clinton voters Dole voters Bush voters into caucus voters how much they want Clinton to succeed. I'm really impressed by how many people come up to me and say, you know, we really want this guy to succeed and I think that's a very healthy thing. It's one of the reasons I've always felt the poll numbers are a little misleading because in the traditional presidential job approval polls Clinton scores, 45 50 percent something like that relatively low, but I would argue people are asking the wrong question. If you ask a different question not do you prove of the president's performance which I would argue tends to be really just an economic vote. It's just a really a question. How are you feeling about your pocketbook right now and if you're feeling good and secure than the president gets high job approval rating and if you're feeling insecure and not good he gets a low one, but if we asked a different question, Do you think the country can afford for Clinton to fail? I think you find 95 percent support. I think that's a very healthy thing and it is the ballast. It's like a life vest around the president and it's what's been I think holding him up during those Rocky first few months people want him to succeed because they understand we are at a defining moment in our country and that whether you are a democrat or a republican we cannot afford a failed Clinton presidency. That's certainly what I pick up as I travel around the country. Finally. Let me close with this thought in terms of Clinton and it's the issue of how do you judge a president like him? It's a very Interesting question because you have a president who is reaching for the stars on health care and the economy and national service. He's trying to last through the stars, but most of the time he ends up just last suing the Moon. But that's still a lot better than last suing nothing at all. And that's really the question. I think that we as reporters, we as voters and citizens and future historians will ask. You know, how do you feel about a president who took big problems Healthcare the economy NAFTA trade that maybe we're headed in a downward Trend and all he did was just change it. So the trend line was upward not like that but just took something that was aiming down and put it on a different long-term trend line that will only be able to see the benefits of maybe five or ten years down the road and that's really the question I ask myself. I think it's a question we're going to have to ask ourselves is voters and certainly as historians. How do you feel about a guy who promised the sun and the stars but only delivered the moon yet. It was a heck of a lot more than we had when he got started. We'll take a vote later. You can clap now for the second speech. Basically, the question was you know president Assad has called for full piece in return for full withdrawal. How could that sort of be broken up in phases or segments? Well, I think the short answer is it can very easily be broken up once we all agree on what the bottom what full piece is and what full withdrawal is. In fact, it's going to necessarily have to be phased in just as the Israeli withdrawal from the Sinai desert of Egypt was phased in once the two sides agreed though what the last phase is and the problem today in the syrian-israeli negotiation. Is that each side or certainly Syria saying full piece for full withdrawal, but Assad won't Define what he means by full piece. Does he mean just non belligerency towards Israel or does he mean Israeli tourists in Damascus? And in Israeli Embassy with a flag flying over it in downtown Damascus. He won't say at the same time Robin won't say what he means by withdrawal. Does he mean every square inch does he mean well, we'll give Syria sovereignty over the Golan Heights, but we'll stay there and that's where these negotiations are stuck. Each side is talking about its general principles, but neither one wants to Define it before the other does and that's why sooner or later there's going to have to be either some secret negotiations as there were between Israel and the PLO or some kind of American shuttle between them. So this can be worked out in private. So Robin can stand up and say I gave full withdrawal, but I got an embassy in Damascus and Assad can stand up and say I had to give up Embassy in Damascus, but I got every square inch back and we're not at that phase yet. Yeah, Somalia Haiti sure. She asked me to say something about my book. Somalia and Haiti know these are these are really very serious and very difficult issues. Let me let me just sort of give you a first general answer and then particular one the problem we face today generally in American foreign policy is what I call the Donut problem. And that is the donut problem is that without the Soviet Union out there anymore to really focus our Attention our fears in our resources American foreign policy today is like a donut. It's got a lot of peripheral secondary issues whether it's Somalia or Haiti or Japanese trade or whatever, they're all important, but there's nothing at the center. There is no big large overriding threat that serves for us like a compass. And says go here go there go there. That's what the Soviet Union was Moscow was our North Star and when they went to Afghanistan, well, we know we had to side with Pakistan and when they were you know for the sandinistas, well, we knew we were for the contras and when they were for Syria where we knew we were for Israel and you know when they were for, you know one side in Cambodia, we knew who we were for we were for the other side. And so the biggest problem we face today is that when your foreign policies like a donut then we're always asking ourselves where our interests what's important. Should we really be in Somalia? We never went anywhere to feed people before. And so I have enormous really enormous Sympathy for the president for the last president. And for this one in trying to sort out which issues on the periphery of this donut. We should be involved in which not and you know, how much and that's what you're seeing here in Bosnia in Somalia in Haiti were really groping around the periphery and asking ourselves. Do we have the will do we have the wallet and do we have the Wiles? to operate in these kinds of environments now the problem with Haiti with with Somalia and I learned this less I've been to this play before I had a front-row seat it was called Beirut and so I know this one real well and the problem that Somalia raises is what I call the notion that there is no such thing as humanitarian intervention now what do I mean by that I mean that the idea that you just go into a country and which were just there to feed people don't even wear it would just tear to feed people pass out chewing gum and C rations and which is here to feed people is in illusion because politics doesn't end when people get hungry fact it gets sharper And we thought the same thing in Beirut, which is here to protect these Palestinians in these refugee camps, and we're not here to hurt anybody because when you go into a country where there is no government where there is no Center. Well where there's no Center. It means everyone's aside and your aside to and that's why in Beirut we came in there as peacekeepers, but the way the Lebanese looked at us was as the international militia. We were just one more militia there and we came into Somalia to feed people but the Somali sauce as the Clinton Clan just another clan. Because when you go into a place, we have a fractured political environment you automatically either have to take one guy side or another's even if you're neutral you're taking sides. So the lesson here is that the lesson of Beirut in the lesson of Somali is that we forgot about politics. We for the best of reasons we went in there truly to feed the starving and we save hundreds of thousands of lives, but the problem was is that there is also politics and when you forget about that, then you get embroiled in a way that you're out of control and that's what happened in Somalia. See when you're a clan and you're living in a clan environment. You can only do one of three things. You only have three choices you can align yourself with another clan that's trying to take over and help them get controlled. You can try to take over the whole country yourself. Or you can try to be a peace broker between all the different Clans the problem with our Somalia policy is that we did all three. At one point, we allowed ourselves against I did with the other clans at and one point we tried to be power Brokers between them and at other points, we left the somalis with the impression. These guys must be taken over the whole country and that's where things have gotten confusing and that's why what the president is trying to do now is pull us back into a clearly defined Brokers roll and ask the question, you know, what our interests here. Our interests are twofold feeding somalis making sure the speeding operation can go on without us and brokering the minimum level of consensus among these Clans. So there will be a functioning Somali government when we leave those are our interests. And we have finally I think got them into Focus whether we'll succeed. I don't know but I have a lot of Sympathy for the president for trying and not just picking up and leaving because I'll tell you what happens when you just pick up and leave. As far as Somalia is concerned nothing will happen. My lifestyle won't be affected. Your lifestyle won't be affected. No problem. So far as Bosnia is concerned nothing will happen. My life won't be affected. Your life won't be affected as far as Bosnia is concerned. Nothing will happen. As far as George is concerned. Nothing will happen as far as nagorno-karabakh is nothing will happen. But the interesting question is what happens when you add them all up. And what happens 10 years from now if we discover that the world has AIDS. Diplomatic AIDS Anarchy immune deficiency that there is nothing out there in the International System but a group of failed States sort of churning against one another in a sort of Perpetual cycle of famine under development and violence. That's a really scary issue. So yeah, we can we can pull out of Somalia tomorrow won't make a dimes worth of difference. But the big issue is you know, what happens when you have a critical mass what happens when you add them all up in 10 years from now, we look out there and we see my God that is one sick world. And so, you know, I shouldn't have unlimited patients with the administration. They shouldn't be allowed fuzzy thinking they want to do this. They got to get it right but we have to have a little bit of patience. They're winging it here. None of us have done this before we're dealing on the periphery of that donut and were groping in the dark. And if every time we put one wrong foot forward or bump our nose into a door everyone screams. Get out go home. You idiot fire the guy We're not going to go anywhere and we'll never be able to deal with that periphery out there. Thank you very much.