[Music]

from New York Times opinion this is the

Ezra Klein

[Music]

show if we'd only had a partner for

peace that's been the refrain in the

Israeli Palestinian Conflict for as long

as I fall it you hear it often from

Israelis you also sometimes hear it from

Palestinians and there's truth to this

but there's also a bit of a lie to it

because it suggests you only need one

partner what you need is two partners

able to deliver at the same

time there's this moment in Palestinian

political history that that keeps coming

up for me in my reading and my thinking

so it's 2009 aboss is as he is now the

president of the Palestinian Authority

and a man named Salam fiad is the prime

minister and fiad has an interesting

history he has an economics PhD from the

United States he's worked at the World

Bank and the IMF he was brought in by

Arafat in 2002 the height of the second

inata to serve as Finance Minister and

to build the basic capabilities of a

Palestinian State he became prime

minister in 2007 after the breakup of

the unity government between Hamas and

fatah and he is at his core a kind of

technocrat a person who focuses on the

nuts and bolts of governance so in 2009

frustrated by seeing peace deal after

peace deal fall apart he begins moving

forward with an idea that reverses the

way people have been thinking about this

maybe the way to a state is not through

some Grand deal bargain settlement

declaration maybe it is through the

internal development of a state maybe it

is through the simple building of the

state itself show you can collect taxes

show you can maintain internal security

show you can work with your partners and

then maybe the world will have no choice

but to recogn iiz that state maybe

Israelis will see they can work with you

and if they don't or if they don't want

to work with you maybe the fact that you

have built this will lead the

International Community to demand they

work with you and so fiad goes about

doing this and to a very large extent a

remarkable extent he succeeds and that

success is noticed well I know you have

had differences with the Palestinian

Authority I genuinely believe that you

do have a true partner in president abas

and prime minister fat

I believe

that and they have a track record to

prove it over the last few years they

have built institutions and maintained

Security on the West Bank in ways that

few could have imagined just a few years

ago so many Palestinians including young

people have rejected violence as a means

of achieving their

aspirations there is an opportunity

there there's a window

which brings me to my third Point peace

is

possible it is

possible a month after Obama gave that

speech this is now April of 2013 fiad

resigns as prime minister and today the

Palestinian Authority he worked so hard

to build into a governing force is in

tatters it is unpopular it is widely

considered to be corrupt it is widely

considered among Palestinians to have

failed failed to deliver the Better

Lives they need failed to deliver the

state had been promised so what happened

why didn't this work fiad is now at

Princeton and his name is being floated

as one of the people who might be called

back in some kind of revitalized

Palestinian government but I wanted to

know what happened when he tried this

the first time what went right and what

went wrong what he learned working with

the other factions and forces in

Palestinian politics and working with

Israel and how we still ended up here as

always my email as reinh show atny

times.com

[Music]

Salam fad welcome to the show pleasure

to be with you it's an honor to have you

here so in 2009 you are prime minister

You released a plan to establish a

Palestinian state within two years yes

tell me about the theory of that

plan the rationale behind launching that

plan which actually ended up being

launched in August of

2009 was um to make explicit in the most

constructive of ways possible that we

Palestinians were tired of a political

process that failed to deliver so it was

important for us to somehow find a way

to say we're tired of this occupation

this can't go on forever in many ways

the content of the plan actually

represented a continuation of things

that we were doing before when I first

joined the PA as finance minister in

mid2 2002 the height of the second in

father I had this idea about the need to

build the Palestinian Authority from

grounds up and finance is an important

component of that and was considered to

be a significant enough step in the

direction of rehabilitating the

Palestinian Authority it's kind of

really ironic when it was supposed to

have ceased to exist anyway the other

background to this actually is important

going back to June 2002 when George W

Bush was president he made a very

important policy statement on the

question of Palestine Israel which he

said then he was the first sitting US

president to say that yes Palestinian

state but then Palestinians have to meet

these

requirements Palestinian state will

never be created by Terror it will be

built through reform true reform will

require entirely new political and

Economic

Institutions based on democracy market

economics and action against

terrorism this moment is both an

opportunity and a test for all parties

in the Middle East an opportunity to lay

the foundations for future

peace a test to show who is serious

about peace and who is

not which on the face of things to me

like did not sound fair because here we

are singled out for having somehow to

prove that we are are worthy enough to

exercise something which is a natural

right for all peop around the world I.E

right to self-determination my attitude

on this was fair or unfair let's take

that test and pass it and we did better

than that actually we wrote the exam in

the form of that plan we said this is

what he intend to do over the SP of the

next two years in order for us to cross

the threshold of riness for State

beginning with a vision overall arching

vision for what that state was going to

look like for it to really actually be a

state that is founded on foundations the

progressive values of openness tolerance

inclusivity pluralism democracy and all

of that and the question we tried to

answer was what should be done in

various sectors of governance over a

period of two years in order for us to

be in a position to fulfill that

overarching National Vision when I read

your story when I read your policy memor

what I see is the difficulty of trying

to form what we think of as a state

right a taxation Authority sewers Etc

out of the the clay of a group that was

not built to do that was built not to

govern anything but to assert the rights

of a people to fight for that people and

so the people who were leaders in it

they had the experience of War they had

the experience of being refugees they

had the experience of planning military

operations but they didn't have the

experience of managing sewer instruction

so tell me a bit about when when you

begin working with the Palestinian

Authority or becomes a Palestinian

Authority who are the people in it and

what kind of experience did they bring

to that remember it was the PLO the

Palestine Liberation Organization that

entered into the oso Accords with the

state of Israel back in 1993 the PLO

acting on behalf of all Palestinians

actually signed those Accords and those

Accords gave rise to this

self-governing entity called the

Palestinian Authority it was supposed to

govern and take care of the needs of the

Palestinian people in the territories

Israel occupied in 1967 West Bank and

Gaza for an interim period that was to

end in May 1999 this was supposed to be

a transitional period of 5 years and if

you're thinking is in 5 years we're

going to have a state you're preoccupied

with that so it should not come as a

surprise that the Palestinian leaders

leadership in the90s was preoccupied

with political process lost in the

detail the building part the building

component so that's what got lost in

shff doesn't mean In fairness to our own

history that nothing was done there was

a lot of investment on part of

International Community in helping the

Palestinian Authority put together the

institutions of the functional State and

in terms of the makeup yes Ministries

agencies and all were by and large

staffed by people who came into

Palestine with president arafa after

long period in Tunisia some had some

experience what they were doing but

others didn't so some progress was made

I'm not really saying nothing happened

but it was not the it was not the main

game in town the focus was on peace

Envoy coming peace Envoy coming back

what's going to happen next donor

meeting then of course Camp David and

the run up to it and all lot that

happened in between and so I just want

to pull something out that you're saying

because this also tracks mind

understanding of it but but I think this

is important that the theory of the PLO

the PA of Arafat in this period I would

call an external theory that they are

going to get statehood by negotiating

with the Americans the Israelis the

Egyptians you know the Europeans Etc

there's a lot of focus on on that

external game and at the same time they

have to manage internally they have

constituents they have people who need

you know the roads to be fixed they have

to figure out how the Ministries work

but the theory is that they're going to

get to the promised land yes through a

deal and those deals then Begin to Fall

Apart um people who want more uh

background on this can listen to our

episode with Aaron David Miller and so I

want to fast forward here a little bit

to 2002 this is the second inata yes

there is a lot of violence there are

Israeli sieges of parts of the

Palestinian Authority Hamas is now a

player there are suicide bombings coming

from multiple groups into Israel and

you're brought in by rfed as Finance

Minister tell me why why does he choose

you to be Finance Minister okay people

were beginning to express unhappiness

about the way governance issues were

handled even from my days with the IMF

in the '90s I'm talking about like

9798 you know stories about you know not

all money that the PA made came to the

coffers of Ministry of Finance

commercial operations investment

operations taking place outside pview of

Minister of Finance so people were

beginning to say something about and we

did have a good legislative Council

there was a lot of discussion in the

legislature about these issues in Spring

of 2002 before I joined the PA there was

an important session of the PLC as it is

called Palestinian legislative Council

which basically they came up with the

List of Demands and expectations of the

leadership things needed to change so it

was against that backdrop and also

international calls for reform that I

was called in to serve as Finance

Minister and the president called and

asked me if I would do this and I said

yes and I did it and so from the way you

tell this what you have here is now

internal and external pressure in the

same direction this is after the second

inapa launches correct after Camp David

Fails this is a cratering of aats

international standing I mean the

Americans are Furious the Europeans are

upset people are feeling hopeless about

this now there's much more violence

Israeli politics is moving to the right

there's a feeling that the PA is corrupt

uh and internally you're saying there's

also this pressure from the legislative

Council it's kind of also saying there's

no deal coming and the state isn't

working yeah the government isn't

working so you come in this is about as

bad as things have been to that point

and You Begin a project of working on

internal bureaucratic processes it seems

and I've read your account of this it it

seems very in congruous right to imagine

somebody at the same time there's

military curfews and sieges and and

suicide bombs Bings sitting around

trying to figure out the accounting

structure and how people bring a request

for money from one office to another but

tell me a bit about that work and and

why you decided to focus on that first

why you decided to focus on on process

it was my job my job I was brought in to

really actually put Palestinian finances

in order and uh Details Matter in this

and you know to me as I said the task

was always about you know building the

state and projecting its reality on the

ground in finan yes it it had to mean

preparing budget it had to mean having

your accounts right and it had to mean

transparency it had to mean all of those

things it's a critical component of

being a transparent government to be

transparent in your finances and my

focus at the time was on getting it

fixed going forward key challenge also

at the time you asked me about like what

it felt like I remember what it was like

it was basically not being able to go to

my office itself was under curfew for a

good period of time when you are in

government and especially acting on

under highly challenging conditions of

the kind that we're having to contend

with you can't basically say we're close

for business until we're fix you got to

fix it on the go so to speak so it was

those little things whenever you can do

something however little just do it you

can just wait for the perfect alignment

of stars that was the doctrine if you

will and then building on whatever

confidence that you can get and generate

of doing things to do more things

incrementally in a way that was highly

opportunistic and I say this in the best

possible sense of the word do what you

can as soon as you can do it and that

basically is how we went about doing

business how are things working I mean

I've heard it described funy as a

patronage model that that people go to

Arafat make a ask for money and the

point of the finance ministry was to try

to back up the things said he would like

how what was going on before you came in

and then what is the way in which you

changed it you described it right patri

and it was the way Palestinian

leadership managed even before coming

into pistan money basically was

distributed from a center and decisions

on dispersement had to be remade by the

president himself big or small so when I

came in it was just like that pretty

much but who hires for example president

had to approve everything you know

sometimes it actually took the form of a

number of people like we need you know

100 or 200 people in security somebody

would write a memo to the president

saying and there be a list of names and

the president say approved something

like that so what do you do so you have

a president Larger than Life iconic

leader and I did have very good working

relationship with him really and he he

trusted me he had really good confidence

what I was trying to do so how did you

change a system from patronage to

systems based approach to running

Affairs of government so basically what

you thought was sensible worked and you

really needed to lobby with some

colleagues here and there but you get it

done for example if the president had

signed off on a piece of paper for

somebody to get health care I would send

it to the minister of Health for review

and I would charge it to the budget of

the Ministry of Health as opposed to the

budget of the president's office and if

it's social welfare I would send it to

the minister of social Affairs it just

allowed the flow to continue but it

started to really compartmentalize it

and organize it institutionally next

budget that we did we actually had all

of those anticipated expenditures

integrated in the budgets of line

Ministries so that's when you really

begin to see and I cannot tell you the

extent to which this was absolutely

fascinating and highly motivating and

source of joy to see you know what once

was so centralized and you know had to

really had president's approval to

happen all of a sudden becoming the

perview of ministers line ministers and

agencies and you could see the

structures appear beginning to emerge it

happened over time not overnight but it

did happen and as I said within span of

a couple of years not only did we have a

budget that was published we had good

accountabil to the legislature

testimonies uh hearings uh discussions

and approvals and the rest of it we're

beginning to look like a state in the

make and it sounds like one thing that

was crucial to this was the marriage of

your processes to arafat's Authority yes

right that that he had the charismatic

authority of it he backed you up you had

the processes and it was that marriage

of the nationalism and the the

technocratic method that was responsible

for at least their success in this

period yeah and it worked not everything

I did was kind of really easy to swallow

but to his credit he really actually

accepted it and he knew it was about

doing the right thing some issues were

easier to implement than others but he

was done to his credit most if not all

of the key components of a well

functioning Public Finance system were

put in place while President Arafat was

alive and president pal Authority so

that's an example of how you could do

[Music]

[Music]

things

so what comes next in in '06 are are

elections yeah and you form another

party it's called Third Way the the

party does not do very well in the polls

but tell me about that decision to form

a third party running for office was not

something I really had thought about by

Spring of 2005 I start to think about

wanting to leave government and do

something else with my life but I didn't

want to rock the boat doing it so there

was talk about elections and according

to our law you can't be a cabinet

officer and run for office so for

convenience political convenience I

remember I was asked by the prime

minister at the time late Abu Al Ahmed K

and the president himself president AB

why why are you leaving I said I want to

run for office and and they both gave me

this look do what like run for office

it's like I said what's wrong with that

I mean like fine but then in the way

things happened it started out as a way

out quiet way out if you will uh became

reality and people so for you it it

became more as an excuse yeah I kind of

used it to be honest with you that was

my attention like when you're when

you're quitting a job you need an excuse

for why you're quitting the job it

raised a lot of questions and I felt it

convenient to say I'm running for office

but then it started this way kind of in

a light way and our system was a mixed

system in the sense that you could run

all by yourself like for individual seat

or you can run on a slate so because I

really had not really given the matter

that much thought originally I was

thinking of running fore an office in in

my own District but then talking to some

people and all why don't we run on a

slate I was an independent and I still

am actual political independent and so

we ran a slate of Independence at the

time out of nothing I mean just like

scratch it was not a party as you

described it it was just an electoral

slate you need to put together a slate

to run for office and that's what we did

and you all come in fairly low I think

it was 2% in the polls if I remember the

and

the surprising thing that happens in

this election and that sets a stage for

a lot of what comes next is Hamas does

very well oh yes absolutely why yeah

look at their election slogans you know

things that they chose to run on I think

the one that really was most effective

It's a poster that they ran everywhere

it said America says no to Hamas Israel

says no to Hamas what do you say I've

heard this slogan before and that but

that tells you a lot about internal

Palestinian yeah of course it does of

course it does but but here we are this

is January 2006 now and you know by then

those who still believe that the

solution culminating Palestinian St were

beginning to become a minority what do

you do you play to that I mean it's a

failed bet that the PLO made on Oslo

expecting it to deliver Palestinian and

by that time in the minds of Benny and

coming on the heels of the second father

and the violence of it all and the

destru C and and all both in Gaz and

West Bank basically that was a winning

hand also they ran on we're clean you

know we don't have issues of corruption

we have white hands we clean and all so

these are really all important messages

I think electorally speaking but

technically speaking mechanics of

winning the elections helped them

enormously because they got about 44% of

the vote and fat I think came in second

at about 43 that would not have given

them an outright majority in the way

they did 74 out of 132 how did that

happen it happened because the election

system at the time was like 50%

proportional you have to run on a slate

and 50% individual seats people compete

in districts what fat did at the time

because of their own internal politics

they did not have the discipline of

running one candidate per position so

they ran against each other essentially

they took votes from each other and

Hamas candidates won for 4% is a

substantial showing there's no question

about that but it would not have been

enough to give them outright majority

what gave them outright majority was the

election system but one thing you can

imagine here I mean it is to some degree

parliamentary you could have imagined

coalitional governance you could have

imagined some kind of unity governance I

mean this is still a People Under Siege

still trying to fight for Statehood and

what you get instead is a violent split

yes why what leads to the yeah crack up

of Palestinian governance you know it's

kind of really when you reflect on those

days and what we're trying to do to act

as if you know we're kind of mature

State and democracy and all these are

really fun memories it's like uh so

Hamas wins and what Hamas does actually

is begin the process by Consulting with

other factions when they in fact could

have formed the government by themselves

I mean they won an outright majority so

they did that they went through a

process of talking to factions including

the talking to

they ended up without really getting in

details forming essentially a Hamas only

government and that first year was

difficult there were some clashes and

security issues and deterioration and

all lack of stability strikes and what

have you Financial boycott on banking

institutions and the rest of it money

withheld by government of Israel so

government unable to really meet its

salaries Etc so there was a process of

reconciliation LED at the time by Saudi

Arabia and a deal was reached in Mecca

and my name was in that agreement by the

way as Finance Minister and when I left

I left not to come back by the way but

then the government was formed and when

my name was mentioned the agreement so

you have that and of course I I joined

that fin Minister I was there I mean the

early going of this was good it felt

good to really be on a cabinet that was

inclusive headed at the time by Hamas

prime minister was Hamas and N9 or 10

cabin

officers were from Hamas we knew each

other Ian it's not like some of us were

imported from outer space and and it

lasted about 3 months or so didn't last

too long and then we had the violent

take over Power by Hamas and Gaza in

June of 2007 a takeover of Gaza by Hamas

may be near the latest sign Hamas takes

over this important security

installation of the Rival fata movement

capturing the preventive security

headquarters mlon and civilians looting

the compound what leads to the

dissolution why doesn't that survive you

know I always had this premonition about

Gaza separated from the rest of policy

and this goes back to way before you

know Hamas came into Power I have to

tell you I made the point of attending

most cabinet meetings from Gaza just go

there just make it kind of really stick

still up until that time it wasn't

really on anybody's mind that Gaza was

going to really separate in the way it

happened and um here it really depends

the story depends on whom you're really

talking to and some say it's a Siege you

know Financial Siege continue to put

pressure on the authority and and that

can led to the implosion and all of that

I personally don't think that is the

case because about five or six weeks

into my tenure in that very shortlived

government I was able to work with

significant components of the

International Community to find work

around The Siege on our banking system

and I know what I'm really talking about

I was a party to it and we did it so in

terms of our capacity to deal with the

banking system that was restored when I

showed up in my second since as Minister

of Finance I mean the PA was again

dealing in cash there were kind of

really invoices boxes of things banking

system could not be used for fear that

they be kind of banned internationally

and all of it so you needed to rebuild

the system scratch and you can't do it

without having a banking relationship we

were able to restore that so I don't buy

so what you buy what I buy is faction

rivalries you know for sure I mean yeah

in politics you have you know

competition you need to have competition

for any vibr democracy it's fine but but

then when the Rivalry becomes too much

about factional salvation as opposed to

what's collectively nationally sensible

we all lose and our struggle for freedom

for nationhood for self-determination in

history cannot really be adequately

understood without seeing at least good

part of it through the prism of trying

to answer the question who represents

the Palestinian people if you really

Factor this into the analysis you see a

lot that you would not otherwise see I

think uh that was absolutely devastating

there's no question about that it is my

opinion that unless we really find a way

to not eliminate that pluralis but to

manage it effectively that we really can

move forward because until we do that

the focus will always be on the

privilege of representation not on what

comes with it by way of

responsibility this feels to me like a

place your thinking has changed over

time to fast forward a little bit here

there's the the breakup of this Unity

government there's violent clashes a

boss makes you prime minister and as

prime minister you among other things

are managing security and and one thing

you're managing there is basically the

expulsion of Hamas in the West Bank and

I think there's a a vision that people

external to Palestinian politics have

which is you can have some kind of

future Palestinian politics with no

Hamas right that Israel says it will

destroy Hamas my sense is that you've

come to the view that that is impossible

and counterproductive so tell me a

little bit about that evolution in your

thinking yeah as a matter of fact I was

for pluralism and for the arrangement

that took place in 2007 and my joining

it actually is prime face evidence of my

strong preference for it even though I

knew and I do not know if I really can

go into too much detail here that this

was a government that was going to be

rejected internationally and not I mean

Israel of course we knew but not only by

the United States but also by Europe so

I knew that I mean I knew even if there

was this International opposition to it

I'm not talking about Israel which is

always a slightly odd thing given that

we pushed very hard for these elections

the United States push for the elections

also pushed to allow Hamas to run in the

elections that was part of George W

Bush's view against the um advice of

other people then Hamas wins it seems

strange to me that the International

Community both wanted the elections

allowed Hamas to win and then treated it

then as delegitimizing for like either

do it or don't do it the Hamas

party has made it clear that they do not

support the right of Israel to

exist and I have made it clear so long

as that's their policy that we will not

support a Palestinian government made up

of

Hamas this new democracy that's emerging

in the Palestinian

territories must understand that you

can't have a political party that also

has got a armed Wing to it that

democracies yield

peace I would not really want to get

into US position on this and where the

president was wasn't but I can tell you

that on the Pres principle that you have

just like articulated right now there

can be no disagreement I mean that was

my view at the time that the idea that

we have elections but we exclude a

faction that by that time everybody knew

had significant weight politically in

the system I mean you either have open

Fair inclusive elections or just

governed by Fiat I mean it's it doesn't

really make much sense it's a show I'm

not really fan of the kind of sudo

elections I mean where you have people

go and they have and they show their

finger and we have voted but but rigged

the elections now 2007 that's an

important moment I was in this

government and all of a sudden overnight

essentially there was this violent took

over power I mean was there immediately

I mean the president actually was at the

time of a state of mind that maybe we we

we really cannot save ourselves I mean

that was predominantly the mood in mid

June

2007 and I wasn't in a different place

but I thought it was going to be

temporary yes I was called in to serve

as prime minister at the time and that

was the consensus amongst the pl of

factions it's not something I looked for

or particularly want to do or anything

like that we just sat in in a room and I

remember the president at the time on

the day after asked people to answer

three questions like what kind of

government do you want us to have small

or normal size whether it's factional or

non-fa and who should be the Prime

Minister and I I remember

overwhelmingly people around in the way

they answer they put my name on it so

National Emergency however I took it

literally to mean an emergency

government which under our Constitution

which I took seriously and I still do

take very seriously and that this is

going to be short lived that during

these short weeks way will be found to

put the system back together I was wrong

but actually on the 29th day of my ten

year as prime minister I submitted my

resignation this is not reported on a

lot but this is a fact and this came as

a surprise to everybody around me

including the president like why are you

doing this and I said well that's the

law what was your relationship in these

years like with a boss it was cordial

and all right I mean I when I left the

government I left as Finance Minister he

tried to talk me out of it and um but I

said I'm I'm running and I ran and then

my own sense is that I've gone not to

return I mean you know what when I left

as Finance Minister but going back to

that period he was the one who asked me

to do this uh you knew I'm kind of an

independent person and things were not

going to really be easy but at the time

nobody thought anything was going to be

easy so what do we do what we do is if

you want me to continue to serve I

resign then you task me with forming

another government and then in

accordance with the law I have to take

it to the council for vote confidence

either they voted in or out but that's

the process and we did that and he

called the council to convene to vote on

the government and Hamas did not show

up they would have voted it out that day

if they showed up they didn't there was

a session That was supposed to take

place my office was not very far from

where the legislature was and I had the

the Secretary General of the cabinet go

there and tell me when there was Quorum

and was supposed to take place at 12

midday and I stood on the stairs of the

legis Council said we came here to

actually offer our program to the

legislature they didn't show up and that

actually made the government to car take

our government for a long period of time

now all of this is known what is not

known you talk about Evolution own

thinking this is a fact and

corbor in April of 2008 less than a year

after I became prime minister I wrote an

interal memo that was entitled Gaza just

one word Gaza and the thesis of that was

the path we are on is not going to

restore

Unity what is in the way of this is

actually continuing to say that unless

everybody becomes the same they cannot

join the pl this is in writing my own

name and signature and this is also

documented members of Hamas used to

visit with me in my office I knew them

we talk about things and we were very

clear in terms of our own

expectations political descent is more

than welcome for sure on security we

stand on a platform of nonviolence let's

just be clear on this who is the wi here

we is the PA and of which I was prime

minister so it was very clear to

everybody you know what we stood on and

by the way on

security my main preoccupation coming

into the job was to deal with the

lawlessness that was so dominant and

prevalent everywhere in cities of West

Bank and by the way for the record that

was not Hamas but but hold on I I want

to hold here for for a minute and

integrate Israel into this conversation

okay we are now at a point where there

is a split Hamas is running Gaza the PA

is running uh the West Bank yes the PA

has a platform of nonviolence right that

is a major division between the two

sides but you're also managing security

within the West Bank um you can imagine

different paths Israel could take at

this moment in terms of here's a partner

we can work with here's what we can't

you can imagine a lot of different

strategic considerations for them what

was Israel's relationship to you and to

the PA in this period did was your sense

that they were trying to raise up the PA

as the alternative such that Hamas would

crumble that they were trying to keep

the two divided how did Israel deal with

you and your colleagues so in 2007 when

I became prime minister yeah I got all

of those accolades and this guy is

serious uh you were the prime minister

of the West liked yeah I mean Western

educated worked in Western insti had

record track record of having really

delivered on financial reform and all of

that sort thing massive coverage from

Captain meetings to laying the

Cornerstone for a $19 million project

undertaking the role of prime minister

without a state Salam fiad is laying the

foundations of a Palestinian Nation one

road one school and one project at a

time in August 200 by the way even was

Finance Minister I I don't know many

Finance ministers who get this much

recognition and coverage internationally

from all over papers in the United

States Europe everywhere a lot of media

interest in what we're trying to do and

after all we're not even a state which

of course tells you the extent to which

the issue of peace and Bel how important

it is internationally it's not about me

personally but this is kind of the kind

of promise that people saw in this so

yes there was that including in Israel I

mean a lot of politicians would say all

kinds of really good things about this

prime minister is really serious man man

we can do business with ET making s like

it's a question of just who not the

process or anything like that translate

that into action into deeds and and look

at what happened a lot can be said about

this I have my own convictions I come to

the conversation with a little bit of

bias that was very explicit on this

doubt that you have this doubt I always

had this doubt I always had this War I

had PR about things I pr about Gaza long

before I joined the PA when I used to

just go there as IMF res rep Crossing

into something that's kind of really

different somehow and if I may take a

step back and I was not obviously

involved in Oso process itself I was an

international civil servant at the

international monetary Fund in in

Washington DC at the time and it was not

really before I became the resident

represented IMF to the Palestinian

Authority in late 95 early 96

that I started to read up on the issue

in details and studied it very carefully

the agreement and from early on I had my

doubts to be very honest uh that the

framework of that kind was going to

really lead us to the promised land what

were you skeptical about the agreement

itself when you really look at it

clinically and technically it's not you

know based on recognition of any of our

national rights as a people that's

fundamentally important and history burs

that out if you really look at what

happened subsequently and where you know

something is essentially kind of thrown

at us like most recent rendition or

version of the So-Cal two set solution

was contained arguably in the Trum plan

of January 2020 and essentially it was

like here is two solution take it or

leave it and and not doing so would be

engaging in wasting yet another

opportunity for peace whereas the PLO

acting on on behalf of all Palestinians

recognized the right of the state of

Israel to exist in peace and security

that's profound by the way so you're

saying that the at the base of this

there was an asymmetry right at the

beginning Israel was recognized and the

Palestinian state was contingent it it

was more of a a promise they saw a

promise of State essentially they

internalized it as such it was really

more of a promise than anything else if

you look into the agreements themselves

you're not going to find a single

reference however implicitly that this

is really about Palestinian state it was

about self-government for Palestinians

self-rule that's what it was about so

there was no reference to sovereignty I

remember after I became president pres

of ymf we would go to International

meetings donor meetings and all and

there are several meetings that were

interrupted almost like stopped

cancelled because of a reference in one

of the international documents or

delegations implying palan sovereignty

this is how delicate the issue was at

the time when late prime minister isak

raban took the agreements in 1995 to the

canet he gave an important speech and

there is in there everything that

confirms what I have just told you that

this is really about self-rule and the

process was to culminate in agreement

between the sides on so-called permanent

status issues not

[Music]

state

[Music]

so this gets then to your theory of

State Building which is that by 2009

there have been many failed peace

processing attempts right there's been

uh International meetings there have

been bilateral negotiations like AOS mer

there have been all these efforts they

have come to not and so you sort of

reverse this idea yes that instead of

waiting for a state recognized and

agreed to by Israel and the

International Community for Palestinians

Palestinians should build what looks

like a state and that will lead to the

international recognition and and the

deal and so as I understand a lot of

your approach here it actually flips the

ordering that had become dominant until

that time absolutely that's fair and

accurate way of describing my thought

processes and and and how I approach the

issue from beginning to what I told you

earlier about my own doubt I long

harbored about the capacity of the

political process peace process to

deliver Palestinian state to be quite

candid about it I always was doubtful

about that being able to do it and

that's why I invested a lot in the

process of making it happen creating it

you just created make it happen build it

build this institution project its

reality let it it grow on people as

opposed to it happening top down and

then work politically somehow with the

International Community to impart

Sovereign to it that was really the

equation so it's not surprising actually

shortly after we launched that plan of

2009 that the world jumped on it even

though the world was not consulted on it

I mean a lot of people think that this

was concocted up some kind of really

Grand conspiracy or grand game plan

agreed with the Americans Europeans with

International financial institutions

none of it I held the press conference

said here's our plan but immediately the

word jumped on it it had the promise it

has this Vision it has all of these

things but importantly what many forgot

about was the massive major turn around

insecurity conditions West Bank in so

far as sense of personal security that

people had main cities of West back were

kind of No Man's Land state of total

lawlessness total chaos businesses rans

and government offices rans people have

no sense of personal security walking

streets nighttime or anything like that

within a matter of short months was a

complete turnaround in that whole

operation it was a very good example of

how you can do things then conditions

improved drastically and you look at the

numbers yourself and you will see that

over a four year period in terms of

casualties of violence and and all of

that so what was Israel's response to

this were they delighted were they

trying to work with you were they not

two areas I can point to which we

telling of Israel not having been the

right State of Mind in in terms of

political system center of gravity as I

call it of the political system and by

that time of course Israel shifted to

the right relative to where it used to

be in theid 90s little bit of very brief

rundown of History Oslo had segregated

the West Bank in particular to areas a b

and c area a is like Urban centers like

cities likea

Etc Etc major urban areas in area a

that's where the person Authority has

sole perview over security and

administration then you have area B

where security is kind of really shared

responsibility and then area C PA has no

jurisdiction in other words you can't if

you're a security officer PA move into

area C without prior coordination Israel

you can't do that so that's the lay of

the land and it was excluded by and

large from development because to build

anything a room anything an extension to

your own home you need to get a permit

from Israel and because Israel by Design

wanted arec out of the equation would

give only very few permits and a lot is

known has been written about the extent

to which they demolished existing

structures and they still do to this day

so that's one real test I me if that

state of Palestine is going to emerge

and it's going to really be fulfilled

minimally speaking how can they start

point B the West Bank minus 60% of it I

mean how can this be it's unreal

essentially that's what what it really

meant so that's one one test and there

was no change in their policy on that

none whatsoever I mean I remember

because I would struggle a lot of my

focus was on economic development really

getting the economy to move and and all

of that thing and we are hamstrung by

those policies for sure nevertheless we

engaged in a cat and mouse game with the

Israelis can of really Building without

permit and I stand constantly accused

with being a thief of Jewish land

because we would they would not allow us

to do it so we just go ahead and do it

sometimes they demolish we build again

so that's one area the other is security

Now Israel was not supposed to under

ooso to send its troops to area a

meaning urban areas if you know I don't

know if you do or not but any event

outside of the city there's a a little

bit roundabout in the early second the

father days the Israeli Army would come

in but would not cross beyond the

roundabout in the spring of2 that was

broken they sent the Army into the urban

centers to stay for a while then they

disengage from the cities but they

maintain the practice of in and out

raids that's what they were doing now

promise that we stood on we we stood on

doctrine of nonviolence I that's

important in everything we did and what

is it that I was telling people when I

visited the region I used to spend about

half of my time touring the country

going to refugee camp what was it I was

talking about we stand on nonviolence

and we believe in it is going to deliver

us a state from my point of view the

most important deliverable on Israel's

side would have been to stop the

incurrence the military rat into area a

I would have taken that and kind of made

the poster out with basically saying see

we told you because the Israelis were on

record many times and to this day they

repeat the same

story if there is security we will not

send the troops but it was the mar

Improvement in security conditions in

those four years that I described to you

and this is a matter of record then

would admit it my biggest most important

ask of the Israelis both directly to

them and acting through International

Community especially the United States

in discussions meeting after meeting

conferences and all we need for the

incursion to stop why because what

defines a state more than where its

Security Services

are nothing else defines State more than

you know having your own security there

not Israel's own security the message

that would have come out of action by

Israel on something like this would have

been unmistakably understood as meaning

Israel sees as an end game a separate

Sovereign Palestinian entity they didn't

they did not even reduce the frequency

and sometimes they would just send the

troops just for show voting there's

nothing one of the things you'll hear

most often on the Israeli side is that

it never had a a partner for peace or

even a partner and there are times I

think where there's some truth to that

but there's also this period where aboss

is President and your prime minister I

think that the view of many many people

is that you were trying to build the

kind of state that Israel and the

International Community had all said

this is what we want a state that has

security cooperation with Israel that is

managing security within the West Bank

that is focusing on economic development

that is committed to

nonviolence and there is a set of things

Israel could have done to help make you

successful and to help make what you

were doing seem legitimate in the eyes

of Palestinians right like if you go

this path we get what we want or we get

some amount of what we want exactly and

there are things they could do to make

you look not successful right there's

cooperation but you're getting nothing

this path is not going to lead you

anywhere yes and it sounds like you're

saying they chose the lad the yes it

will not lead you anywhere yes and the

most obvious example of that of course

which everybody talks about and realizes

and recognizes as a key contributor to

loss of confidence in the capacity of

the framework to deliver person

continued settlement expansion I mean

that's obvious and administration after

Administration SEC state after secular

State envoys Arab countri is were making

the point to redem bring this to an end

it did not but what not many talked

about was this other point about

security that I told you and that would

have been a very very powerful message

had they really delivered on that and

they really have to defend their record

on this one because they lived up to it

up until

2002 but I thought that if we defy the

odds I mean that process of really

working against the ODS is something

that actually inspires people and and

you take risks doing it but you believe

it I mean after all even if it failed

politically it certainly would be

important for us to really embark on a

path like that because it leads to

empowerment of our own people and there

any scenario self-empowerment is

absolutely essential that's key you have

to believe in it you have to do it so we

took that bet but no delivery and then

the process fell apart if Netanyahu had

lost rather than won in 2009 do you

think it would have been any different

that's a good question certainly it did

not make things easier when you have a

prime minister who come in and from day

one says I mean actually even going back

to 1996 when he first came he ran

against Oso when he knew that Oso

actually explicit not provide for

Palestinian St to this day he's taken

credit for having been the Prime

Minister who ran against Oso and he

opposed Oso and he brought it down so s

not make things easier and I'm I want to

be fair to the record here in addition

to reflecting my own convictions but out

of caring about projecting think to you

how I really feel about this I can say

to you that you're looking at someone

who never really felt that the idea of a

sovereign state of Palestine on the

territory of Israel occupied in

1967 was ever internalized by the

Israeli body politic or its center of

gravity that's what I truly believe

let's just really move fast forward to

2020 in what argu be described as a

version of two- State solution because

people say two State solution they don't

Define it so Trump can say oh yeah

here's one there is state of palestin

there is state of Israel not many people

read the fine print or even the full

print of the plan itself but it's very

clear to this reader of it me myself

there is no person in sovereignty over

even 70% of the West Bank that we were

going to retain why it's kind of really

mentioned kind of really casually that

Israel would have perview over zoning

issues in areas adjacent to the Border

without defining what adjacent means

given how narrow strip of land we're

really talking about we could

conceivably I don't want really be

hyperbolic about this but conceivably

Israel could have the right to come and

say you can't build here in outskirts of

rala so here's the deal when I looked at

what Oso was about and how various

Israeli governments behaved and what the

Israeli government had to tell its

kasset back in 1995 to get their

approval and even then Burly by saying

explicitly this is really not serious

State this is a State minus What I Call

State of leftovers and if that's the

idea I can tell you it's a nonstarter

that's what people should understand so

you're prime minister until 2013 yes the

story I have heard about this is that

you're pushed out by a boss what is the

end of your Prime ministership what

leads to it how do you do you understand

it I did leave actually in early June

2013 formerly but I started working on

it going back to 2012 so it took a while

I mean much like the process I went

through when I resigned as Finance

Minister there were many reasons that

really led into that I was not pushed

out I was not fired not that I would

have taken that in a bad way to be

honest with you and I still wouldn't

today look at it that way but that's not

the truth the truth I resigned so that

story you don't feel is true it's widely

believed no I I I resigned I I resigned

a volunt resign tell you variety of

reasons over time I saw this as really

not doing what we wanted accomplished

this to me was not about Premier this to

me was always about an Enterprise

leading to freedom for all people

something big so April 2011 less than

two years into implementing that plan

that you refer to the two-year program I

remember we were declared as ready for

stat it was in Brussels that we got that

endorsement from all of the world and

Israel was around the table by the way

at that meeting and that's the statement

they issued what did I say I said job is

not done Gaza is not a part of this to

what end are we doing this and then the

internal Dynamics the internal dyamics

were compelling for me to really

actually leave and there was beginning a

lot of unhappiness within top Lear

leadership taking shots sometimes

needlessly or without cause or or

something like that up and including

mobilizing people against an income tax

and with with those who are actually

demonstrating were instigated by others

so it was really beginning to take on

that Dimension which clearly is not

really a happy place to be another was

and I will said this as best as I could

while being differential and not wanting

to make a story more dramatic than it

really was I have this sense about what

what government is and what governance

is about and you know government is a

servant government should be in the

business of really thinking about itself

of itself as there to serve the people

and their interest and to really look

for a way in which it could become as we

were trying to a government not only for

the people but of the people and when

that didn't happen and system started to

R more in the direction of higher and

higher concentration of powers in the

executive that's not a situation I was

very happy with to be honest with you

there is this dispute happening now I

mean what is happening now in Gaz is a

horror there's this question of who

should run it also question in some ways

of who and how the West Bank will be

running the Palestinian Authority has

collapsed in in polling among

Palestinians the Israelis say they don't

want the Palestinian Authority or as far

as I can tell any Palestinian control

over Gaza or for that matter according

Rel to Netanyahu over the West Bank he

at least has said that he does not think

having the Palestinian Authority in

charge is something he supports

Americans and Europeans want a major

essential role for the Palestinian

Authority you've said that just turning

it over to the Palestinian Authority in

the PA's current condition is an

nonstarter it's not going to work from

the perspective of building a

Palestinian State not in terms of its

politics but its institutions its

governability building the kind of thing

that you were trying to build what would

you like to see happen what do you think

the realistic proposal is not the one

Israel would support but the one that

Joe Biden should demand they support you

described the conditions of personal

Authority it's you know standing

politically speaking and and all of

these are facts and disputable facts

Paul after Paul shows that and the most

recent one actually the most daming and

devastating not surprisingly so but in

any event we are where we are so looking

at the catastrophe that's Gaza today

that has to be the starting point of

conversation and there different

approaches that were talked about kind

of really not loudly early on including

ideas like a temporary Arrangement

provisional arrangement for Gaza Gaza

only kind of operation to maybe some

people from Civil Society business

Community dealing with International

Community all kinds of schemes and I

from the very beginning I thought that

would not be the right way to begin

because that presumed that the day after

was G to be ham Gaza the only thing that

I was certain was going to happen tens

of thousands person in lives lost

because it War to no end and so the most

sensible thing to do from my point of

view was to work with what we have but

supposed to have been there to begin

with the Palestinian Authority a version

of this appears to have been adopted of

what I have proposed for what I called a

reconfigured Palestinian Authority

reconstituted Palestinian Authority the

Americans now are using the term

revitalized which could imply more of an

administrative a technocratic kind of

strengthening or or

revitalization it is not excluded from

our own thinking to the contrary key

responsibility of the government to be

form is to really actually upgrade the

capacity to personal Authority reform

its ways in finance in Security in all

spheres of government but what is needed

UPF front is political enablement

political weakness is a key problem

anyone would tell you that and if you

are this we politically you cannot

govern you cannot lead effectively you

cannot do anything under normal

conditions you have elections but we

didn't have them in better times we're

not about to have them now it's time of

war and we can't do that and the war

continuing cannot but really add to the

weakness of personal Authority so what

we really need as first order of

business is to really impart strength

political strength and viability to PA

until we can have elections so I thought

maybe the way to do it to find a way to

impart credibility and inclusivity to

the Palestinian Authority through the

higher organ that's the PLO and to do

that you need to expand the PLO because

the PLO itself is not representative of

Palestinian people in an effective sense

nominally yes that's its title and I

would like for it to Forever continue to

be that kind of home for us it means a

lot president's B dearly for the PLO to

be so recognize so I don't take it

lightly but does it really today

effectively represent Palestinian people

it doesn't it's bet on Oso fiiled

miserably and it's not inclusive in

terms of opposition different points of

views and all of that in some places

I've seen you say this you've said that

to be part of this body you should have

to renounce violence correct Hamas

obviously is the major player here they

are Central now in in Palestinian

politics violence is core to their

identity yeah so isn't it a paradox to

say it should be inclusive body that

includes Hamas but it also must be a

body that renounces violence there is

during this transitional commitment to

be made by the pl to nonviolence the

expanded PLO meaning everybody will have

to really commit to that and that's not

far-fetched

now imagine the situation well let's

just say somehow you mentioned the

Americans uh President Biden comes and

says okay boys and girls time to really

be serious let's come to the table we

want to resolve this issue with this

timeline and I'm throwing full weight of

the United States behind this effort all

right who sits at the table p and as

part of that process just as was

expected of us back in 1993 we signed on

to a document declaration principles in

in there there and what we said was like

we commit toal violence but that's what

the people signed on to and you said

something about violence is part of the

hamas's identity and it was part of of

the pl's identity up until it signed

that piece of paper in

1993 I mean factions of the PLO itself

whether fat pflp Democratic front all of

their components this is armed

resistance you can't you know forever

label a faction or as forever being one

thing or the other and history is

repleted with examples like this and

after all when peace is made it's not

really exactly made between good

neighbors and happy neighbors we need to

at some point resolve this but there is

an enormous task that lies ahead of us

before we really begin to think about

the broader dimensions of the conflict

and how it's going to be resolved and

all the Deep scars of this war are going

to last forever and ever there's so much

of rebuilding of human life and and

livelihood to really begin before we

think about all of these other things

that really need to go into to put us

back on some kind of track that that

could lead to a viable Palestinian state

in the way that really actually Rises

and lives up to the expectations and

aspirations of our own people there is

that human Dimension to that that we

really need to focus on and that should

really focus the attention on the need

to bring this war to an end today before

tomorrow immediately it's overdue all

that is really happening now is Untold

loss of life and livelihood on a daily

basis people look at numbers death and

all but what about the injured what

about lack of Medicine what about lack

of food 25% inst starvation no basic

amenities of life this is what we're

looking at is how is that really going

to really help there has to really be

political solution to this and I'm

hopeful that as a matter of fact the

discussions over a potential deal that

could lead to somehow weeks of ret

during this time no effort should be

spared at really bringing this war to an

end

permanently I really appreciate your

your time here today

I'll ask you what is always our final

question here which is what are three

books for people who want to understand

this better that you would recommend to

the

audience well related to what I just was

talking about right now the importance

of good governance for successful

Nations and all I mean the book that

comes to mind is there are several but

one that comes to mind is why Nations

fail by Daren asogo and James Robinson

this is good read it is really about two

important issues in the way they explain

this about how bad it is to really have

a high concentration of Economic and

political power and how bad it is for

countries to be badly governed meaning

poor governance corruption and all of

that those who are interested in

learning about us in English it's called

the Arabs by Eugene Rogan the modern

Arab history beginning maybe mid 16th

century and all the the beautiful thing

about this book is actually it's done by

an Arab but through the prism of how

Arabs themselves see themselves and how

they lived and experienced various

episodes of their lives like for example

Arab Spring and and the third one how

about a novel by a Palestinian writer

from Jerusalem name of author is Nadia

harash the title I'm translating it is

that on the trails of Mariam Mariam

being the Biblical name it happens to be

named name given to or the name of Four

Women the book is about it does talk

about history in in the context of the

novel and the occupation and experience

of being woman in society like ours in a

very good way I don't know if it has

been translated if it has not I think

it's really one good translation away

from making this author an

internationally renowned literary

luminary well we have a lot of people in

the publishing industry who listen so

maybe they'll maybe they'll get on that

Salam fad thank you so much my pleasure

thank

[Music]

you this episode of the is Clan show is

produced by Roland hoop fact checking by

Michelle Harris our senior engineer is

Jeff geld with additional mixing from

Aim Shapiro our senior editor is Clare

Gordon the show's production team also

includes Annie Galvin and Kristen Lynn

we have original music by Isaac Jones

audience strategy by Christina seoi and

Busta the executive producer of New York

Times opinion audio is Annie roer and

special thanks to Sonia

[Music]

Herrero