tv Charlie Rose Bloomberg June 30, 2016 10:00pm-11:01pm EDT
♪ >> from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." charlie: we begin this evening with the terrorists attack in turkey, three suicide bomber is injured over 40 people and injured -- killed over 40 people and injured over 1200 people -- 200 people. the prime minister ahmet davutoglu said that isis was responsible. >> these three people captured just before one of the blasts tour through the main airport. and one attacker is captured in these shaky images come after being shot down, riding on the ground before blowing himself
up. the attack was coordinated and bloody, three separate locations hit by three suicide bombers who apparently arrived by taxi. it is the latest in the deadly bombings in turkey. thomas kemper of atlanta, georgia was waiting for a connecting flight. >> it really woke me up from my net -- nap. and then gunfire and then people started running. and we just ran this way. guest: richard of connecticut said that he and his wife spent three hours trapped in the airport. >> there was no place to go, nowhere to hide. and hearing gunfire and not being of a get out, it is a frightening feeling good -- feeling. >> there is an extra layer of security at the airport before you get into the building, but it did not stop to the attackers
from getting in the terminal and blowing themselves up. one of them just over there. it was in the arrivals area, another in the entrance nearby and a third went upstairs into departures. these images showed one of the attacker inside the airport and another just in a quilted jacket in the middle of summer, which would have aroused suspicion. charlie: if followed the announcement on monday that turkey and israel had resumed diplomatic relations. this after turkey and russia -- president obama had remarks in ottawa earlier today. president obama: we know that this is part of our broader, shared by against terrorist networks and we will continue to
work closely with turkey to root them out. in the meantime, we will do what is necessary to protect our people. i am confident that we can and we will defeat those the offer only to and distraction -- death and destruction, and we will remember that we are stronger when we come together and work toward a better world together. charlie: ian bremmer is the founding member of the -- group. and steven cook it will be -- and is given cook on the counsel for foreign relations. we begin with ian bremmer at the table. tell us about turkey. a place we both know well. ian: it was a tough year for them. i was with the deputy prime minister yesterday in china. and he was feeling pretty good, literally hours before the attacks and finally they had made progress, they got -- to apologize to the russians. they felt like that would move on getting the economic relationship back on track,
normalization with israel, he felt like a deal with cyprus was coming soon. it was the best day they had had in years. if you are -- right now, of all of the economies, you are probably in the most geopolitically challenging position. charlie: because? ian: because you have the syrian war, which is not ending. ian: because you have the syrian you have a kurdish crisis inside your country, as well as increasingly moving toward independence in -- and syria and iraq have the potential to tear your country apart. and you have challenges militarily, with the greeks, the russian relationship continues to be challenging, hopefully that will improve. and everywhere you look around,
you have 2.5 million refugees sitting in turkey and that you are paying for. one reason may have a bigger issue with terrorism, lots of freedom fighters coming from syria and iraq, this is a which's -- witch's brew and if you are -- you are not going to have an easy time. ian: they launched strikes against isis, 10 of them in syria. i have spoken to a number of senior washington officials about them, do you think right now, who is working more closely with the americans in the fight on syria -- the turks or the russians? to a person, they say russia. ian: i had a conversation -- charlie: i had a conversation with joe biden on syria. joe biden: vladimir putin is trying to get out of syria. it is costing him billions of dollars. the rest of the world sees that they are not capable.
he has a great problem in ukraine and europe, his economy is in almost a freefall, so this is a guy that is not winning anything. charlie: but he is a player in the world. joe biden: he is a player in the sense that he is engaged in practically him as a practical matter, supporting a dictator who is killing tens of thousands of his people. so, if you call that a player, influential in the world -- no.
charlie: a willingness on the part of russia to talk about a new constitution in syria, where a sawed -- assad is still there. ian: that is something they are willing to engage on with the americans and i think that america has had useful conversations. they talked about syria a couple of months ago, and they are still militarily engaging. including an aleppo against the u.s. and you saw -- who could become the secretary of defense under hillary clinton, saying that she would be willing to military engagement of the u.s. directly in syria to try to stop assad from some of these attacks. charlie: let's assume she sticks to her defenses and hillary clinton is president, what would they do? they would do what to stop it? ian: they said they would have american forces that would be providing direct support to rebels in trying to resist some of these assad attacks.
charlie: and what are they doing now? ian: in other words there is potential for the americans to be engaged directly and proxy war with the russians under that scenario. she was careful to talk about the desire to continue to engage with the russians through this process, but clearly a sense from clinton and her folks, her surrogates, that the willingness of the americans in syria should be greater than what we see presently. then you have the issue of the kurds themselves, moving toward independence. at some point it is clear that the kurdish regional government in iraq, the kurds in syria, are moving toward not just a tonic me but their own -- autonomy, but their own states. it clearly believes over into kurdish aspirations in turkey, as well. charlie: i raised that question with the vice president. it is what he said. joe biden: that is the only way, to have a capital called baghdad, with control over the borders and foreign policy.
but each of the regions, which is the sunni region, the kurdish-sunni region, and the shia region, in fact that, each of them should have the same kind of autonomy that california has. so do have a national army, like our national guard commitment cents -- national guard, makes sense. charlie: is that a future look at iraq? ian: no question. it is hard for me to imagine that the central iraqi government will be able to assert authority over sovereign borders the way they exist right now. i will bring a broader point on this. my firm, the eurasia group, we probably have spent 90% of our time talking about states as credible actors in determining things down the ground.
i think today that presented is more like 80%, in the next five years, 50%. charlie: so non-state actors? ian: some of them are businesses, some of them are religious leaders, people like this on a, people are like -- are terrorists organizations. when you have states that have nominal governments, but cannot provide the legitimacy that is required to effectively govern citizens, then it is not a complete vacuum, there are other actors that matter. it is happening all over the world, but much more quickly and much more germanic implications across the middle east. charlie: what about china? ian: it is a great deal of friendship on one hand, on the other and, they do not talk about brexit at all. it is interesting to see how the chinese think about themselves as an economic and commercial power.
everybody in the world has something to say about this. and vladimir putin and the leader of china do not. charlie: he has spoken about it, but not in china. ian: yes and vladimir putin has been well disposed with the brits going their own way. and having more influence over individual countries. charlie: and he hopes for a week or nato -- weaker nato. ian: yes. and in terms of weakening sanctions. charlie: harder than the germans? ian: roughly about the same, for different reasons. in the case of the russians, the brits, you have a lot of immigration.
and the assassination, things like that. in the case of germany, there is rule of law. it was a big part of it. ukraine was a bigger part of it. charlie: speaking of the brexit though, there are always and the assassination, things like that. suggestions they may not be alone in wanting to exit the european union. there is talk in france, obviously the netherlands, and in other places where there is unhappiness about globalization and there are populist politicians wanting to take advantage of the mood. ian: the first point is the orientation in the media about this has been about these nasty populists that want to get rid of europe. but we also need to recognize that europe has not been governing effectively, ever since the financial crisis. when we talk about europe, we talk about kicking the can, going from crisis to crisis and we come out with outcomes that do not fix anything. if the brits were going to stay
in, it would be staying in a union that was becoming more and perfect by the day -- imperfect by the day. a longer-term resolution on greece where there would have been sustainable debt situation for them and they could've gotten out of it. none of the big crises that have been hit have actually been resolved, they have been pushed aside or not even half measure. and while that was going on, you have a more significant problem, in each of the countries the social contract is falling away. and large numbers, increasingly large numbers of the populations are saying, we do not trust any of these establishment leaders, we do not trust europe. or brussels. charlie: they do not trust globalization.
ian: they do not trust the identity that europe was meant to espouse and we do not trust -- so we want something other. charlie: is it a failure? ian: i think a couple of the things that europe was meant to a conflict as failed. the creation of a set of common values that would hold true across europe in terms of governance, things like rule of law, liberal democracy, a sense of supranational identity where people would believe themselves to be european and it would be meaningful. i think that has failed. we cannot look at a country like poland or hungary, his government's -- whose governments openly admire big aspects of russian political governance or chinese state capitalism, and say, within the european union, and say that you are functioning. originally, europe was not to be economically together, it was meant to be political so you never went to war again. charlie: do you think that state
capitalism in china is a growing role model? ian: i would not call it a role model. when i was in china one of the biggest things i did was have a panel with the runner of the and frustration -- the bank, and the trillion dollars they are planning to spend across the region and more broadly on infrastructure. they are highly aware that they are building institutions, spending money come outside the borders. europeans are not. the data brexit was announced, i was on the 65th floor of my hotel and watching massive towers built, floor by floor, 24-7. charlie: they have a huge overcapacity at home? ian: they do and that is why they are spending on infrastructure rather than creating new markets. the chinese, the ones who that has not dropped -- shoe that has not dropped since 2008 has been
china. we had the u.s. financial crisis, we are in the throes of this -- charlie: the issue that has -- shoe has not dropped? ian: everyone has been talking about their instability and so far, we have not had these problems in china. charlie: but there was a downsizing. that perhaps lasted -- ian: they say 6.7%, the reality is lower. but when you are in china, patriotism is high, there is consolidated power and it is not about like the problems we are experiencing in the u.s. and europe, yet i came away from the trip for the first time in many years with a little bit of trepidation. charlie: trepidation about? ian: the ceos i was talking to, they were carrying the party line, the government line more consistently than they were before.
it implies insecurity. charlie: and what has changed? ian: the growth rate is going down and they are concerned about the global market environment. europe falling apart is good for the russian perspective, not china. if you are russia, your role in the world is defense -- and in china it is economic, so you want a more robust marketplace. china wants a strong europe. they do not want to europe to challenge them, but the europeans are not challenging them. they are able to have deals with china -- germany and -- charlie: they can level the playing field? ian: i would say in some areas where they know that they need the help, so the stimulus that you see in china today is
overwhelmingly toward the consumer. if you are talking about health care, talking about building out the ability to provide better pensions to people, anything that will support growing middle class consumption, hotels, those american companies going to china are doing incredibly well and they have great opportunities. where i see places that the chinese feel they are strategic centers, particularly the information technology, broadly defined, big data, the cloud, surveillance and also the ability to determine who sees what and who buys what, that is an area that is becoming harder for the europeans, american, and japanese to function as equals in china. it is becoming more difficult. charlie: can you imagine circumstances in which there is a right wing populist uprising takeover, as in france? can you imagine? ian: not in the last -- next
election. right now -- is in front. in the second round environment where the other votes turn to whoever the remaining centralist candidate is, i think it is clear that lapinne. loses. i am worried about a referendum not in france, but in the netherlands. any of these places that has 1, 1 more headline for people to focus on because you do not want a knock on effect. in the netherlands, you have a freedom party out in front and to have elections coming up in a year. and while he is unlikely to win, he will likely be the king maker, so whoever wants to govern will need him in the coalition. and his negotiating stance will be, i want a referendum. there is a good chance that the netherlands get a referendum. if we see mr. rensy in italy, if
he fails in his extraordinarily important referendum on constitutional political reform. charlie: and what happened in rome. ian: yes, it took over. big local governments in italy not very important, but they are. he handled it with optimism, like he always does. he is a foreign time. -- florintine. but are they going to be able to, if they do not get the win in october and the polls right now are about 50-50, then he will be out and the five-star movement by 2018 could be governing and they want a referendum and to be out on the euro. now the european union, the euro. in austria, there could be a referendum. there are growing movement in every one of these countries and while i do not think that you will see wins for these
right-wing movements in the main european governments, at least not most of them, i think it will affect the politics. the main thing this means is negotiations with the brits will be sharp. they have to be. charlie: so, what do you think the admonishment of ongoing merkel -- angela merkel will be. ian: she is the grown up in the room. she has the least to worry about domestically, even though her popularity is down. charlie: because of migration. ian: absolutely. but wolfgang scheuble is taking a tougher stance on the brits. she does have to worry about the populist plank.
but it is less about that. if we could have a negotiation between a unified and sensible british government and angela merkel we could end up with a norway style agreement where the brits have access to a common market, where they get rid of the promise to open borders to immigrants and the markets are sensible and we take a breath and say we dodged a bullet. but if we look at the way that they can build negotiations from -- they have handled negotiations from the past years, any crisis they had, the idea that this europe, with this u.k., is going to have a non-acrimonious negotiation that will end in something sensible, is not a bit you want to make -- bet you want to make. charlie: will boris johnson be the next prime minister? ian: it is not a slamdunk. johnson has not looked good since winning brexit. he has been defensive, he said i
do not think immigration is what people were actually voting for. it is like he was chasing the car and then he got it and now what do you do? i think there is a decent chance that we get somebody else, the secretary, whom most of the brits in the tory party are talking about. they call her, great britain's merkel. would you would think would not be attractive, but it is meant as a compliment and would certainly allow something that could bring the conservative party more closer together. charlie: there is also this question when you go to china, do they ask you about donald trump? ian: everybody does. charlie: what did they ask? ian: the chinese -- interestingly, everywhere you go, well not in russia because in russia, vladimir putin likes
donald trump, and the russians would welcome it, but everyone else you talk to thanks that donald trump would be a disaster -- thinks that donald trump would be a disaster. charlie: the chinese do? ian: a year ago, when i was talking to the leadership, they would say consistently they do not want hillary. she was considered a hawk and -- charlie: they do not like her because she is considered a hot -- a hawk? ian: she was the architect for more american military in the region. charlie: moore the president than her. ian: you look at campbell and you look at hillary and they think a lot of it was them. and certainly, she was talking about state capitalism and the model. barack obama never brought that up as president, not once.
and you talk to the chinese now, they say, we want hillary. and it is a good thing. the thing that is interesting is, the chinese, as the world is becoming more unstable, they are becoming more of a status quo power. they sure want the south china sea in their direction and they will push against the new government in hong kong, but globally they want a strong europe, they want a strong u.s., they do not want anybody rocking the boat. ♪
♪ charlie: i want to go to turkey, richard engels is there. richard, tell me what we know at this moment about who did what and where they are in the investigation. richard: i think at this point we know mostly how they did what they did. not necessarily who. the position among government officials is that this was in isis attack and it was a coordinated attack, with the first militant, arriving according to the prime minister of turkey, in two taxicabs. three militants got out, they were dressed in civilian clothes. then they opened fire at a security checkpoint. one of the checkpoints you need to cross to get into the terminal.
one of the suicide bombers detonated at curbside. the explosion created panic, confusion and allowed the other two attackers to go into the terminal itself. one of the attackers then lou up by the arrival -- blew up by the arrival station, where people wait. the other attacker was on foot and got upstairs, got not far from the business lounge by the departures, and he was shot actually by police and blew up his device and by then people have been cleared away. quite a sophisticated assault, which is one big reason that isis was responsible. so far, the turkish government has not released any names, the specifics of the investigation. charlie: why didn't isis take credit for this? why would it not be in their interest to take credit?
richard: isis very rarely claims credit for any of the violence it carries out in turkey, primarily because turkey is an important homebase for isis. it is an important staging ground, the airport that was attacked is the main gateway for them to the world. so isis, when they did attack in turkey in the past, it was to send a message to the turkish government -- do not upset things, do not rock the boat. isis can create tremendous problems for turkey, if turkey decides to go after it. and turkey has really stepped up its campaign against isis, tightening controls at the border, making it much more difficult for isis members to flow in and out of syria, and i think they are trying to tell turkey, unless the pressure stops, they will burn the country down. government -- do not upset things, do not rock the boat.
charlie: what will turkey do? richard: i think turkey is already -- has already made it to bed, they -- its bed, they will go after isis and i think after this attack them with a will go after them much harder. you have already seen the response so far, the airport is open again, within hours of the attack. even as crews were in there cleaning up the glass, cleaning up the bullet holes in the walls, replacing panels, people were walking through with the bags and luggage around the construction crews, around investigators. it was a very bizarre scene, but one that is deliberate by the turkish government, saying we will not let isis shut the country down and shut down this critical transportation hub.
charlie: what does this do for erdogan? richard: there is frustration ;already gone because there are fights on so many fronts. a fight with the kurds, a fight with isis, which many people believe that the government was partially responsible for creating, that the policies allowed isis to flourish here before the country started to crack down. that he was not turning just a blind eye to isis, but that he was allowing extremist to function here, knowing that they would go into syria and fight against an objective that he wanted. and now there is a sense that his chickens are coming home to roost. he allowed them to set up a base, now he is going after the group and they are too entrenched to uproot. and there is intelligence that is important to understand.
about two weeks ago, we reported on the embassy night eileen is, that there had -- nbc nightly news, that there had been intelligence, that isis had staged 35 -- more than 35 fighters from syria into turkey to carry out attacks during the month of ramadan. and i was told that this attack was highly likely to be related to that deployment of isis fighters to carry out attacks on ramadan. and the biggest concern is ramadan is not over and if they did in fact move and mobilize 35 attackers, a large number, into syria, presuming three of them are now dead, what will happen to the rest? are they planning to do more attacks in the final days of the muslim holy month? charlie: is this a new strategy by isis as they lose ground, lose part of the caliphate, as the work continues in syria.
that this is setting up a second front? richard: i think isis is recognizing that it is getting much more propaganda value in its external attacks than it ever gets in the internal attacks. if you look at cost-benefit analysis, if you are going to send a group of suicide bombers to attack an assad checkpoint or a kurdish control, nobody will notice it really. maybe a youtube video could be generated that barely get attention, but if they are able to carry out an attack in paris, brussels or istanbul, the world takes notice. and as they lose ground at home, those attacks become important. charlie: also joining us, steven cook. what would you add to it richard
said, or what would you ask richard? steve: it is important to understand this is a pattern and turkey is being targeted now, it is at least the 11th attack in turkey since last june. the 6th that can be potentially linked to isis and this will be a problem that turkey will have for some time. some of it is their own making, as richard pointed out. there -- their turning a blind eye against these groups in syria, and some of it has to do with domestic politics, the differences between turkish nationalism and kurdish nationalism has exploded in turkey and there is a war going on in southeastern turkey. and there is an offshoot called the freedom falcons, also claiming responsibility for two horrific bombings earlier this year. this is a country, a stable and prosperous place, a nato ally, but all this and is unstable and it is going to be engaged in a three front war. charlie: what is the most
important question you are in search of tonight, richard? richard: i think we want to know, i want to know, where are the other bombers that were reportedly the floyd from -- deployed from syria? the question i had initially when i heard the report and it hit me quite hard, about two weeks ago, did they come to turkey to carry out attacks in turkey, or were they sent from syria to carry out attacks in other parts of the world? this is also the isis gateway to the rest of the world. ramadan has about another week to go and we have already seen
orlando carried out during ramadan, we saw the very personal savage, murder in france, carried out by an isis inspired militant, we thought this attack -- see this attack and i wonder about the other militants who may have been orlando carried out during deployed in turkey or are carrying out attacks abroad. steve: they are fighting on so many fronts and my question would be, it this attack -- is this attack going to lead to a turning point for them to work more closely with the americans and europeans? we saw it with the israelis, they were taking massive hits when tourism disappeared. and now they have a terrorist hit.
if you're going to fight isis anymore seriously, will he be working closely with americans? will they implement a deal between themselves and the germans, the eu, on refugees, visas, so far the indications have been very negative. will this attack be enough to push them away from all of the if you're going to fight isis will swallow that and i will be ego and say, you know what, i with these guys. or will he began -- will he dig in? steve: i think he has already given indication that he is trying to change policies. he reconciled with israel, burying the hatchet. it was a long foreign between -- thorn between israeli and a turkish relations. richard: he is burying the hatchet with putin.
russia, even despite the attack, lifted the recommendation that russian citizens do not come to turkey for holiday. will he then improve relations with the u.s. and go after isis? i think he probably will and he already has been going after him -- them. but the real problem is, are they so deep rooted in the country that by going after them he finds that this country or parts of the country will be -- once you are the main gateway, it is very hard to get rid of the problem after it is entrenched. charlie: stephen? steve: i agree. let me add another dimension. he certainly has demonstrated a pragmatic streak, at least this week.
but that is israel, that is russia, we are talking about isis, isis at home, which is a threat, but in order to accommodate himself to american policy, he must climb down from his declaration that the united states and allies must do something about it, and he must accommodate himself to work with syrian kurds, or the y fiji -- ypg. they have been effective ally against isis, but it is regarded to be in turkey, and arm of the -- an arm of the terrorist organization that the turks have been fighting. can they climb down from that? it will be very difficult in their political environment. richard: i was saying that a lot of people have been tempted to ride this tiger in the past, using the passion, discipline, focus, violence of islamic militant groups to achieve their
objectives and it never attends to work -- tends to work. they were used in egypt to try to establish a base and make themselves look different and the militants went around and assassinated him. they used them in pakistan with the help of the u.s. and saudi arabia to topple or push the soviets out of afghanistan. it ultimately led to 9/11. they used militants to fight against the president and he like all of the others before him, has been unsuccessful in trying to ride this. charlie: thank you for joining us. we continue with ian and steven. stephen, what is the next step in where goes turkey now? steve: i think there is no question that the turks will
ramp up operations against the islamic state, if that is who they believe is responsible. as richard pointed out, over the last six months, they have been directly targeting the islamic state, they have picked up since -- sympathizers. and i think the turks will continue their operations against the pkk. everything the turks are going to do our things they have already been doing. they may have been doing them and evidently, but -- and evidently, but there is no real assurance that they can arrest this deterioration in their security. as richard pointed out, there is an extremist infrastructure that has grown up at the border. there is well-developed military forces in the form of the pkk that is keeping the military
busy. i am afraid that no matter what steps they take, there will be more bloodletting in the streets. ian: this is precisely why they had to back down against the russians and israelis. it took him seven months on russia. this is not something that he wanted to do, but he felt vulnerable and he cut a deal. the question is, is the challenge too great? he also has a domestic problem, he just lost his prime minister, ahmet davutoglu. he could not have it -- hack it anymore, because the president was maniacal in saying he was going to make himself the next -- in turkey. and the fight he has internally, and anybody against him and his party, that means he has a much weaker crew around him. charlie: -- anybody who is opposed to him?
ian: yes, anybody remotely in society or an intellectual who has decided, they are a mortal enemy. he has dug his own grave from a domestic perspective, so if it was just the international front and he had a strong group around him, he would have a decent shot. but he is really fighting a war internally to change the system, because this is a guy, let's keep in mind, if he is not able to get greater powers for himself and immunity, he will end up either in exile or a box. it is hard to see how he will have a democratic transition to the next person. he has far too many enemies. it is really difficult to know. the military is reasonably supportive of him right now. ian: even -- charlie: even though they put him on trial? ian: yes.
they do not want a war in syria. and heard a gone -- erdogan has not been able to do that. otherwise he would have a buffer zone on syria. charlie: how do you see the situation today in terms of the last six months of the obama administration? steve: i do not think there'll be much change. we are going into the last months of the obama administration and the president has made his decision. i think the turkish effort to reconcile with the russians presents -- when it comes to syria. the fact that the turkish president had to climb down on the russians, raises the question that he would have to come down on -- and a diplomatic opening could emerge. the fact of the matter is, you have isis and other extremist groups, the other parts of the opposition, and the regime that are all determined to fight this. so that regardless of what kind of leverage that the russians have now the turks have reconciled, ultimately the political actors are on the
ground. isis and other extremists, the guard corps and others, they want to protect equities in syria. so it strikes me that as much as the change in turkey's posture and the prospect that they will be much more directly involved in the anti-isis coalition are good things, but it may not make a significant difference and what is happening in syria. charlie: intriguing possibilities. ian: i also go back to what stephen said, the turks are most concerned about the role of the kurds inside their society and in syria and iraq, those trends are undermining the turkish stability over the long term and i have a hard time seeing them move enough, to actually align with the united states on the kurdish issue.
can they recognize that isis is more of a threat? yeah, they might be able to do that. but it is a different story from saying they are ok with the united states providing arms with those they consider to be terrorists. i cannot see the americans and turks getting on the same page in syria anytime soon. steve: and just to underline what was said, what happens here is a nightmare scenario for the turks. the united states, a major ally, the western power, has essentially midwifed a terrorist state on the border. in this western kurdistan. it is a state in the making that
is aligned with the pkk. for the turks it is a nightmare scenario and is something may have been worried about forever. it places the integrity of their country in jeopardy. so certainly, moving the turks in the direction of anti-isis coalition and a more direct way is positive, but when push comes to shove, really would get the turks' attention is kurdish nationalism. charlie: thank you. great to have you here. and my thanks again to richard engel and my friend ian bremmer. we will be right back. ♪
♪ charlie: we turn from terrorism and international politics to a story of courage, toughness and leadership. pat summitt them in the winningest coach in history, died. she was 64 years old. her death came five years after she was diagnosed with alzheimer's disease. she one 1098 games while leading the lady volunteers to eight national titles. her teams reached the final four 22 times and made an unprecedented 31 consecutive appearances in the ncaa tournament. her influence extended be on the basketball court.
all of her players graduated from the university of tennessee. tamika catchings said, we learned what it takes to be a leader, a great woman, a great lady, what it takes to have character, what it takes to have boys. pat summitt was a guest from -- in 1998. here is a part of that conversation. charlie: do you think that people like you are made or born? guest: i think i am a product of my environment. i think i am this way from my childhood. i do not particularly like it at the time, i thought that all my friends had it made. then my within -- then, within that system, i created an incredible work ethic and a competitiveness.
i played pickup with my brothers and early on i could not stand to lose. i could not. i said, we will play tonight after we finish chores. charlie: and i will win. guest: i am going to sleep a winner tonight. i think that is just my life. charlie: my philosophy. that is what i believe in. guest: it is. charlie: and you just got it from growing up like that and getting to compete. it is obviously in the genes, some of it. guest: probably some of it. my father motivated me a lot by challenging me and saying, you are going to be an olympian, after my acl injury. charlie: he said, you are going to be in a lengthy and -- olympian? guest: yes, and there were days i thought, this is my father, i cannot let my family down.
charlie: this is the edge right here. have you ever gone over, pushed too hard, felt like, i better go back because -- guest: because i might snap? [laughter] charlie: or be, you worry? you do not worry about that? guest: there were sometimes i thought i was too tough on kids and i would beat myself up about that. and i would worry about that. and maybe i would drop them a note, but in their locker and reassure them i was doing it for their benefit, hang in there. the tough times will not last and the tough people will last. but me, pushing hard, no. i think there was a time that i let losses eat at me and it was unhealthy. i could not eat, i was not
sleeping, and i was miserable. charlie: what is the cure for that? winning? guest: to be realistic. you do not win every time. i used to think that i could control everything that would happen and it is not true. charlie: what can't you control? guest: sometimes you cannot control what goes through the minds of an 18-year-old, you cannot control how the opposition performs, you do not have total control. charlie: what is here that is important for all of us to know about your experience? guest: the reason i wanted to write this kind of look -- book, we had really tried at tennessee to come up with a system.
i think you need a system whether it is in your family or the workplace. it is really just basic, developing the basic life skills. and allowing individuals to understand how they can be successful individually and with a team. because that is what we do, we develop individual players and people, yet we tried to incorporate -- try to incorporate a life concept. you have to figure out how to get along with people, but first you must understand yourself and have the self-discipline and assume responsibility and no, i am accountable for me. and then when i am working in a corporation or living in a family or on a team, then i have responsibilities for the team. i have a role. charlie: pat summitt dead at 64. thank you for joining us. ♪
mark: i am mark crumpton. you're watching "bloomberg west." the pentagon announced today that transgender people will be allowed to serve openly in the u.s. military. >> our mission is to serve this country and we don't want barriers on related to a person's qualification to serve preventing us from recruiting or retaining a soldier, sailor, airman or marine who can best accomplish the mission. mark: the house armed services commission mac thornberry accused the obama administration for prioritizing politics over policy. turkey has made more than a dozen with connection with this week's deadly triple suicide bombing at instant bowls airport. -- istanbul's airports.