tv Fareed Zakaria GPS CNN January 22, 2017 10:00am-11:01am PST
this is gps, global public square. welcome to all of you in the united states and around the world. i'm fareed zakaria coming to you live from new york. >> i donald john trump. >> today on the show the trump inauguration and four years to come. what the new president said on friday about how he sees the world. >> it's going to be only america first. >> what his cabinet nominees tell us about how he will deal with that world. we have a great panel to tackle it all. richard haass, annmarie slaughter, william cohen and michael duran.
and how can we understand the ideology of donald trump? a new journal has been launched to dissect exactly that. does trumpism have a philosophy and what is it? i'll talk to the magazine's editor. china, washington's new foe, and russia, america's closest buddy? how will president trump order decades of precedent in these two critical relationships? we'll discuss it all. first here's my take. on friday we heard something unusual, even unprecedented in american history. we heard the newly sworn in president of the united states deliver an inaugural address that was an exercise in undiluted pessimism. his description of the country he now leads is vivid. american carnage. it could be the title of a gangster movie.
trump's advisers like to compare him with jackson. jackson's first inaugural address was low in comparison. there's no precedent no matter how grim the reality who has chosen to begin his term in office in dark tones of despair. in the midst of the great depression franklin roosevelt told the nation they had nothing to fear but fear itself. with a horrific civil war still in its last throes, lincoln said let us strive onto bind up the nation's wounds. with unemployment at 4.7% and crime rates down to a 20% low, donald trump spoke of american carnage. many of trump's supporters would argue this is appropriate. america is in dire straits. it has its problem but if you have any sense of history, you could come to the opposite conclusion.
america today is the world's largest and most dynamic economy. the economy has grown steadily although slowly although steadily. unemployment has plunged. the deficit is at a reasonable 40-year average. finally, after years and years of stagnation, the wages of average americans, median income has begun to rise. over a longer time frame, crime and violent crime are down substantially, though there was a small uptick recently, homicide rates in the u.s. are lower than they have been since the early 1960s. our air and water is cleaner than in decades. discrimination has declined. women and minors have more opportunities to work in advance than ever before. since 9/11, the united states has had no major terrorist attack on its soil. the number of americans who have been killed by international
terrorists since that date is under 100. of course, it's not just trump. many americans believe that the country is headed in the wrong direction and they voice some of this doom and gloom. why is that if the actual facts do not support such a grim picture. there are probably many explanations. surely one of them might be that for many, many years now there has been a sustained campaign of out right negativism about the united states. americans have been told by politicians, pundits and media organizations that their country was going to hell, destroyed by immigration, trade, crime, terrorism, multiculturalism and more. on friday, they were told this again by their president in his inaugural address. is it any wonder they believe it? let's get started. what does america first look
like? let's get straight to look at this new era? joining me is william cohen. former republican senator who also served as secretary of defense in the clinton administration. he now heads the cohen group. here in new york are richard haass and ann marie slaughter, planning in the state department, richard served under george w. bush and runs the council on foreign relations, the author of "a world in disarray." anne-marie served under president obama and leads the think tank new america. michael doran is here as well. haefs senior director and now senior fellow at the hudson institute. for anyone keeping score, that's three republicans out of four on this panel. anne-marie, i'm going to give you the first word. trump in an america first speech by his own definition began by thanking the people of the
world. he does see this as something global, right? >> he does. he was announcing a global nationalist movement that the parties in europe, the right wing parties will be meeting tomorrow to talk about this new support. he sees this as a resurgence of nationalism against globalism. against globalization, the global elite and he was very much putting america in that context saying america will pursue its national interest and we expect other nations to pursue their national interest and this is a global movement. >> what does an america first strategy do to the kind of world in disarray that you describe very effectively in your new book? >> alas, it adds to it. when you start talking about america first, it sends the signal that we're going to have a very narrow calculation of our self-interest and others have to
do the same thing. one of two things will happen. either weaker states will appease. some of them more powerful neighbors. we may see a little bit of that in asia towards china or just as dangerous, i think the world is on the verge of becoming something of a self-help society. people depending on the united states will say hold it. against the backdrop of all the uncertainty of the last eight years and now we have this new president who is talking about a narrow definition of america's role in the world, they will say they can't count on us. i wouldn't be shocked if he see more countries strike independent deals and think about developing their own nuclear weapons program because they can't be as confident as american security guarantees. >> he said two simple rules by american and hire american. if every country would drop that rule, who would buy american exports.
bill cohen, you served as a republican senator in the reagan era, does this strike you as a sharp break from republicanism and rag annism? >> i think it's a total break from reaganism. president reagan talked about open trade and free trade and engaging the world, not retreating from it. it just returned from saudi arabia and i found some of the leadership was enthusiastic about mr. trump, president trump because they want him and believe he'll take a harder line toward iran and isis. on the other hand, they are apprehensive that he may have the u.s. embassy moved from tel aviv to jerusalem and find many of the street of the arab world taking action in protest. there's mixed reaction right now. my fear also is that we're picking enemies. we're drawing red lines. one around north korea. one around china but not one around russia. i think it's going to be quite a four years of disarray.
>> mike, how does this strike you? >> i think he's laying the basis for a redefinition of the west. i think it's going to lead to stability and prosperity. i don't see the basis for fear. he just returned the churchill bust to the white house. i think that's a sign of a certain kind of mixture of nationalism and globalism. i don't think we should see these as opposing views. he's going to have theresa may in washington at the end of the week. we'll have a new special relationship between britain and the united states based on this idea of economic nationalism and i think that will set the basis for a restructuring of the u.s. european relation but not a destruction of what exists. >> america first is his slogan. that's from the 1930s from the left from a group of people at yale law school who were about
keeping america out of wars. what he is saying is we will not fight other countries' wars. we will not come to their aid. it's a vision of america that was absolutely anti-nato. >> i don't think he looked at the history books for this. this is a very -- the slogan what it means to the people he's speaking to, the people in ohio, michigan and so forth is i'm going to put your interest above the interest of our global commitments. >> that means our allies. >> no. it means restructuring. >> richard? >> what's missing is a sense of how the united states has benefitted from our leadership in the world. it was all about cost, not about benefits. the return on investment to the united states of the last 75 years of global leadership is extraordinary. stability in big parts of the world including asia and europe. unbelievable prosperity in the united states.
the world is moved in directions. it's more open economically and more open politically. that's what's missing from this. it's such a dark image. you talked about the dark image of american economy and society. it's also a dark image of the world and it ought to be much more positive. >> bill, we have 30 seconds. do you think this kind of pessimism, how does the world react to it? you travel all the time. do they view it as an accurate picture? >> they are troubled by it because the american people have been the leaders of a liberal, globalized economy. now they're trouble saying you're on your own. you can no longer count on the united states and you must fend for yourself. if they have to fends for themselves they are unlikely want to join the united states when it comes to the united states wanting them to participate in any particular military action or diplomatic action. i think going on -- being on your own means exactly that.
i think it will lead to the destruction of the pillars of security we have erected over the last 50 years. >> we will be back with much more from my all-star panel. i'm going to ask about the strange things trump has done since the inaugural. in other words, just yesterday. that's why you drink ensure. with 9 grams of protein and 26 vitamins and minerals. for the strength and energy to get back to doing... ...what you love. ensure. always be you.
moms know their kids need love, encouragement and milk. with 8 grams of natural protein, and 8 other nutrients to provide balanced nutrition. moms know kids grow strong when they milk life. (becky) i've seen such a change provin einstein sinceition. he started eating beneful. the number one ingredient in it is beef. (einstein) the beef is fantastic! (becky) he's a very active dog. he never stops moving.
he has enough energy to believe that he can jump high enough to catch a bird. it has real beef, grains, vegetables, and he loves it. well, we were coming for an interview... so he wanted to wear his tie. (einstein) it's my power tie. it gives me power. (vo) try beneful originals with beef. with real beef as the number one ingredient. healthful. flavorful. beneful.
we're back with mike doran, richard haass, anne-marie slaughter and william cohen. i want to start with a split screen image of two inaugurals, obama's and trump. the president's press secretary said they had the largest inaugural in history. it was -- the press secretary said it was much larger than obama's. i ask you to look at the two photographs.
the reason i bring this up is the word of the president of the united states, the word coming out of the official press white house secretary is important. i recall a story that was told about the cuban missile crisis. president kennedy's envoy goes and tells them the russians have put missiles in cuba and gives them an envelope and said here are the aerial photographs to prove it. the president of france said i don't need to see the photographs. if the president of the united states tells me this, i assume it's true. isn't there something to be said for being absolutely scrupulous about voracity and accuracy when you're speaking from the podium of the white house? >> absolutely. on every call with president nixon. his attorney general said watch what we do and not what we say. words have a kinetic power all
of their own. they can produce a reaction immediately in a world of nano technology and instant information. being careful what you say and being truthful in what you say is critical to maintaining stability and peace in many parts of the world. your word is your bond. if you don't tell the truth, you can't slip back in today's world into an orwellian world, in which if you tell a lie long enough, it becomes the truth. i don't think that can happen or should happen in this world. >> mike, you are much more sympathetic toward trump. you also have a active twitter account. you're a good tweeter. what do you make of this? should there be different rules? are we in a different world where certain amount of
exaggeration, bravado is okay? what am i missing? >> there was a lot of this in the obama presidency. if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. the israeli officials have told me about americans coming while we were secretly negotiating with iran and while they knew and american officials came and told them that wasn't happening. voracity is in the eye of the beholder. i think the most important thing is here -- >> you really believe that? everybody does this the same? >> the issue is what are we talking about. the key line is the one that selena zito wrote during the campaign. trump's detractors take him literally and not seriously and supporters take him seriously but not literally. look at the picks that he's made for foreign policy. his cabinet picks are absolute mainstream republicans. they would be comfortable in any administration.
as secretary cohen said, look at what he does, not at what he says. i think those picks mattis, tillerson, pompeo, they send a message of strength and stability to the world. that's the most important thing. the other point i make, the one that secretary cohen alluded to, he said the saudis realize they will get serious with the iranians. we see a passivity. i think our allies see that america is back. that will have a stabilizing effect on the world. >> what do you make of the cia visit. i have to confess, one of the things that upsets me is this constant -- he's repeated it many times -- we should have taken iraq's oil. he's not a candidate now. you kind of have to take this seriously. you can't just say, well, it doesn't matter.
i don't know what it means to not take it literally but to take iraq's oil would be an act of colonial theft and exploitation that the united states has not done -- any country has done in 70 years. it would be illegal and immoral, and it would mean a permanent occupation of iraq. >> it would mean all those things. the united states would be bogged down against a national armed resistance. wars of conquest is not what this country is about. we fought this wars, whether you agreed with them or not, but for principle. i disagree with what michael said. what you say matters. you can't just speak to one audience. the president of the united states is not a candidate. the president of the united states is speaking to the entire world. you have to broadcast, not narrowcast. it has to been taken literally because it will be heard literally around the world. least got a pretty big inbox. i've written this book about a world on disarray. he has a lot on his plate. he doesn't need to be going around the world picking fights on the size of the crowd on the mall. he has plenty to worry about
including his relationship with the intelligence community. i thought yesterday was an missed opportunity, to heel that break. he could have addressed what his relationship will be. >> you have 90 seconds. you told me before you disagreed with my take. tell me why. >> i think you're looking at averages and certainly on average, the united states is doing much better in many ways. i think trump has tapped into the fact that large groups of americans are not seeing any material improvement in their standards of living or their prospect or hopes or dreams even as others are succeeding far better and if you miss that, it's not because the media is telling you a bad picture of the united states, it's they're reality is so far removed from the elite reality or city reality that they want somebody who is actually speaking to them.
>> of course, the question becomes is are his policies going to improve them? >> that's a very different story. i don't think so. >> we're going to leave it at that. richard haass, anne-marie slaughter, bill cohen, thank you very much so much. we'll be back to talk about the political philosophy of donald trump. what is it? we'll explain just that. companies in the country. after expanding our fiber network coast to coast. these are the places we call home. we are centurylink. we believe in the power of the digital world. the power to connect. and that's what drives us everyday.
i deto get my dna testedtry so i could find out more about my heritage. and i also found that i had a sister that i didn't know about because i'm adopted. that was me. it was really exciting to find myself in someone else. (vo) when you're on your phone 24/7, you probably think you need an unlimited plan. but actually, the majority of people pay for data they never use. that's right, two out of three people use less than five gigs. now verizon introduces the one plan that's right for you. switch, and for just $55 get five gigs on america's best network. that's tons of data at a cost that's less than an unlimited plan. and the best part, no surprise overages. finally, all the data you need, on the network you want. verizon.
donald trump's politics are not traditionally conservative and they're not traditionally liberal. what are they? something else altogether. something probably not seen for a while in america and a new journal has been launched to examine and chart this new trump philosophy. the journal will be called american affairs and julius krein is the editor as does katrina vanden heuvel. editor and publisher of "the naks" magazine. you have a developed ideology that coincide with some of the things he's been saying. presumably sometimes diverges. explain what your rationale was. >> that's correct. trump himself is certainly not an intellectual. i think he would repudiate it if you try to apply that to him.
that said, i think there are a few core concepts, his opposition to trade -- free trade dogma, restrictive immigration policies, could for more interest-based foreign policy that constitute a clear direction he's trying to go. >> you came at this at because during the republican primary, you're a financial analyst and you started to write a blog pointing out something that was interesting as well, that trump was alone among 17 candidates in diverging, disagreeing and dissented from reaganism. sort of free trades, free markets, deregulations as the be all and end all of american philosophy. >> it is interesting to point out that reagan took a number of enforcement measures against free trade.
i think trump is unique is that he won the presidency not only by opposing the democratic party but repudiating the dogma of his own party. that presents a unique opportunity for a broader realignment in our politics that i've never seen in my lifetime and also some unique challenges in governing. >> how does this strike you? >> first of all, i congratulate julius for launching a new journal. i think it's too early in political historian would tell you it's too early to attach an ism to trump. there are some core concepts. on free trade. on foreign policy. what we forget is populism, which has a long american history, he's driving a reactionary populism but there's another populism which bernie sanders ran in the primaries
which is worthying about today. too often, the tectonic events of 2016, brexit and the election of donald trump are rightfully blamed on a failed neo liberal consensus and elites who have forgotten to listen to the american man and woman. the nation has challenged and championed people to think about a populist that's inclusive and not divisive that doesn't scapegoat as donald trump's does. i think that's important to remember. there's going to be a fight on inside both parties, republican and democratic. the ascendency of a populist wing inside the democratic party, it seems critical in the wake of trump's election that is the party will rebuild and revive. >> if trump ends up becoming the sort of populist, protectionist, nationalist candidate. it seems the politics is realigning around that open/closed dimension.
the people who were saying we want protection. trump embraced the idea in the inaugural address. protection is good. it will make us strong, secure. is that the core of it? >> i think we use these terms open and closed and they have certain moralistic connotations that make open sound better. the problem, you brought up scapegoating. who is the scapegoat in donald trump's rhetoric? i would argue it's not a minority group, not even foreigners, though he draws the sharp line. it's the bipartisan political elites that is the scapegoat. >> it's never banks or corporations. >> it is.
he's attacking carrier and ford from moving jobs away. things of that nature. >> it's tough to say it's not foreigners when the entire campaign is about muslims and mexicans. >> he's not blaming the mexicans. he's saying they're smart, but our political elite is not smart enough -- >> it's also too early to know what trump will achieve. that speech he gave the other day was full of promises. you have three branches of government. you have the white house with steve bannon and a reactionary populism. you a congress tethered to the heritage foundation, very supply side reaganist policies, and you have -- >> supreme court. >> you have a supreme court, but i think you have a tethering to 4 a republican party in congress that's very much traditional in its supply side tax sides and you have a cabinet. fareed, davos was up in arms
this year. epic fail for davos. this is a davos cabinet in many ways. it looks like a goldman sachs executive retreat. i think that is going to test whether trump at the end of the day can fulfill the promises to the working class and to those he talks of as forgotten men and women. i think that's the the challenge for the progressive community to speak to those people effectively without the scapegoating. >> is the test whether or not the economic policies work or is -- a lot of economic policies seem to be other than in trade, fairly traditional republican. tax cut, deregulation, get government out of the way, cut corporate taxes. >> well, i think the test for everything is whether it works. i agree with katrina that there's a dive vied between the white house and the republicans in congress. trump is going to have to be very nimble in building co-lags.
>> will he need to remake the republican party along his ideological lines? >> it's possible. there's a unique opportunity to do that. >> i think he's disruptive, but not transformational. i think hit will be a figure as the republican party and democratic party remake themselves to speak to the people of this time. >> we'll come back and check in. next, we'll dig in on the two biggest foreign policy challenges facing trump, russia and china. also talk about relations with each. we'll talk about them, back in a moment. esents "how to win at business." step one: point decisively with the arm of your glasses. abracadabra. the stage is yours. step two: choose la quinta. the only hotel where you can redeem loyalty points for a free night-instantly and win at business.
with real chicken as the number one ingredient. i just want to find a used car without getting ripped off. you could start your search at the all-new carfax.com that might help. show me the carfax. now the car you want and the history you need are easy to find. show me used trucks with one owner. pretty cool. [laughs] ah... ahem... show me the carfax. start your used car search and get free carfax reports at the all-new carfax.com.
russia was america's biggest enemy for decades then came a post-cold war. over three administrations tensions have grown reaching a boiling point over ukraine and syria. now american intelligence says russia was likely behind the dnc hack, and there are allegations, and just allegations, but turning into investigations about tieing between russia and donald trump and members of his team. meanwhile, trump and putin exchange kind words about each other. what does all this mean? joining me now, steven cohen, scholar of russian politics and history professor emeritus at princeton and nyu. and julia yoffe who was born in russia and written about it.
there's something that put together all the things that donald trump has said about foreign countries. they're all negative. the europeans are terrible because they don't pay their bills. the chinese are raping us, i think is the word he's used. mexico is terrible. all muslims. we know how he thinks about japan, also bad because it's been stealing our jobs. the one country he is always said nice things about, for years, is russia. what do you think explains that? >> i've always thought russia and america were quite similar. they both have this idea that they are unique, that they are special. they have a special destiny given to them by god. they both have 'em peer listic tendencies and russia is run by putin, who has this kind of adolescent idea of masculinity about him that appeals to somebody with an adolescent idea about masculinity, and he says nice thing about him and walks
through big gold doors. he's like an action hero leader and i think that appeals to donald trump. putin has talked about being the the last bastian of christiandom. >> there was this idea of russia as a third rome, rome had collapsed, business santian had collapsed. steve, do you think there's some kind of -- is it a personal affinity or do you think i'm making too much of it? striking to me that trump is really tough on foreigners and foreign countries but consistently been nice about putin and russia. >> i don't know what nice means. what he has not done is vilified putin. that's a sharp departure in the american context.
this is what i either think or hope. you decide. i hope that trump has been told that the relationship between the united states and russia today is exceedingly dangerous, including on a nuclear level. he's been told that a new day tant datante is necessary and it's in the republican tradition of eisenhower, nixon and reagan and that he trump, for the sake of american national security, should move in that direction. if that's the case, i don't know trump or anyone around him, my response would be simple. it's imperative for the sake of american national security. it's possible to do but it's going to be exceedingly hard politically, primarily in the united states but also in moscow. >> and, you have to look at what russia's been saying as all of this has been happening. russia sent clear signals that you're not going to get anything for lifting sanctions against
us. putin's spokesman said, you impose the sanctions, we're not going to bargain with you. you impose them, you lift them. you're not going to get anything from us. he said again yesterday symmetrical reduction of nuclear arms is not possible and unacceptable to russia. they have repeatedly signaled they're not going to bargain, all of these moves will have to be unilateral from trump's side. he also said putin isn't going to meet with trump for another couple of months at the earliest. he's already playing the senior partner, and it's unclear -- detant is great. it's very dangerous to have an additional relationship with russia for obvious reasons, but what kind of deal are you going to make and on what terms and what is the u.s. going to get out of it? >> steve, you talk about the importance of detante. i think everyone wants better relations.
>> i don't agree. i don't think everyone. >> what i'm wondering is, do you think it is a serious issue, or do you dispute the facts that almost -- many, many intelligence agencies and many independent observers believe that russia has interfered in elections in hungary, pole lapd, germany and in the united states. that it's using soft power, cyber power, asymmetrical warfare in a way. do you believe it's true and how should they respond? >> let me focus on the accusations that putin somehow interfered in the american election benefiting trump. i say this is a blood slander against trump, libelous -- zblit's not about trump. it's about putin. >> at the moment it's being discussed in terms of trump.
when various networks go on the air and newspapers saying trump is an agent of the kremlin, a puppet of the crekremlin. imagine john kennedy in 1962 trying to negotiate our way out of a nuclear crisis with khrushchev. and each day kennedy had been called the puppet of the kremlin. the only way he could prove he wasn't would be to go to nuclear war. we don't want a situation like that. until they from dues facts, i don't think we should be discussing it. to me it's bunk. >> the issue is not trump, it's putin. >> it's not coming out of nowhere -- people aren't going on the air and sticking their finger in the wind and saying we think he's an agent of putin. they're relying on intelligence assessments -- >> oh, please. let's talk about intelligence.
>> i want to be clear. i don't and this network has never reported, even reported on the contents of that dossier. only that the intelligence community briefed trump about it which is a fact. nobody has disputed. what i'm talking about is putin and russia's very successful cyber warfare. i'm wondering -- 4 >> are you talking about the hacking of the dnc? >> yes. >> in his last press conference, president obama said we don't know how the material got to wikileaks, which is part of the -- he said we don't know. we've been told by the cia, we did know. he didn't use the word hack. he used the word leak. nobody followed up on that. we don't know. >> two separate things that happen. first there has to be a hack and somebody has to take the material. >> no, no, no. >> you certainly can't do it in reverse. >> isn't this part of a pattern? this is not an isolated case.
>> this is a strategy they have been working on for a long time going back to 2007 when the internet in estonia was subject to attack from russian servers because estonia took down a monument to soviet soldiers. it was developed across the kind of so called mirror broad. the former soviet universe. it's slowly become more and more sophisticated. what's striking to me, four or five years ago i'm not sure that the russian government, that the kremlin knew what the dnc was. they have slowly developed these strategies in ukraine, in eastern europe and western europe and it's finally crossed the ocean to the u.s. what is interesting is this happened 25 years after the collapse of soviet union when the global agreement consensus was that liberal democracy was
the most moral, deliberate, effective way to rule populations. putin seemed to have reversed that and said no system of government is better than any other. we're no worse than you are. we're going to infiltrate your systems and get the outcome we want. >> accuses us of interfering. >> not incorrectly. >> your dissent is registered. steven cohen, julia, thank you both of you. next on gps, the other major power with which donald trump has complicated relations, china. will it be good or bad for america to start a trade war? maybe even a hot one. family's y eating vegetables thanks to our birds eye voila skillet meals. and they only take 15 minutes to make. ahh! birds eye voila so veggie good youthat's why you drink ensure. sidelined. with 9 grams of protein and 26 vitamins and minerals.
for the strength and energy to get back to doing... ...what you love. ensure. always be you. [vo] quickbooks introduces he teaches lessons to stanley... and that's kind of it right now. but rodney knew just what to do...he got quickbooks. it organizes all his accounts, so he knows where he stands in an instant. ahhh...that's a profit. which gave him the idea to spend a little cash on some brilliant marketing! ha, clever. wow, look at all these new students! way to grow, rodney! know where you stand instantly. visit quickbooks.com.
what will happen to u.s./china relations in the wake of threats, rhetoric and trump's phone call with taiwan's leader? joining me now are director for studies at the council on foreign relations and steven yates former deputy of security to vice president dick cheney. steve, let me ask you, the conventional wisdom certainly is that the one-china policy, which is, you know, to put it very simply basically says we'll punt on the issue of whether taiwan is a separate country. we're going to agree that both sides think that they are part of one country. we won't say whether taiwan is right or mainland china is right. that has preserved stability, peace, to let taiwan flourish and become a rich democracy, it's allowed china to flourish and we've had no trouble. that's the way to go and the
trump's phone call unsettles that. you disagree. explain. >> well, number one, i don't think that one-china is an american policy. if you travel around the country or talking to people in grassroots politics or just average society, the words "one-china" don't tell you what our policy is about. the nature of china is important than the number of chinas to most americans. not everyone agrees it's gone well. it's gone well for people who take notes in diplomatic meetings but we've had a missile crisis in the middle of the 1990s. we've had aggressive trade policies where at least in many americans' perceptions the chinese have had more of an advantage than the united states has. taiwan now is the last geography on the planet that has a liberal democracy but is isolated diplomat ekcally. usually it's because it's dictatorship, a horrible situation. we have these anomalies and we have a policy that was divined
40 to 50 years ago. the only part of the planet where america doesn't step back and recalibrate but this policy goes from administration to administration. i'm actually hopeful that we'll have a rethinking and maybe a rebranding of what we do. the broad parameters may not be that different after the review of it. but i think we have found that it's a new leader of the united states that won't be told which words to use. >> what do you say, liz? maybe we need to -- it's true taiwan is this flourishing democracy. isn't it kind of weird that we're not supposed to talk to them? >> i don't think it's that we're not supposed to talk to them and i think it's entirely fair that we take a look at all our policies with regard to china and taiwan and what hasn't worked and what may need to change. but i don't think tweeting out diplomacy is the way to go and to change fundamentally one of our governing principles. president trump needs to take a step back and remember that negotiating with china, dealing with china is not checkers but
chess, right, a three level game of chess where we have to deal with them on global affairs, regional affairs and bilaterally. before we say yes, let's revisit this and perhaps we'll trade off taiwan as a commodity for a better deal with china which i think steve and i agree would be a bad thing to do or on the other hand we're going to help taiwan declare its independence and recognize it diplomatically which is not at all clear that's what taiwan wants us to do for them, i think let's remember we have a broad sweep of issues that we have to work with china on and let's develop a strategy and not just a set of inflammatory tweets. >> i guess one of the things animating a lot of people in the united states ever since really kissinger and nixon, six, seven administrations ago is the idea that you want to integrate china into the system slowly and make sure they're not a spoiler because they're so big and particularly now the second largest economy in the world that there's this fear that what you'll have with the rise of
china is what we had when we had the rise of germany or the rise of japan. a great clash, perhaps military clash between the established power of the united states and the rising power. do you worry about that or do you feel like it's overdone and we should push them and come what may? >> we have to look at all possibilities and be concerned, but at the same time we're not the only party in a vote on this. this is a bit like the discussion of terrorism and muslimism, there's another party that may have already declared some forms of war with the united states. when you talk about information, cyber, trade and things like that, there's been a fairly aggressive approach by china in recent years that has done very well for their national interests. and what i've heard from now president trump is that, well, after all these years when we're looking at integrating china, china is now integrated. is it time to stop and figure out with this integration do we need to adjust maybe the balance of this relationship so that it
favors american interests more. i think that's the simplification of the ins but one that resonates with a lot of american expense. >> i have to say when you look a trade policy, i'm sympathetic to the idea that the chinese have sort of -- i don't know if cheated is the right word, but they've been able to take advantage of this ability to be highly more can't ta list and more open as an economy and benefit from all the openness of the western world and the wto. >> no doubt. and i think the fact that president trump has suggested this is an area that he wants to c tackle up front, do we need to be leveling a 45% tariff on all chinese imports? i don't think so because that's not only going to hurt chinese companies, but it will hurt american companies that do a lot of importing from china. it will also hurt supply chains all tl way down. so a number of other countries that feed into china in
manufacturing are going to be hurt. >> and hurt american consumers who will pay more for the products. >> exactly. so let's stop and take this again piece by piece. there are things we can do. for example, in the investment realm, we should be talking more about reciprocity, right? we should be saying, you know what? your sectors in entertainment, culture, electricity and mining, financial services are quite closed to u.s. investment. maybe it's time that we close our sectors as well. >> i think this is an area where trump has changed the conversation in a way that he might find he gets bipartisan agreement. thanks to my guests. that is all for this special post-inaugural edition of gps. thank you for being part of my program this week and i'll see you next week. as far as you want for up to three years and be covered.
so no matter where you go, your peace of mind and confidence will be as unlimited... as your mileage. visit the certified pre-owned sales event, now through february 28th. and learn more about our unlimited mileage warranty, only at your authorized dealer. mercedes-benz. the best or nothing. after becoming one of the largest broadband companies in the country. after expanding our fiber network coast to coast.
these are the places we call home. we are centurylink. we believe in the power of the digital world. the power to connect. and that's what drives us everyday. tais really quite simple.est it comes in the mail, you pull out the tube and you spit in it, which is something southern girls are taught you're not supposed to do. you seal it and send it back and then you wait for your results. it's that simple. why are you checking your credit score? you don't want to ride the 13l forever, do you? the doctor said it's not contagious. [coughing] credit karma, huh? yeah, it's free. credit karma. give yourself some credit.
this is cnn breaking news. >> hello, everyone. thank you so much for joining me. i'm fredricka whitfield here in washington, d.c., this inauguration weekend. we begin this hour with the first 100 days alert. the white house. the white house announcing today it is in the beginning stages of discussions to move the u.s. embassy to israel -- in israel. white house press secretary sean spicer telling cnn, quote, we are at the very beginning stages of even discussing this subject, end quote. moving the embassy from tel aviv to jerusalem was one of president trump's pledges during the campaign. that alert