tv Charlie Rose PBS November 19, 2015 12:00am-1:01am PST
>> rose: welcome to the program. we continue tonight our look at paris and the aftermath and we begin with lisa monaco, assistant to the president for homeland security and counterterrorism. >> we are complacent. we've got to be vigilant. we cannot treat paris as if it were a one-off. that is not how we approach it. that said, i think it's also fair to say that we have built up a robust architecture over the last decade, military intelligence, law enforcement, sharing information to identify plots to disrupt those. we have to be right 100 percent of the time. terrorists and attackers only have to get it right once. that's the challenge we face. >> rose: we continue with bob gates, former secretary of defense. >> i think we ought to decide what our strategy is, and how
we're going to deal with this situation in syria and in isis together. what our priority is which is our priority, getting rid of assad or taking care of business with isis first. we need to decide our strategy and then decide how russia fits into that strategy. >> rose: and we conclude this evening with david miliband, he is president of the international rescue committee. >> there are always very difficult decisions and very difficult judgements. but what my piece of learning is, you have to build up the systems that are robust. and what i have seen of the u.s. system, 12 to 15 different agencies, the full panapoly of buy metric tests, no refugee has committed an act of terrorism in the united states, and long may that continue. what i have seen is systems that are very dill gent and very well built. >> rose: lisa monaco, bob gates and david miliband when we
continue. funding for charlie rose is provided by the following: and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide. from our studios in new york city, this is charlie evening with our continuing coverage of the paris attacks. more details emerging about the plot that killed at least 129 people last friday. there have been over 400 raids across france in the past three days. french police stormed an apartment in the paris suburb of saint-denis just after 4 a.m. eight were arrested and two people died in the seven hour assault it included a female occupant who detonated a suicide vest.
the target of the raid was a a beub-- abdelhamid abaaoud the suspected ringleader of the attacks. "the washington post" said he was killed but the death is yet to be confirmed by french authorities thevment are ducting dna tests of body parts. a manhunt continued for fugitive suspect abu salah, the french prosecutor said the police operation had foiled a new plot. >> a new terror cell was neutralized and everything is leading us to believe considering their weapon stock pile, their structured organization and their commitment, that this team would have been able to carry on other attacks. >> rose: french president hold-and-e said-- hollande says the raid confirms france is at war with isis. >> these actions confirm to us once again that we are at war. a war against a terrorism which
itself has decided to launch war against us. the jihadist organization of isil. >> rose: meanwhile president obama defended his strategy to combat isis during a news conference in man ila earlier today. >> we are not well served when in response to a terrorist attack we defend-- descend into fear and panic. we don't make good decisions. if it is based on on hysteria or an exaggeration of risks. >> rose: the president also rebuffed calls to bloct entry of syrian refugees. >> when can -- said we wouldn't admit 3 year old orphans, that is political posturing.
when individuals say that we should have a religious test and that only christians, proven christians should be admitted, that is offensive and contrary to american values. i cannot think of a more-- more potent recruitment tool for isil than some of the rhetoric that's been coming out of here during the course of this debate. >> rose: the white house released a statement this evening saying the president would veto a gop bill that seeks to increase screening for incoming refugees. joining me from washington is lisa monaco. she is aa sis tenant to the president for homeland sceurtd and counterterrorism. she also serves as deputy national security advisor. i'm pleased to have her back on this program. thank you for doing this. >> hi, charlie. >> rose: give me a sense of now know about the attackswhat that took place in the early morning hours in paris.
>> well, charmie, that operation as you know is ongoing. early this morning and the french undertook as we understand it, an operation in the neighborhood in paris to go after those they assessed may be associated with the brutal attacks that happened last friday. the french are in the lead. we're in constant communication. i've been in touch myself over the last few days repeatedly with my counterparts in paris. we are offering all the support we can, sharing intelligence, and the french are going after these plotters vigorously and we're working very closely with them. >> rose: a a bood, the everybody-- has it been confirmed that he was there or was not there? >> i am going to let the french speak to the specifics of the operation but we do not have
confirmation that he was there. >> rose: do we have any evidence that they have been planting other attacks in paris following the initial attack? >> well, certainly that's what the french vergts and the french counterterrorism professionals are very focused on. it is what we are also working with them on. but time is going to tell as this investigation unfolds but they certainly are not treating friday as a one-off nor should they. because they're going to be vigilant as we are against subsequent attacks. >> rose: you are the principal person in the white house to advise the president on these kinds of issues. what have you learned. what has been the important sort of teachable moment for you? >> well, charlie, what we know is terrorist ackers evolve, terrorist threats evolve. we've got to evolve with them. that's what we have been doing, in applying relentless pleasure against isil, against its leadership, against its supply
lines, against its messaging, quite frankly. that's what we're doing in iraq an syria, in areas where we are concerned that isil might establish another foothold which is why, for instance, we took lethal action, we took military strike against isil's leader in libya just last weekend. >> rose: but you say they have evolved and we have evolved. how have they evolved beyond the idea that is clear they have a global strategy. >> well, for instance, isil is different in kind. as i think you and i talked about before, charlie. isil presented a different type of threat than we have seen in the past for instance for al-qaeda. they are more diffuse, less centralized, they are using social media in a way that is very different than al-qaeda has in the past. they're using it to recruit, to radicalize and indeed to plot. they are-- have a global theory of establishing a caliphate which is why we are applying
this relentless pressure on them in iraq and syria where they have tried to take and hold territory and we are blunting their momentum and pushing them back, holding territory is a source of strength and recruitment for isil. and therefore if we can shrink that, push them back, they hold 25% lester tore today than they did this time last year. that is a source of going at their source of strength. and that's what we're trying to do to blunt that momentum. >> rose: but are they more sophisticated? >> well, it's certainly the case that al-qaeda, when al-qaeda core and osama bin laden's theory was to focus on the far enemy, to focus on complex attacks. and we have seen a different approach historically with isil. we have talked about their use of social media to extol their followers in adherence to undertake opportunistic attacks. i think what you saw in paris is partly that but also clearly a,
an effort to undertake a terror rampage in paris of the kind we've seen them trying to extol their followers to do over the last year. >> rose: did we benefit greatly from the telephone that was discovered, the smartphone? >> well, as in any investigation, you need a starting point. so we'll take that information, the french will take that information, along with the names of the deceased attackers that they recovered as a result of the horrific attack last friday. they're going to piece that together. what they do is they will share that information with us, with others. we all will access the information that we have built up over a decade since 9/11 with our intelligence sources, military sources, diplomatic sources and law enforcement. and piece together an share that information back with the french so we all clejtively will have a better picture. >> much has been said about the app they were using and
encryption. can you help us understand what that threat is to the investigation and to uncovering communication between members of these terrorist groups. >> well, what we have seen, charlie, is with the evolution of technology, with the evolution of terrorist use of technology and indeed criminal use of that technology, is on the one hand, a use by isil of social media to put out their message, to put that out, to enlist, to recruit, to radicalize followers. and then, and we've heard director comey talk about there, to move that information to an encryption channel. to apply the type of operational security that is entailed and that they use to conduct this plotting. now when it's in that encrypted channel, law enforcement and intelligence agencies can't get at it. that is the problem we face. that is what we are trying to work with companies in the
private sector on to have them understand the type of national security and public safety challenges we face with the use of those encrypted communications even as we also very strongly value the privacy an frankly security benefits of the use of strong encryption. encryption provides untold benefits for instance for cybersecurity. >> yeah. >> so we need to recognize that both of these pieces are at issue. >> is it fair to say that what has happened in paris and with the use of earn kription apps, that it gives you a stronger argument to make with these private companies in silicon valley that have been taken a stand that said we encrypted and therefore whatever happens to this device is not our responsibility? >> well, look, i'm sure that will continue to be part of conversation. as i said, we are working with and we want to work with the private secretarier with companies so that they under
stafn the challenges which face so they can hopefully work toblght to address national security. >> rose: but are you making progress on that. >> i think director comey has spoken to this. i think there is progress to be had here. i think we'll continue to have those conversations. look, these folks, these are patriotic americans. they don't want to see attacks happen against the united states. and that's what we want to work through with them. to understand the challenges we face so that we can work with them cooperatively to try and address the challenges we face in the public safety sphere. >> rose: i'm sure you have been asked this by the president and many other people. if they can do this in paris, can they do this in the united states? >> look, charlie, we are not going to be complacent. we are not complacent. we've got to be vigilant. we cannot treat paris as if it were a one-off. that's not how we approach it. that said, i think it's also
fair to say that we have built up a robust architecture over the last decade, military intelligence, law enforcement, sharing information to identify plots to disrupt those, we have to be right 100 percent of the time. terrorist and attackers only have to get it once. that is the challenge we face. but we are not letting up and we're going to be vigilant to disrupt attacks, to share information, to work with our partners. but we're not going to be complacent. >> rose: did you have credible intelligence reports that an attack was about to take place in paris. >> well, i think as director brennan spoke to this, that we have been concerned and have been aware of obviously isil's desire to attack the west. they have spoken, they've been quite blatant about it, their leaders have been blat ent. >> rose: but that's general, and not sperveg. >> right, we did not have specific information about these targets, about this timing,
about these plots. but we certainly had information and were aware that the desire of isil, of its leadership, of its external operations plotters to hit at the west, to hit at targets in europe. but we did not have specific information about these targets. >> rose: did we know about abaaoud and his group. >> with respect to abaaoud, we have certainly been focused on him. he is amongst the leadership in isil, and the key figures in isil that we have been focused on. and as i said, we have been placing relentless pleasure on them. and you've seen that in the case of the strike we took last week against "jihadi john," the brutal murderer, we assess of american journalists, and others from last summer. it's why we have been going after the rest of the leadership
including the deputy to al baghdadi in iraq who we also took off the battle field and why we took the strike last week ends against abu nabil, the leader of isil in libya. >> do we believe that is our primary defense to take out the leadership of isil? >> look, it's clearly one blank in our strategy to place relentless pressure on isil's leadership, against and on plotters and attackers wherever they are, whether this iraq and syria, or elsewhere, like in libya. we're also going after their supply line, that's money, that's men and material. which is why we undertook the operation last week to cut off the critical supply line between moss ul and raqqa, to stief el those supplies that get to isil in their key stronghold. and to shrink their safe haven which again has been a source of
strength. >> rose: what are the other planks in the strategy? >> so going after the leadership, placing that pressure on them, shrinking their safe haven, selferring those supply lines, denying them safe haven. physical safe haven and denying them digital safe haven in terms of the messaging they have. and enabling our partners. we've trained 15,000 iraqi security forces. we're supplying our partners in the north of syria, syrian arabs, turkeman, kurds to close that border between syria and turkey. we've worked very effectively with those partners to close hundreds of kilometers of that border. we've got about a hundred kilometers left to go. we're working more closely with turkey. we're putting more assets into the base in turkey that we're flying missions from there to apply pressure to raqqa, to apply more pressure and more lethal strikes against isil.
so we're ramping up and intensifying this campaign against all those lines of effort. >> rose: and how will you measure success? >> we'll measure success by shrinking that safe haven and making it a place where isil can no longer plot attacks and perpetrate heinous acts of brutality in that space and elsewhere. >> rose: thank you so much, lisa monaco from the white house in taking time on what has to be as busy a day as you've had. thank you so much. >> thanks, charlie. >> rose: we'll be right back. stay with us. we continue our conversation now about the paris attack with robert gates. he was secretary of defense from 2006 to 2011. serving both administrations. he joins us now from philadelphia. i'm pleased to have him back on this program. mr. secretary, thank you for joining us. >> thank you, charlie. good to be with you again. >> rose: tell me what reality you think the attacks in paris have changed.
>> i think you need to look at what happened in paris alongside of the bombing of the russian airliner over the sinai and the market place attacks in bay route. -- bay beiru had,t. within three weeks isis launched major attacks in three very different places using three very different techniques. and i think it speaks to the way in which their ability to reach beyond the area that they control in syria and iraq has expanded. and we see that they're active in libya as well. and have made progress in establishing control over the central part of that country. so i think that this is a movement that is reaching well beyond the boundaries of the
territory that they've conquered in syria and in iraq. and i think that measures the magnitude of the kind of challenge that we face. >> rose: help me understand what this strategy has been before and what the strategy is now, and what the strategy should be. >> well, i think that the strategy has been to try and find people in iraq and syria who are willing to take on isis with our help and the help of others, so that we don't have troops on the ground but the arab, the kurds and the others are out in front in this conflict. and we have been able, the iraqi forces with iranian and our help have been able to take back some tunes. they've been able to take back the major oil refinery.
although the towns and oil refinery essentially have been destroyed. so it has been a very gradual process. and one that looks to as the administration has said, taking three to five years. i think that what we have seen in the last three weeks suggests that at a minimum, there needs to be a significant intensification of the effort. now personally, i think that the idea of introducing western troops, american troops on the ground is probably not a good idea. i think it would agri fate-- aggravate the problem. there is no indication, by the way, that the iraqis would welcome those forces on the ground. and so if you made a big pitch and big effort to put together a coalition to send in ground forces and the iraqis turn around and say thanks but no thanks, then where are you.
so i think the strategy needs to focus, if i may, on an intensification of some of the things i think we're probably already doing. identifying tribes and others like the kurds who are willing to defend their own territory, their own villages, their own tribal lands, and help them and it may mean helping them directly, not through the baghdad government. i think we need to loosen the rules of engagement for our forces that are already in iraq. we need to allow special forces, more operating space. i think we need to have embedded trainers and advisors down to probably the bat all onlevel with iraqi forces. the sunni tribes and the kurds. i think that we need to have forward air controllers and spotters to help the coalition aircraft be more precise and better in their targeting. one of the things we haven't talked about or i haven't heard anybody talk about is the potential for what the western intelligence services including
cia could do on the ground in terms of infiltrating, sabotage and other activities to make life harder for isis. so i think there are a number of things like this that we can do, without sending a lot more troops in there, without aggravating the situation, if you will, in terms of turning people on the ground against us because we're back in there. >> rose: as the president said, this is going to take awhile. and what we need to do is reinforce what we're doing but essentially our strategy is right and that's what we ought to be doing. when you say that, and we have special forces, you are saying we ought to put more of them at risk by not only embedding them but also putting on the front lines where they can both act as spotters as well as coming to the aid in emergency situations, of those soldiers fighting against isis. aren't you? >> the president hag said we're
at war. war is inherently risky. if we're going to do anything, we're obviously going to have to expose our people to greater risk. both those in uniform and those working for our intelligence services. you know, i think in terms of the other thing we haven't talked about, really, is the potential threat here at home. and there i think one of the things john brennan, the cia director talked about whether there ought to be a reversal of some of the constraints that have been put on the national security agency. i don't know the answer to that. but i think that the president and the congress rather urgently ought to call in the descreker of nsa and say what capabilities do you have that you are prevented from using and if we allow you to use them, how would they make a difference. >> and that gives you a basis on which to decide whether there is something more we should allow nsa to do that would help us if these guys are using encrypted technologies and so on.
>> the argument is made that we really need to be at war. and we need to put troops on the ground. as a former secretary of defense, i mean what is possible if you made the commitment, and there was an acceptance of it by the iranians, to big ifs. >> how long would it take, what could you do, and what would happen to the core leadership in syria? >> well, first of all, i think those are two gigantic ifs, to tell you the truth. but i think if those things should fall into place, first of all, it depends on how many troops you want to send. again, this idea that you are going to get turkish units going in there, saudi units going in there. the saudis are pretty preoccupied in yemen right now, the notion that they will fight on a secretary front in iraq i think is highly questionable. so where are these arab troops going to come from.
now we've been training the iraqis and the iraqi security services. and over time they seem to be getting better. but as we have seen with the approach to cutting off isis in ramadi, it takes a long time to get through the belts of ieds and other sthings that they have laid down. so the iraqi forces are going to be there. but that's going to be a fairly slow process as well. so if you are talking about u.s. troops, presumably you are talking about tens of thousands of troops. that would take many months, i think, to organize and get there. i think people need to appreciate how exhausted our army is in particular. after almost 15 years of war. and equipment shortages, training shortages and so on. so this is a march complicated, sending in a major u.s. force not only has huge political
implications, but just the sheer logistics of it is a major problem as well. >> as far as you. >> and especially if you-- especially if urgency is what is on your mind. >> do you think what you just said reflects the views of the top military leaders in the pentagon? >> well, i haven't talked to them. but i would be willing to wager that it is. >> if they're very reluctant to fully engage american combat troops on the ground in order to move as fast as they can against isis. >> so what is the mission they're going to be given. is it going to be to destroy raqqa? raqqa is a city of hundreds of thousands of people. how are they going to figure out whose isis and who are the citizens of raqqa? do they think that the isis farmee is going to come out in uniforms and marching in formation to challenge us as opposed to melting into the
population? and then what are we going to do even if we were to take raqqa. we aren't going to defeat isis simply by taking that territory. now i get it in terms of undermining the whole narrative of the caliphate and of their being able to hold territory. but from a straight forward military standpoint, you haven't killed their army. you've seized their headquarters but their army has dissipated into the countryside. and presumably they still will hold mosu l and still will hold other places. and the idea that, just think about what it took to liberate fall ugea the first time, or the second time. what it took to liberate some of these other iraqi cities in terms of a number of u.s. casualties in the iraq war. mosu l is a city of a million people. and so i just think people underestimate even from a
military standpoint the deficit of this. and then the military's question would be, and what is the political side of this equation. who is going to come in and provide governance. who is going to come in and provide the followup once we have carried out this military mission. we saw both in iraq and afghanistan, that the civilian side of our efforts is too weak. and has not got the kind of robustness that would be necessary to follow up on something like that. >> the president said we have to do two things. number one, he said we have to end the civil war in syria. i secretarily, he said what we have to do is end the conflict between sunnies and shia in iraq. let me turn to syria. do you think it's wise. how would you handle this demand on some of america's coalition partners like the saudis and like the turks, that the first
attention ought to be to overthrow or get saddam, i mean get bashar al-assad out of power. >> well, this is one of the challenges that faces us in dealing with isis. and that is almost everybody in the region has a-- has their own agenda. and for many of them, whether it's the saudis or the turks, or others, frankly, fighting isis is not the top item on their agenda. exeelting with iran in the case of, in the kaition of the saudis. the turks are preoccupied with the kurds and what they're going to do. and then, of course, as you have suggested, you have the saudis and others who basically say the first thing you have to do is get rid of assad. where you've got the russians and others saying assad has got to stay and we'll take care of isis and then we'll figure out syria. the truth is finding some way to
stop the syrian civil war is a critical piece of beating isis. and i have said before, i do think that we should try and establish some safe havens in syria, and particularly further do the east, away from assad's turf so we could basically tell the russians, look, this is not a threat to assad. this is a humanitarian endeavor. we're not going to be in conflict with your military protecting him. so basically just stay out of our way. and we are going to try and create with the turks and with others in the region these safe havens that hopefully will deal with, begin to ameliorate the humanitarian crisis that the europe and the rest of the region is facing. but all theetion mixed agendas of the different players is what makes trying to go at this problem like three dimensional chess. because it doesn't seem like anybody is on the same page with anybody else.
>> what do you think about putin and his efforts and the role he's playing and how much cooperation the united states ought to make with him. >> well, i think the first thing to understand about putin is that he sees russia's military intervention in syria as russia away back to the table. after a ukraine. he sees it as demonstrating that russia is a great power. that it must be reckoned with. and that any solution to the problems in syria has to involve russia at the table and maybe even as the chair. and this is a reassertion of russia's role in the world. this is what his agenda has been all about. and i think he sees syria as the mechanism to do this. now he's not exactly a sentimentsal fellow. so if we can find another
allo-wite or somebody who can take assad's place and guarantee the russians continued access to that naval base, i think he would throw assad over the side in a heartbeat if he thought it served russian interests. so i think that he sees this in very broader terms, much broader terms than just syria. this is about russia's place in the world. >> rose: how is he playing his card? >> well, i think as secretary rice and i wrote a few weeks ago, he's playing a very weak hand with extraordinary skill. >> rose: and so how should the u.s. respond to him? >> i think we ought to-- i think we ought to decide what our strategy is and how we're going to deal with this situation in syria and in isis together. what our priority is, which is our priority, getting rid of assad or taking care of business
with isis first. we need to decide our strategy and then decide how russia fits into that strategy. >> rose: that suggests we don't have a strategy right now. >> well, i think we have-- we have this strategy that the president has articulated for taking on isis. but i don't think we have a strategy with respect to the middle east as a whole or with respect to syria. i think we've basically been very passive about syria from the very beginning of the civil war. >> rose: you know the united arab emirates, you know the saudis, you have had dealings with the iranians. you know the jordanians, you know the he gip shans. i mean you know all of these players. what do they want us to do? i think they want us to lead. i think they want us to have a strategy. i think they want to know that we will be there for them. that we are not leaving the middle east. that we will have a military presence. that we will-- i think we should
have articulated a very tough strategy vees a vee iran at the same time the new clear deal was being inked to reassure our allies in the region, both arab and israeli that we were going to be very tough about any iranian efforts to use the money that they get from lifting the sanctions to metel in the region. that we're going to resist that and work with our partners in the region to do that. and it's not just arm sales to the arabs and israelis but it's a military presence. it's military deployment. it's intelligence operations. it's di plom see. it's a comprehensive approach to diseeling with iran that clearly has not de-- clearly does not seem interested in changing its ways after the agreement. >> so they're not going to change their behavior. is there anything we can do to get them to change their behavior? >> well, i think that-- i think first of all we ought to be very careful about lifting the
sanctions to insurance that the actions that they are supposed to have taken, they have taken. and i worry, i worry that if we ignore the little things, that we will end up ignoring the big things. and what i mean by that is, so when the head of the revolutionary guard, general seul mani went to moss could you, that was a violation of a u.n. security council resolution. and yet we said and basically did nothing about it. so i kind of half the new york police's approach to broken windows. when you ignore the little stuff, the little problems, the big problems seem to come up more often. and so i think we ought to be very rigorous in holding the iranians to the agreements that they've made and the terms of the u.n. security council resolutions and not lift sanctions until they clearly have done what they have pledged to do. that is one thing that we need to do. but then i think we just need to
be clear that we are not going to give them open field running in that region. we are not going to opt for a relationship with iran in place of the relationships with our sunni friends that have been our friends for decades. >> rose: and we. >> and we are going to resist that. >> is it your judgement that we have not sent the clear signals that we are going to resist these kinds of things with the iranians and with others. >> i do not believe we have done so clearly enough. >> and you think they have responded as you might expect, including russia, including the iranians, including isis. >> well, the ayatollah has made very clear that iran is not going to change its strategy in the middle east one whip. that they are going to continue to pursue their regional ambitions. that they are going to met el in
parts of the-- any part of the middle east they can get into. and that they think that time is on their side. so i think we need to be clear about that. and you know, the russians have essentially cast their lot with the iranians at least in terms of where we are in syria. and to tell you the truth, that may be a long-term problem for putin. because the shia, are significant minority in the-- in the islamic world. >> right. >> sunnies are by far the majority muslims in the world, including those in russia. and so putin's actions have i think antagonized a lot of sunnist. and that may involve a price for the russian as long the road. >> you mean with people like the saudis and emirates and others. >> well, and i think, i think you're also seeing it through isis. >> rose: secretary gates, thank you so much for joining
us. it is a pleasure to have you back on the program. >> thanks, charlie. >> rose: robert gates, former secretary of defense. back in a moment. stay with us. david miliband joins us now. he was previously a british foreign secretary, he is now president of the international rescue committee. i am pleased to have him back at this table. what is your responsibility as president of the international rescue committee. >> we are a humanitarian organization founded by albert einstein here in new york in 1933 when he fled the nazis. and across 26 u.s. cities we resettle refugees in the u.s., 10,000 a year. but the bullk of our 17,000 staff and volunteers are in the 30 or so war zones and fragile states around the world where there are a record number of refugees, 20 million in total around the world last year. so we are humanitarian. >> rose: 20 million people went across borders last year looking for some sense of security. >> that's exactly right. fleeing the kind of terror that exists in syria, but also the
more long-standing wars in afghanistan and somalia and congresso. >> rose: have the events in paris caused more problems in terms of political debate because at least one of them had come across as a refugee. >> well, yes, it's caused more debate. but don't fall yet for the allegation that one of them definitely came across as a refugee. because the passport is now shown to be a fake. and we don't yet know that any of them were posing as refugees. but it is undoubtedly the case that-- . >> rose: some are. >> no, it's undowtsedly the case that the horror of paris has browts a degree of polarization to the politics around the compassion that is necessary in dealing with-- . >> rose: certainlily here. >> it's not just in the u.s but the u.s. is insulated in significant part by its geography. and partly as a result of 9/11, but for long-standing organizations like mine which do resettle people in the u.s. have always said an efficient and effective security screening
process is an essential part of any successful refugee resettle am prament program. and the u.s. has a very successful refugee resettlement program, from einstein evening stein, to mad line albright, wsh and awe sure those people that the united states, the state department does it, i assume, has done an effective job of checking refugees as they come in. >> well, interesting thing is it is not just the state department. it's 12 to 15 different agencies of state including the ckground checks, biometric checks, who also do, there is also followup by the state department once people are here, when they apply for permanent residency after a year. and of course the seriousness which with which the security screening takes place is one reason that so few syrians have come through over the last few years because the process itself takes 18 to 24 months. so only 2,000 or so syrians have come to the u.s. over the last four years. >> and should we be doing a lot
more. >> i believe so, yes. a lot more both in the region, not jut complitly and diplomatically, but the humanitarian load on countries like lebanon, jordan, an incredibly close ally of the u.s remember leb non has over a million refugees, jordan has 670,000 registered refugees. those countries are screeking under the strain. i was in lobe nonand jordan last week and saw it yet again. but also in this country, refugee resettlement is one way of sharing the load. one way of standing with people in desperate need. and that is something the u.s. has historically been a leader on. now the leadership mantel frankly is passed to germany at least for the moment which has stepped up in an extraordinary way. >> rose: because they changed their policy. >> partly it has to be said to recognize reality. when mrs. merkel changed the policy in the summer, she was recognizing the reality that there were 300,000 or so syrians already in germany. >> rose: you agree with the president and his el gent-- eloquent and passionate
defense of america welcoming the refugees. >> i think it is a very important part of obviously this country. but also refugee resettlement has been a success story in this country. 150,000 a year veelt nam ease boat people coming in here 79ee, 80, 81ee. making thaifer livers, and their kid's lives. the american experience is if you teach them the language. if you get their kids into school, if the adults get on to employment and there is a path to citizenship, then it can be a very successful program of integration to create productive and patriotic citizens. >> rose: and where is your worry then that among refugees are people who mean harm wherever they land? >> there is a worry. put it slightly differently which is obviously that people who are seeking to do ill insinuate themselves amongst refugees. >> rose: they're not refugees by definition. they're something else, they use the refugee cover to get in. >> well, they can use a tide or flow of people to try to hide
themselves among them. for the u.s. because of geography it's much harder because of the fact that the vast bullk of people have to come here at least south america excluded by plane. now the situation in europe is obviously different. because it's thousands of miles of borders, much more morous, much more challenging. and of course the security challenge for europe is one that we have been talking about, frankly, for more than three or four weeks. we as an organization have been warning for over a year that the pressure inside syria and the pressure inside afghanistan and the pressure in the neighboring states of syria and afghanistan was going to lead people to throw it all in and come and try and get to europe. and that has indeed happened over the last six months with tragic consequences for many. and with an overwhelming challenge now for the european union and all of its member states. >> rose: what worries you the most? >> i worry, of course, about the security side because that could undermine confidence in the whole refugee resettlement
system. but pie two greatest worries are first of all, of course for my own staff. we have 2,000 staff and volunteers delivering health care, inside syria. and we have people doing extraordinary work in the most challenging places. but the second thing i worry about, frankly charlie, is that at a time when the world is coming closer together, interdependence is a word being used on this show very, very often. global interdependence. on a time of that closer and closer connection across the world, the danger is that countries turn inwards rather than outwards. that they try to shutd themselves off from the world. obviously in the wake of paris there is always that kind of reaction. and the job of leadership, obviously is to show not just compassion but competent tense in the way systems have managed the integration of nations and people, are put together. and of course it's my worry that with 20 million refugees, 40 million internally displaced people within the country, that the humanitarian insight, the
humanitarian commitment just gets fatigued. and that means a hell of a lot more missery around the world and we're an organization. >> does the vetting process get fatigued? >> the important thing is to always work with the fact. and there is no evidence that for the u.s. that the system has broken down. it is very important that it works well. the challenge for europe is to emulate the best of the american system, frankly. >> rose: with you fieng this simply political rhetoric. the-- said on monday you allow 10,000 people in and 9,000-- 9,999 of them are innocent people fighting oppression and feeling oppression. and one of them is a well trained isis fighter. what if we get one of them wrong, just one of them wrong. >> i-- not as an interior minister but as a foreign minister,-- there are always very difficult decisions and very difficult judgements. but what my piece of learning is you have to build up the systems
that are robust. and what i have seen of the u.s. system, 12 to 15 different agencies, the full panapoly of biometric tests. remember no refugee has committed an act of ter lism in the united states and long may that continue. what i have seen is systems that are very dill gent and very well built. and if you are in positions of authority, the key thing is to assure yourself that the systems are robust and keeping up with the latest challenges. remember, it is harder to get to the u.s. as a refugee than through any other route. its' tough tore get here on a refugee visa than any other way. and that is because you are on the path to citizenship if you get here as a refugee. but it's a system that has proved its worth so far, from what i know, it has always kept updated. and that's important. >> rose: are arab states taking refugees from syria. >> arab states are not signature that tores to the 1951
convention. we would like them to be so. there are a significant number of syrians in at rab state, i think half a million in sawdzee arabia, 120,000 in theu ae. many have been there for many years r my grant workers. but some have gone from syria. if your question is shoulded arab states be a bigger part of the humanitarian-- . >> rose: i will take that question. >> then of course, i would argue yes. >> rose: you but you would argue that everybody should. >> well, those who are able to, should. and the richer countries should play that role. and i want to see a humanitarian system updated for the modern world. remember, the iconic image of a refugee is someone in a refugee camp. but the vast bullk of refugees today are not in refugee camps but are in urban areas. just go to lebanon where they do not want to build more refugee houses we have to update the-- . >> rose: when refugees arrive in lebanon, jordan, turkey, is there some, what can you say build them and what their cry is. >> their cry is so-- it makes
you weep, really. their cry is safe me from hell. i mean i melt a family last week. and they said look, we're from aleppo. it's hell. we have got barrel bombs from assad on one side. we've got the terror of isis on the other. i've got generations from aleppo behind me. but i've had to leave everything because i have nothing left. and those people what i fear. >> rose: had no choice left. >> i had to save my kids. you have to save my life. and the real thing i felt. and i've been to the middle east off then this job in the last two years, there is a loss of hope there. there is a real loss of hope. the syria war looks like a tunnel without light at the end of it. the situation in lebanon and jordan is becoming tougher and tougher. and they don't see much opportunity to get to europe or to the u.s so that is the abiding image. remember these middle class
people fleeing syria. they are business people, they are teachers, accountants. these are people who knew a middle class life who were educated. and they say i've got nothing. and that's what leads to desperate people to try and cross the agean under terrible circumstances. >> rose: so that makes it even more imperative to find a way to have a ceasefire in syria and a way to end the war in syria. >> certainly to protect the civilians there. i mean the bombardment and the terror that exists for the civilians in syria, i think-- it is without parallel at the moment. it is the defining humanitarian catastrophe of this century. and the longer it goes on, the worse the options get. >> rose: what would be your strategy to combat isis? >> if t is a great question. a tough question. there are obvious things which everyone is talking about. of course there is a military dimension. of course there is a dimension, an idea logical dimension but i think the biggest thing i see
when i think about iraq where i have been relatively recently, lebanon, jordan, the biggest thing is a sunni political alternative to isis. where isis thrives is on the argument to sunni communities across the middle east, that there is no alternative political representation for them. and that i think is the-- without that, without that lead from within the islamic world, within the arab world and in the case of iraq and neighboring states, there needs to be an alternative political narrative. now the military and other elements go around that. but without that defining political alternative is very hard to win communities, and of course that is the dilemma around assad because is he the great recruiting sergeant. >> exactly. >> especially among sunnist. >> exactly. >> and the same thing with what the president said. the president said if we want to combat isis first we have to
ceasefire or peace in syria. stop the war, mainly, in syria and secondly we have to find some solution to the conflict wean sunnist and shia in iraq. those are the two essential ingredients before you can really engage a major effort to stop isis. >> well, i think isis exploited the vacuum that has existed in central and eastern syria over the last two or three years. and that las some complicated and complex roots. but i think the way i would put it is the first priority to is to protect civilians inside. every barrel bomb that is dropped by assad. >> is a civilian conditions is certainly to kill civilians, is a recruiting tool for isis. and i think that the scale of the destruction, remember, 78% of the lights are out in syria. >> two thirds of the hospitals. >> isis primary argument is that we're against assad. >> well, primary argument is that they are the only people
who can represent sunni communities in the face of assad's bombardment, in the face of alternative-- . >> rose: who is most effective. >> they can say look, that they have colonized some of the exbawtist so they have got them on their side. and this is obviously a structural challenge because it's royalk across the region. it's no longer right to call it a syrian crisis, at a money mum it is a regional crisis an frankly has become a european price is, the striking think to me vitsing the island in greece where we have 200 staff working to make sure the refugees who arrive get some mod i cum of help when they get there, they are coming straight from syria, not just jordan and lebanon. >> rose: has the refugee crisis increased the amount of political activity on the part of far right nationalist parties. >> in europe what has happened i would argue over the last 15 to 20 years is the mix between the debate about refugees and the debate about my graiks.
the coming together about the debate about migration with a debate about refugees is what has fueled a sense of anger and grieveance that has been exploited by far right. parties. and it's very, very pornlt, i think to say, that a refugee who is fleeing percent keution, a well-founded fear of percent keution is different from an immigrant who is simply seeking a better liefer. it's not that one is good and one is bad, they're different. >> rose: and you describe migration as what? >> seeking a better life. >> exactly. seeking an economic better life. they try to go from one place where they are poor to another place where they might be better off. >> rose: so it's a miss nommer to call people who are leaving syria for their of their life and oppression as my grants. >> correct. >> rose: they have be to called refugees with and it's wrong to call the syria krieses is as a my grant crisis, it's a refugee crisis, this isn't just being politically correct, it's a matter of being correct. because a refugee has rights in natural law. and states receiving refugees have obligations
responsibilities in international law. and preserving the infeg-- integrity of the disef nition of a rev guy a hard won gain after the traj december angry tum ult of the second world war, preserving that status of a refugee is a vielt allly important part of the job of governments and ngos at the moment. >> rose: thank you for coming. >> thank you very much. >> rose: david miliband of the international rescue committee, thank you for joining us. see you next time. for more about this program and earlier episodes visit us online at pbs.org and charlie rose.com. captioning sponsored by rose communications captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org
>> announcer: this is "nightly business report" with tyler mathisen and sue herera. strong signals. the federal reserve sends its clearest message yet that a december rate hike is likely, and stocks take off. raids in france. elite police units move against a terrorist hideout in a paris suburb. at least two were killed, seven detained, but the mastermind of last week's carnage is not among the arrested. we have latest details. what's in your fund? why regulators are taking a closer look at some mutual funds that are popular with small investors. all that and more tonight on "nightly business report" for wednesday, november 18th. good evening, everyone, and welcome. new developments out of paris tonight, and we will have a full report later in the broadcast. but we begin tonight with the stock market and the federal reserve.