tv Charlie Rose PBS May 9, 2016 12:00pm-1:01pm PDT
>> rose: welcome to the program. we begin this evening with brett mcgurk. he is the special envoy to the coalition fighting against i.s.i.s. >> i.s.i.l is -- director brendan last weekend called it a fee phenomenon. it is a phenomenon, and it's important to understand how we analyze it, how you make sense of something like this. we analyze it in three dimensions. there's the core in iraq and syria which we're talking about. you have to shrink the core. you have to shrink the amount of territory they control, and we are shrinking it, about 45% in iraq, less in syria but strategic plans in syria. so there's a core in iraq and syria. there is then the global networks, the foreign fighter network, the propaganda, recruiting and financing networks, and then they have eight self declared affiliates around the world. >> rose: we conclude with
maggie haberman who covers politics for the "new york times" and cnn. >> paul ryan is a very conservative figure. yet at this moment in the conservative party which has lurched so far right, he is not treated that way anymore. he's seen as a moderate. >> rose: instead of establishment. >> absolutely. and the party base is deeply suspicious. many americans are deeply suspicious of government and of an establishment. so i think that we're not going to know whether the republican party looks anything like what we resemble. you certainly see people like paul ryan and ted cruz banking on the idea that it basically will form wack toward what it was in some version or another, but it's a collection of different tribes with different interests now. >> rose: brett mcgurk and maggie haberman, when we continue. >> rose: funding for "charlie rose" has been provided by the following:
>> and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide. captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> rose: brett mcgurk is here. he is a special presidential envoy for the global coalition to fight i.s.i.l. he previously held a number of policy roles under both the obama and bush administrations, also served as a senior advisor to three u.s. ambassadors in baghdad. questions continue to surround the u.s. led effort to combat the islamic state. abadi is battling to stay in office after protests over the weekend. a u.s. navy seal was killed by
i.s.i.s. fighters in iraq tuesday, the third american serviceman to die in the country since 2014. in syria, a push to maintain a fragile cease fire in the wake of recent violence. to talk about this and more, i'm pleased to have brett mcgurk back at the table. welcome. >> good to have you. >> rose: give me a sense -- and this is a huge concern for you and we want to talk about many things, of where is iraq today. >> so, charlie, i have been in and out of iraq now the last month, kind of going back and forth, baghdad, traveling around the region. >> rose: everywhere but mosul. ight, not in mosul. iraq faces tremendous challenges. you mentioned prime minister abadi. here's a guy that came into office after prime minister maliki. it was a democratic, peaceful transition in the heart of the middle east. at the time the price of oil per
barrel was about $100. every single drop of the price per barrel of oil, iraq loses about a billion dollars a year. and last month, it went all the way down to about $30. so you just got a sense of the tools of which he has to work was not what we quite expected. so what he's trying to do is implement some pretty far-reaching reforms. electricity tariffs. he's trying to purge the roles of the ghost soldiers and employees, far-reaching reforms. that's popular among the population but generated resistance among the political elite. so what you have in the country in addition to the fight against i.s.i.l which we can talk about is an upheaval against the status quo happening from the bottom up which is happening in many parts to have the world. that's not so much anti-prime minister, they're protesting the ipolitical establishment.
as he tries to implement reforms, he comes up against resistance, against political rivals, they don't get enacted and the population continues to go to the streets. you have his rivals riding that wave, muqtadaer is riding that wave. so abadi is in the right spot but is trying to do the right thing. so we're hopeful that he can get out of this. i think we have great confidence in him and what he's trying to do, but we recognize it's one of the most difficult jobs in the world, what he's trying to do. so i think we have to give the process a lit bit of time to -- little bit of time t to mature recognizing even superman can't do the job needed. the country is taking on $3 billion of debt every month. we're working with the world bank and many of the coalition,
66 members now, to help iraq, and they'll need help. but also abadi has to keep on the right path and do the right thing because they have to address this popular pressure, but he's going to need help from his political challengers. >> rose: you have pointed out the politics of iraq is so crucial, but many people have said over the last year that his essential requirement was, beyond fixing the economy and the confidence of the people of iraq, was to appeal to the sunni tribes, who were needed not only in the battle against i.s.i.s., is that happening? >> great question. and one thing that makes abadi so much different than his predecessor maliki, maliki is kind of an extreme centralizer. not only centralized in baghdad but his office. he would have three phones. when you meet with him, he has three phones on his desk, constantly answering his phone, trying to control everything from his office. >> rose: one to iran.
probably. but that can't work. the days of that overly centralized structure, that creates pressure cookers around the country. that can't work. abadi has a different philosophy. when he was coming into office he told me and since said publicly that either iraq decentralizes or it will disintegrate. >> rose: not to the point of breaking up iraq into parts. >> no, federalism, which was called for in their constitution. he really believes in that and that gets to the sunni tribes. h he has been very supportive of getting local actors into the fight, and that's obviously central to our campaign strategy against i.s.i.l. so we've really seen it come to fruition is in anbar province. in anbar province, we have now working with the iraqi security forces and the tribes, people aren't paying as much attention to this but it's pretty important, about 15,000 tribal fighters are mobilized. they have now cleared from
ramadi, marched up the you the s valley, to the town of heat that i.s.i.l didn't want to give up. in the middle of the cry circumstances the tribes in anbar and iraqi security forces broke a siege of a how often called haditha, under siege by i.s.i.l for about two years. so the progress in anbar province is important. the tribes are mobilizing, fighting with the iraqi security forces. it's very difficult, but abadi has been flushing resources to the local level. another example of where that has come to fruition is if you go north of baghdad, anbar, of course, is to the west. north of baghdad, the city of tikrit, so an iconic sunni city, former home of saddam hussein, i.s.i.l came in there in the summer of 2014, committed mass
atrocities, killed thousands of people, of these young army recruits, put it on youtube -- i was in iraq at the time -- horrific, caused a psychological collapse in the country, the sense i.s.i.l is coming all the way down to baghdad. when the iraqis cleared tikrit, the city was almost depopulated. so we worked with the iraqi government, abadi and the local leaders of sal adean province to flush forces to the local level to get teampeople back into their homes because what is important is what happens after i.s.i.l and to have displaced people come back to their homes. we looked at how long it takes in these sectarian conflicts, it can take years for people to come back. one of the hardest things to do. but in tikrit, the combination flushing resources to the local level, the u.n. did a great job identifying what had to be done to get people back and now almost 95%, according to the
figures from the u.n., 95% of the population is back in their homes in tikrit. it's really quite remarkable, and it's happened because the government of iraq and abadi had an agenda to decentralize, push resources down to the local level, trust the local leaders to bring people back to their homes. now in ramadi, we're trying to do the same thing to bring people back. what makes it so difficult, and this gets to the nature of i.s.i.l and the enemy we're fighting, they're so barbaric. in ramadi, we found almost every home is wired with what we call i.e.d.s, land mines, and they put them in people's refrigerators, children's toys. so 65,000 people have come back to ramadi but since they have, about 100 were killed by i.e.d.s. so the government put a halt on the returnees. we worked as the coalition, immediately raised $15 million, we got in one of the top companies in the world to help go clear the i.e.d.s, so they're on the streets clearing
i.e.d.s in ramadi to help bring people back to their homes. this is only happening because the government supports this decentralization agenda. not to overstate the challenges. this is extremely, extremely difficult. we've had a very hard couple of weeks. it's concerning. the protests in the streets, certainly the breech of the green zone. >> rose: the imemergence of muqtada. >> it's ironic. he's taken on the mantel of the nonsectarian, and thety corruption, that's his cause which if you fall low iraq in the last decade, there's irony to that, so i don't think anyone particularly trusts him, but we'll see where this goes. >> rose: we lost a navy seal this week. >> terribly sad. these guys, i've got ton know a lot of them, are special forces and obviously all the men and women serving in iraq.
the special forces do an advise and assist mission. let me talk about how critical what this young navy seal was doing and his comrades. whatt they do to advise and assist operations against i.s.i.l has been a bit of a game changer. when ramadi fell in may about a year ago, very daunting, we met with the national security team in the situation room. the president was presented with a very good plan from general austin and the department of defense to set up an advise facility east of ramadi, small teams of special forces to go to an air base to help mobilize the tribes and security forces and help them get on their feet and take ramadi. it looked like a daunting challenge and the navy seals took up the mission. l in northern iraq we have
special forces doing that advise and assist mission with peshmerga and doing direct action raids against i.s.i.l targets from time to time, and they have been extremely effective. >> rose: let me underline that. so they have been going out, doing direct offensive mission along with the peshmerga and others? >> yes. usually, they have peshmerga and other iraqi counterterrorism service with them. >> rose: operating against i.s.i.l in iraq. >> what secretary carter called raids. if we see an i.s.i.l leader and we're tracking these people and there is an opportunity to capture them and find out what they know, i think that's one of the things we've learned is what they do, and it's been very effective. >> rose: i want to come back to that. the effectiveness of our strategy and how do you see it. part of what is argued by the pentagon is we are taking out in a significant way a level of
i.s.i.l leadership. >> about every three days now we're taking out a significant leader, not just our forces but the coalition air power, iraqi counterterrorism services and also the syrian forces, some of the syrian kurdish forces we work with in particular. but i'll give you an example of the effectiveness and why we have to do this. about a year ago, now, -- look, we know more about i.s.i.l now than we could have imagined two years ago, and we know that because of this painstaking intelligence work we've done, but that comes by the real heroism of our people who are out there and it's important for the american people to know what they're doing out there. about a year ago we identified a deputy of al-baghdadi, the financier of i.s.i.l, he knew where everything was. you could target him from the air or try to capture him, and he was deep inside syria in shadadi, which we've taken from i.s.i.l. but back then i was a heart land
of i.s.i.l, their leaders were based there. our special forms went from northern iraq, went into the heart of shaddadi. abu sayef was killed but the information they took off him was great. how i.s.i.l is financed, what they're doing with the oil they're getting out of the ground and we put that into a targeting process so that we can be effective and precise in our targeting. so we have since learned that i.s.i.l was making about a billion dollars every year, about $500 million from oil gas, $500 million from extortion, taxes, antiquities trade, so we've broken it down and reduced their ability to resource themselves dramatically, the number is down by 30% or more.
we think they've cut the salaries for the fighters in half. and the mosul, where they're under tremendous pressure, because to have the the painstaking intelligence work, we learned where they're keeping all the cash. the question we used to ask, how do they pay these people and where is the cash. we found out where the cash was and it's a tremendous work by our inner agency team. treasury is a part of this, intelligence community, dod, kind of all working together. we found out where the cash was and we're able to target it and it's been more effective that be we thought. we think we're taken about a billion dollars of their cash, and they can't regenerate that cash, so it's had a significant impact. >> rose: but is the leadership of i.s.i.s. or i.s.i.l in raqqa, syria, influences what happens in iraq as well as syria that's where the top leadership is said to be? >> yes, we think they're around rack cay, the top leaders. but i tell you what's happened in the last six months and why
the situation is not going particular well for them in iraq and syria. they used to travel freely between raqqa and mosul. not anymore. we've cut off all those roadways, working with the syrian kurds and with a coals of syrian air fighters pushing down in eastern syria taking shadady, cutting off all the roads. so we basically isolated raqqa and mosul, for them to get between raqqa and mosul, they have to take the back roads, which makes it a little easier for us. so they're isolated now in these two areas. i think most of their leaders, we think, are probably in raqqa, were inside the network, that's how we're picking up and killing so many of their leaders.
but we also recognize that i.s.i.l is -- director brendan last weekend called it a phenomenon, it is a phenomenon. it's important to understand how do you make sense of something like this and we analyze it in three dimensions. there is the core in iraq and syria. you have to shrink the core and the amount of territory they control. we are shrinking it. about 45% in iraq and less in syria but strategic lands in syria. there's the core in syria. there is the global networks, propaganda, recruiting and financing networks, then eight self-declared affiliates around the world. with one we're most concerned about is libya. so it's the core, the networks and the affiliates. so it truly is a global problem, a global challenge which is why we built the global coalition. >> rose: how much support or how successful have they been in recruiting al quaida and other groups to pay allegiance to
them? now, i'm using al quaida, as al quaida members or some spinoff from al quaida because they have tried to establish themselves as the principal terrorist organization. >> yeah, so there's this kind of competition between i.s.i.l and al quaida. i mean, look at syria. the al quaida affiliate in syria which answers to swa zawahiril n pakistan, i.s.i.l is the same mindset, but they both came from al quaida and iraq, came out of zarqawi, migrated to syria and split. the split happened when baghdadi said we want to establish a caliphate, and i think there is a debate within the jihadi circles, that's not a smart thing to do. >> rose: it is said bin laden was always opposed to that. >> right, the argument was, once you do that, it won't be
popular, you will be vulnerable because you can't govern like a state and we have other things to do first. >> rose: they would say it's a great recruiting tool, shows we're doing something and by doing something the caliphate suggests we're creating a state. >> yes. i was in baghdad when baghdadi went to mosul and announced we're establishing a caliphate. wasn't sure what the consequences would be but it supercharged the global recruiting. i hear this when i travel all around the world, what is driving so many of your young people to i.s.i.l, and it is the -- the common denominator is this notion of a caliphate this historic movement, come be a part of it. it has had a dramatic effect on the recruiting. when they were able to say join the caliphate, it's an historic movement and expanding. the catch phrase is retain and
expand. that's what they say in their propaganda, the flags taking over the middle east. they can't now because it's shrinking. now they're saying join this movement, we're under test and challenge and that's why you have to join. it's a different message than come be a part of this kind of historic, linear, expanding homeland of which you can be a part of and where you will be taking care of. because it's shrinking, is shrinking dramatically and will continue to shrink. >> rose: do we know if they're getting support from within the countries that are a part of the coalition, non-governmental, but people of influence and, in some cases, institutions, foundationings and others, who have been very supportive of the expansion of wahhabism and, in some cases, supporting i.s.i.l? >> when it comes to i.s.i.l, i think we've pretty much shut
that off. so all of our best information now is that i.s.i.l's resources is self-generating, so they are very dependent upon the territory they control. that's why they're still trying to take oil fields, gas fields, they're not being very successful. think we pretty much cut offing. the external -- and there is a reason for that. we were just in saudi arabia. i.s.i.l is in saudi arabia. they're trying to launch an attack. we had very good meetings with the saudis about every 12 days an attack is launched or broken up by the saudis. >> rose: at the same time what comes out of riyadh is the saudis care more about iran and their total focus is on iran, is not so much a concern about i.s.i.l. i'm asking. that's not a statement. >> well, that's true. i think if you ask them, you know, secretary kerry, we spent about three hours with the young
deputy crown prince salman, their number one problem is iran and what iran is doing in the region. >> rose: because they believe iran is trying to be a hedge power. >> they do and they also believe in their narrative, and we see ate little differently, what is driving this recruiting to i.s.i.l is that i.s.i.l is seen as a kind of the strongest sunni entity standing up against iran, which, of course, it's not. so the kingdom wants to kind of get ahead of that. but there is some of that. there is some of that in the region. i.s.i.l in syria and iraq is a bit of a symptom of governance, of sectarianism, but there is something much broader going on around the world. in libya, there's no sectarianism. there's very little iranian influence. in places like indonesia and
australia where people are being drawn to this, there is very little. the number one country of foreign fighters joining i.s.i.l is tunisia. >> rose: which is one of the greater victories of the arab spring. >> and most of those foreign fighters are not going to syria they're going to libya. so the idea the recruiting comes entirely from a notion of sectarian tension or because of what baher al-assad is doing and all the wartime atrocities is part of it, doesn't tell the whole story, because young tunisias are driving -- almost 6,000 tunisias joined i.s.i.l and most are going to libya. >> rose: and you just said it wasn't sectarian there at all. so what prevents them in libya? i know this is high on the president's priority as well, what prevents them from an expansion in libya? what's the resistance from? it has to be from warring tribes, i would assume in some
cases, but who is stopping the expansion of all the people going from tunisia and other places to try build a base in libya? which if libya is a failed state, they have oil as a resource, they have a strategic location across the me med mediterranean from europe, it's a terrible possibility. >> libya, charlie, is a serious concern. we just met in kuwait last week with about 26 of the key members of the coalition and libya is at the top of everybody's agenda about what to do about it. and the only bright spot is it does seem to be -- i.s.i.l seems to be self-limiting in libya. it's not expanding dramatically because many of the libyans and the tribes reject this kind of foreign, what they see as a foreign interference into libya, so they're confined in this area in the central coast of sirte. there is a government who has a toe hold in tripoli which we
very much support and proive president obama has shown clearly when we see an i.s.i.l threat that will threaten us or our partners we will take action. we took a military strike against the number one leader of i.s.i.l in libya and what was concerning about him is he's actually an iraqi. when i mentioned the affiliates, every time a pre-existing terrorist group raises a flag of i.s.i.l, we can't get too distracted in terms of the counteri.s.i.l campaign because most are pre-existing problems. boko haram is a pre-existing problem for which we have many tools to deal with, now flying the i.s.i.l flag but not a fundamental problem as before. when we see leaders traveling to libya, financing going to libya, foreign fighters going into libya and directed by i.s.i.l leaders in raqqa to go to libya, that's when we get concerned, and when we see external plotting coming out of libya, that's when --
>> rose: what do we do other than support the strengthening of a government in tripoli? >> we have to strengthen and support that government, and when we see, again, threats emerging or watching these closely, we won't hesitate to take military action, but we don't want to get too far ahead of this new government. we know when they ask for help i think they will find a very willing, international community willing to help. >> rose: let me go back to iraq. is mosul football retake mozel before the end of obama's the term? >> well, i think -- >> rose: possible. possible, definitely. i think when you interview the president the way he put it was we definitely have the conditions if place to make sure that i.s.i.l will be out of mosul. we are very hesitant -- we do not want to put a time line on this. >> rose: but it's possible and that is the goal and you're putting forces in. you just announced you will have more special forces in iraq and
now in syria. >> absolutely. there is a lot going on in mosul. we are -- we hope not to get into a situation in mosul where it is street by street fighting. you know, we're working with a lot of people now inside mosul. and we know a lot more about what's going on inside mosul. and i.s.i.l has pretty much worn out it's welcome to say the least. but they have control over the population, and they execute people in the town square, they do all sorts of terrible things. but the squeeze is now, you know, the squeeze is beginning. so -- >> rose: on the offensive. well, we have a base southeast of mosul i, so we're there, peshmerga and iraqi security forces are there. two iraqi army brigades we trained are in initial phases of doing operations, clearing villages, moving out to the tigris river. this is difficult. a lot of new units when they get out there, they have to get
their sea legs, that's happening. there are a number of other things we're now planning. so someone said to me the other day, looks like the campaign is really hitting a pause. it doesn't seem to make the rapid progress that it was before. and because of the times in syria we're clearing thousands of square kilometers every week or so, and that's true, there is a natural, strategic pause where you reset, you reassess, you analyze. but when i was in iraq last week, our military commanders were putting the final touches on kind of what might be the final plan for the next stages of this campaign, and i know they feel pretty confident about it. so we hope to do it as soon as possible. >> rose: okay, i hear you, and the president said that, too, when i asked him did they want to get baghdadi the same bay as he wanted to get bin laden and he said yes and 35 or 40 others leading i.s.i.l because of who they are and what the threat is.
>> absolutely. >> rose: is the idea we can use special forces with peshmerga and with sunni's tribes and u.s. providing intelligence, citing of sources, and other things as well as air power, that's the battle plan to take i.s.i.l? what am i missing? >> well, that's the military side. there is a non-military component which is just as critical. but on the military side, we'll say every time we advise and assist a local force, that means let's plan together, let's think of how to do this, here's what you're going to need, here's when you should launch. it's been hugely successful. and i have been to these front line areas where the peshmerga are with our people. i have been to kobani and syria to talk to the people we're working with and out in anbar province, i have been to al-assad air base with the tribes out there. when we do that, every single time, we succeed.
that's hard to do, but every time we do, we succeed and we'll continue to do that. what the president ordered for mosul with the apache helicopters and additional advisors. >> rose: had they been resisting taking the apaches? >> in ramadi, we said to president abady, given how important it was to take ramadi back, there are additional capabilities we might be able to provide if you need them. turned out, we didn't need them in ramadi. mosul, i defer to general mcfarland and the came pain, it's a different terrain and we think the apaches will be noneffective. we call it stabilization, what comes after i.s.i.l, making sure, as i mentioned tikrit, people can return to their homes and people in local areas feel at's very, very important and, as a coalition, every time we're
together with a coalition, there's a military side but there is really importantly the stabilization element. and that requires resources, and i mentioned here, in the beginning, the fact that iraq is facing a real economic challenge. i mean, they are -- they do not have the economic foundation that we thought they would have when we put this campaign together. nobody predicted this kind of poil price shock, and, so -- >> rose: support for the prime minister. >> yeah, because you're heading into a hot summer, people having paychecks cut and causes unrest. >> rose: i want to move to syria. clearly, if you recapture mosul, is that the end of i.s.i.l in iraq? >> i think it will have a significant decisive blow against i.s.i.l. mosul is where you mentioned al-baghdadi rose to the nouri mosque and said we are establishing a caliphate.
so when i.s.i.l is no longer in mosul, that will be a significansignificant blow to te notion of what they are as an entity. however, being very clear about this, they will not just go away. they will remain a cellular terrorist organization. even al quaida in iraq, when the analysts say it was defeated in 2011, 2012, but even then they had five to ten suicide bombers every single month. so you get it to a level in which it's not a threat to the overall stability of the state, most importantly it's not a threat to us. that's really what we're focused on. so the fall of mosul, for i.s.i.l, will be a real strategic, significant blow. >> rose: move to syria. how much -- how strong is bashar al-assad now that he has the russian support he received and continues the to get in one form or the other?
have the russians, in fact, pulled out at all? or are they still there in force? and what role are they playing, and are they playing any role against i.s.i.l because the negotiations are taking place in geneva between the u.s. and russia. >> the russians came in to shore up assad, there's no question about that. >> rose: right, and he acknowledged that, putin. >> yes. and since we put in place a cessation of hostilities -- tougyouhave to keep in mind, whe put this in place and secretary kerry led the effort that, if this thing continues to escalate, you look at the casualties from the regime and the opposition, the regime lost about 90,000 people fighting for the regime, you forget about that. >> rose: the regime has lost 90,000 -- >> about 90,000 people fighting on behalf of the regime. >> rose: right. and rightfully so given what they're doing. >> rose: coming from free syrian forces and u.s. support.
>> free syrian forces and also the whole conglomeration of cats and dogs, some of whom are good and some of whom are pretty bad guys. we have to get into a deescalatory cycle here if we're ever going to get out of this, and also importantly to isolate the threats to us, which include i.s.i.l, and also the nusra front. so what we agreed with the russians was that we'll have a cessation of hostilities, we will do our best to deliver the opposition forces for that, excluding al-nusra and i.s.i.l, and the russians agreed to deliver the regime. putin, you know, put his reputation on the line because he came out and said he was going to support this and said we are pulling back some of our forces. and you did see a shift in russian air strikes after cessation of hostilities and going after more i.s.i.l, that was true, but what's happened in
the last couple of weeks is these regime airstrikes against targets that are civilian targets, it's totally outrageous, and, so, we have said to the russians, you know, hey, if you can't deliver the regime to stop this, then obviously this can't work. now -- >> rose: what do they say? the response we've gotten from the russians is you're right. so -- >> rose: we owe you that. yes. and, so, that has led to, in three parts of the country where there is been continued fighting, in latakia, eastern damascus and aleppo, we now are reestablishing the cessation of hostilities, doesn't mean every shot is going to stop, but what you're seeing the regime do, that just has to stop. and what the russians are telling us -- and we don't trust anybody here -- >> rose: right. -- but what they're telling us is that they agree and they're working now to
reestablish the cessation of hostilities. we've also now, and secretary kerrkerry spoke to this, syria o complicated, it's so hard from day to day to figure out exactly what is happening in any given place, there is so much misinformation together with what we know is happening, that if the russians are sincere in trying to enforce a cessation of ho tilts which once guy -- -- hostilities which they said they would do, we have to have a common sight picture of what happened. we and the russians are increasing teams to have a this-7 cycle of what's happening so when things flare up we can try to work to deescalate. might not work, but that's where we are now. the russians said they would and they have to deliver the regime, period. >> rose: what's the threat if they don't? >> we're always talking about
the whole situation in syria and things we might do but where we are oughtright now is trying to -- where we are now is trying to work with this international support group to put the pressure on and especially -- >> rose: is the coalition going against assad at all? >> the coalition. >> rose: the coalition you're the special envoy to. >> oh, the i.s.i.l coalition. >> rose: yes. the counteri.s.i.l coalition is focused very much on i.s.i.l. >> rose: not on stopping assad? >> we walk and chew gum a lot. >> rose: that's what i'm trying to clear up. >> the counteri.s.i.l coalition is focused on i.s.i.l. >> rose: it's not stopping. who is stopping assad? the special forces, moderate forces? >> there's a lot happening here. you know, the lines are fairly static. >> al-nusra is trying to -- you take aleppo.
there's three parts of aleppo. there's in the southwest, what makes it very complicated, also, is in the southwest, a lot of the fighting in the last two weeks was an offensive in which the opposition was very interwoven with al-nusra fronts and that's what the russians say to us, hey, nusra is not part of the opposition so what about this? we tell them -- >> rose: let me understand this -- al-nusra is frying with free syrian army moderate forces against assad. >> from time to time. >> rose: on the battleground in syria? >> from time to time, that's happening, certainly. they would say if we're being attacked by the regime, we need help. >> rose: they being the syrian moderate forces? >> right. >> rose: so al-nusra says we'll help you? >> we all want to unravel this -- separate the opposition forces from al-nusra. we started seeing it happen.
very important after the cessation of hostilities when you brought peaceful days to syria you started seeing the population rising up against the extremists such as al-nusra, very important moment. so we say to the russians, if you're sincere you're concerned about al-nusra like you say you are, you don't then support a regime that's bombing hospitals which drives people to the extremes. let's work together to deescalate the situation and you can begin to see a bit of a separation. so obviously we're not there yet. it is, charlie, the most complicated problem on earth and also the most important problem on earth. so where we are now is trying to reestablish the cessation of hostilities in the three areas and we'll take it from there. >> rose: especially aleppo? yes, aleppo is fighting in the southwest which is a concern. there is aays a conflict among -- there is a kurdish pocket where the kurds are fighting some of the arabs which is very dangerous, then a threat
of the syrian ample that says we're going to come in and retake aleppo and that would be a total violation of the cessation of pos tilts and that's where again the russians if they're sincere with what they signed up to with what putin went to his people in a national address and said he's going to make it map, they have to make it happen. >> rose: great to have you. it's a true honor to be here. >> rose: back in a moment. stay with us. >> rose: we torn politics -- turn to politics. a run away victory in the indiana primary left donald trump as last man standing in the race for is he cannot support
donald trump." >> it's astonishing. >> rose: the man who runs the convention. >> and who many thought runs the future of the party saying i can't support the person currently doing that. you can look at this in three ways. tlts biggest, most neon example of the party split that we have seen so far and the reaction to donald trump and the fallout. it is a reminder of how much work donald trump is going to have to do to hold the republicans together for the fall is going to be very hard and it is, if we are being honest, an effort, i think, by paul ryan to look forward to the future of the party for the party and himself. >> rose: as a future presidential candidate. >> exactly, in 2020 where many republicans will privately say they believe donald trump is much less likely to win than hillary clinton and the party will be looking to start over again. in 2020 you saw ted cruz look
forward to that in his withdrawal speech. >> rose: you have the trump wing, the tea party and some caucuses in congress that represent the tea party, you have what might be considered moderate to conservative, that would be paul ryan. what's going to happen? if trump loses badly, is the party going to be something different? are people going to want to go away and form a new party? >> very much what they're wrestling with now and i don't think we'll know the answer for some time. you saw bill cristal effort of "the weekly standard" say pointedly i will not support trump. i'm not for hillary clinton and i'm not for trump and i'm looking for what comes next in terms of conservatism. paul ryan is a very conservative figure and yet, at this moment in the republican party which lurched so far right, he is not treated that way. he is seen as a moderate, a
moderate/conservative. >> rose: an establishment republican. >> absolutely. and the party base is deeply suspicious. many americans at the moment are deeply suspicious of government and of an establishment. so we won't know whether the republican party looks like what we resemble. you see paul ryan and ted cruz banking on the idea it will form back toward what it was, but it's a collection of different tribes with different interests now. >> rose: my question would be whether there is anything that donald trump can do to get the bushes, paul rain, and maybe -- paul ryan and others. what is it he can do? he can promise them there will be a different campaign, he can promise them i'm going to be presidential, but there is a history. >> there's a raft of video of statements he has given of interviews he's given, of stories that have been written, of comments he has made, even
prior to getting into the presidential race. he also doesn't really want to change that much. >> rose: he thinks that won. he's not wrong about that. it did win him the nomination, being different won him the nomination. there are lots of other factors. >> rose: somebody who didn't play by the rules. >> somebody who wrote his own playbook. i don't think trumpism could be repeated by another candidate. i think there is a unique set of circumstances that led us to donald trump being a nominee that led to donald trump, his ability to manipulate the media, being on the apprentice for four seasons, beamed into people's homes and they saw him as apt, essentially playing a leader on tv. so i don't think just anybody could have done that but i think trump accomplished something you have to give him credit for, number one and, number two, he thinks why would i change this? this is what people want and i'm giving it to them. he's a showman.
>> rose: saying i match the mood of the country. >> right, and i'm giving the people what they want. this is what they wanted. so you have a set of advisors who are coming in and trying to sand down the message and shape it and -- >> rose: people like paul manafort. >> yes. but trump has proven at times resistant to that. >> rose: just when you think he's changed, he comes back. >> want more pivot points than anyone i can think of. >> rose: is it possible to have him win the presidential race barring some kind of black swan, some kind of indictment, some kind of huge unforeseen event maybe coming from international? >> i think nothing is impossible based on the fact we clearly saw nothing is impossible since he is the nominee. >> rose: people who are protesting the most are the ones who said trump will never do it. >> that's exactly right. that having been said, i think it will take a black swan event as you just described in order
for him to beat hillary clinton or she would have to so dramatically self-destruct and underperform. but there is going to be some kind of a third-party candidate. you have gary johnson running on the libertarian line. i think there is a chance you will see another third-party candidate. one of the things paul ryan said is he didn't say w we shouldn't have a third-party candidate, he said something like he didn't think it was necessary but didn't say it would be devastating. if a third party candidate took away a bunch of votes in key states, hillary clinton will win. >> rose: one of the reasons mike bloomberg said he didn't run is he didn't want to be a spoiler in the election. if he thought he could win, he might have, but he didn't want to be a spoiler and in his case prevent hillary clinton getting the nomination if she was running against donald trump. >> that's right, and for the reasons we talked about, that would happen, you would have
someone, such as bloomberg, who would have resources, be able to advertise and sell the case. he would take enough electoral votes away from hillary clinton, was their estimation, that donald trump would become president. the bet the clinton campaign is making is is there will not be a third-party candidate with such resources and ability to play in a number of states. that combined with trump's historically high negatives and to your point the raft of statements he's made before, many controversial that defended a wide swath of the general election electorate, they believe with all that she is quite likely. >> rose: is anything going to prevent this from being a general election campaign race toward the bottom? >> no, we're on our way toward that marathon. >> rose: sadly, i say, because this country needs a very smart campaign looking at the future and all those issues that have prevented america -- >> it's not what we're going to
see. 2012 was a real slash around burn, tactical, maneuvering knife fight between president obama and mitt romney's campaign. >> rose: the president defined mitt romney was over. >> and very early on. this campaign will make that look like a high-minded debate of ideas. >> rose: why did we let this happen to us? >> i think that we have let it to some extent -- >> rose: the spectacle? trump is entertaining to a lot of people and i think that is some of it. i don't think that is just it. i think voters are very angry, and i think that what trump exposed is -- and to some extent what bernie sanders has exposed -- is the tremendous break between the parties' base voters and their elected officials and representatives who basically have not been in touch with where their voters are. in trump's case, he did it without a pollster. he figured out the party, the
base was against these trade deals, was very, very negative on immigration and wanted to turn away quickly from the george bush foreign policy. >> rose: and did not want to spend american dollars. >> on overseas wars. >> rose: or support other people without them participating. >> correct. >> rose: and in a way, the president has the same points of view. >> trump's positions on foreign policy as he has articulated are not totally different from some of the things obama has said. obama has had complaints about free riders in recent months. >> rose: basically saying they ought to pay at least 2% of g.d.p. for defense. >> exactly, and trump takes everything to an extreme and not necessarily logical conclusion. >> rose: doesn't have the same understanding of new wasps of foreign policy. >> and foreign policy is based on nuances and relationships that take years to build and goes in increments. >> rose: the democratic party
has moved to the left. has it moved to the left in a sense part of it because the president moved a bit to the left in the second term, clearly bernie sanders had a huge influence -- talk about populism, wall street and all those things. is it a different democratic party than bill clinton presided over? >> it is absolutely a different democratic party than bill clinton presided over. >> rose: and is it a different democratic party than barack obama is presiding over? >> it is in the process of becoming that. the number of voters opened to a self-described, democratic socialist and would really be supportive of a lot of his agenda cannot be ignored and that is not where the party has typically been. bernie sanders is somebody who has been in congress for decades in some form of another and was saying basically some version of what he's been saying for a long time and nobody listened and finally he is. >> rose: joe biden said he
hasn't changed his tune. >> and you see that and the voters are moving to him and it's not the other way around. hillary clinton has two problems -- well, she has several problems. in terms of the democratic party, she is very -- she herself is prone to talking about the past. that is just who she is. she has been that way as long as i have covered her but certainly in her presidential races and she talks about the '90s a lot, in sort of a favorable, glowing way, more often than not. a lot of the clinton era policies are things that the party has totally moved away from -- gay marriage, criminal justice reform. there is a bunch that are base mote varieties, particularly criminal justice reform. clinton has been having to bat back criticism about the line she gave in the '90s about the crime bill being to fight super-predators. that has real resonance. >> rose: so much that they have been attacking her husband on the campaign trail. >> and he's gotten very angry
about it. he gets angry in general when she is attacked. he's always reacted pretty harshly in that regard but he also sees it as an attack on his own record and that's what he's responding to. what you're seeing is some of the old methods of soothing people that the democratic party has had with its demographic subsets is not really working that well, so clinton would say, look, i have this great record and voters, many of whom came of age when barack obama was becoming president, say doesn't mean anything to me. >> rose: people have always said to me in politics, people are always voting on the future. >> absolutely. >> rose: because the future is about their hopes. >> yes. >> rose: and they vote their hopes. >> yes. >> rose: also this election may very well depend in terms of what or who it's a referendum on. >> yes. well, david axlerod has this, president obama's former senior advisor, his whole theory of the cases on elections is you look for a replica or remedy and hillary clinton's problem as an
administration official but also people tend to want to remedy. >> rose: a replica they want to remedy. >> and she's doing a bit of both and that's been very difficult for her and bernie sanders' lingering presence in this race has exposed that in pretty stark terms. >> rose: this election could be very transformative election in terms of both parties and the way we -- and the way we govern. >> yes. i mean, i think that's right. i think that -- i think one of the reactions that you're seeing in congress potentially to the trump nomination is you might see increased and you have in some quarters increased calls to confirm garland for the supreme court before this term is over to save the senate. for so long -- >> rose: to save the senate and also knowing that the fear that if the numbers hold up, hillary clinton will be the president and she may want to nominate somebody to the left of
judge garland. >> correct, so go with what you know is basically the sell to voters. but because of that, you could see something of a fiver break on some of this gridlock, not all of it, but certainly for now. >> rose: thank you for coming. thank you. >> rose: maggie haberman. thank you for joining us. see you next time. for more about this program and earlier episodes, visit us online at pbs.org and charlierose.com. captioning sponsored by rose communications captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org
larriva: it's like holy mother of comfort food.ion. woman: throw it down. it's noodle crack. patel: you have to be ready for the heart attack on a platter. crowell: okay, i'm the bacon guy. man: oh, i just did a jig every time i dipped into it. man #2: it just completely blew my mind. woman: it felt like i had a mouthful of raw vegetables and dry dough. sbrocco: oh, please. i want the dessert first! [ laughs ] i told him he had to wait.