tv Charlie Rose PBS May 30, 2016 12:00pm-1:01pm PDT
>> ian: welcome to the program. i'm ian bremmer, filling in for charlie rose who's on assignment. we begin this evening with an analysis of president obama's historic trip to hiroshima. al is on scene. >> it is no secret the japanese army was responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths and it's a big reason why there is a lot of tension between zeke and japan. president obama tried to ease the tension, at the same time encouraging the japanese self-defense force to take a more active role in the region due to heightened threat from
korea among other places. japan's neighbors are leery of the country remilitarizing after 70 years of pacifism. >> i am joined by jennifer harris and patrick cronin. >> if selling arms to vietnam is the arranges what is the question? it's not as if it comes to a real military conflict, these arms salesserly going to be doing the work in any of that conflict just as we see with our continued military sales to taiwan. you know, the u.s. will have to stand behind the security guarantees in order to be seen as credible. >> also this evening a conversation with andrew mcafee, author and principal research scientist at m.i.t.'s initiative on the digital economy.
>> there is a fear that silicon valley might become the next wall street in the minds of people, in other words a great wealth generator engine not benefiting many of us at all. i think that's inaccurate. i think it is benefiting us hugely and we need tech industries to make their case better and stop shooting themselves in the foot. >> ian: we conclude with global health. dr. andre anthony fauci of the national institutes of health. >> we will see other outbreaks. i remember at the end of the curve of the ebola outbreak, i was on many programs with the press talking about the inevitability of our seeing another emerging infectious disease outbreak and unfortunately it was present because on the tail of ebola came zika outbreak. tbheed to be prepared as a global community. we live in a global community.
the borders don't mean anything when you're dealing with merging and reemerging infectious diseases and need to be dealt with differently. >> ian: all this when we continue. >> rose: >> rose: funding for "charlie rose" has been provided by the following: captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose.
>> hunt: i'm al hunt from "bloomberg view" filling in for charlie rose. president obama was the first sitting president to visit hiroshima, japan. he revolution and a world without nuclear weapons. >> we may not be able to eliminate man's capacity to do evil, so nations and the alliances we formed must possess the means to defend ourselves, but among those nations like my own that hold nuclear stockpiles, we must have the courage to escape the logic of fear and pursue a world without them. we must change our mindset about war itself. to prevent conflict through diplomacy and strive to end conflicts after they have begun. >> hunt: the highly
anticipated visit caps off the president's tenth trip to asia which also include add stop in vietnam. joining me now from hiroshima is will ripley. he's an international correspondent for cnn. welcome, will. what was the reaction in japan to this historic visit? >> hi, al. the majority of people here in hiroshima really welcomed president obama's visit. this is something city miserable and the mayor has been having for since the 1980s. they wrote letters to every single president since ronald reagan. the former hiroshima mayor met with president obama in 2010 at the white house when obama said he would be willing to come here and six years later the moment was finally realized. so the majority of people welcome the visit. there were a handful of protesters here, probably in the minority as far as public opinion goes. people with signs were saying the world need to do away with
nuclear weapons which was the message of probst and a handful of sign saying they protested the president's visit in large part because some people here do feel the united states owes japan an apology. president obama, of course, didn't give an apology. it's a very sensitive situation geopolitically here considering japan's own wartime policies specifically against china and south korea during and prior to world war. >> hunt: participation from obama's right wing critics at hope that it would be an apology tour. use said, he didn't apologize but he really gave, it seemed, a rather eloquent speech that was quite moving. >> and it was focusing on what we expected him h to say, al, which was to talk about the horrific toll of nuclear weapons on innocent civilians primarily because the bombings in hiroshima and nagasaki led to an estimated 200,000 deaths within a few months of the bombings and many others suffered the
long-term effects of radiation exposure, so this particular backdrop not only being an historic moment because 11 u.s. presidents have been elected since truman made the decision to drop the a bomb, obama the first sitting president to visit the site and he used it to reiterate the message-gave in prague at the beginning of his presidency that the world should denuclearize. skill skepticism in washington about the iran deal. north korea conducted three nuclear tests since obama's been elected. nearing the end of his presidency, he sees this moment to try to once again make the case that a world without nuclear weapons would be a safer place. but a long way to go, obviously. >> hunt: well, that incredibly emotional moment when the president met with some hiroshima survivors, describe that to us and also the wonderful story you did on that man that he hugged, mr. miro.
>> yeah, it was the last minute thing for president obama to have some time to interact with just a small handful of hiroshima and nagasaki survivors, something they put together at the last moment realizing one of the most important things for people in hiroshima is that the survivors, who are getting older, have the opportunity to share their stories with the american president on this historic day. one of the men in the audience, his story remarkable. this is the man in the grey suit who had an emotional embrace with president obama after he gave his speech, and the man worked 40 years after the bombings to locate families of 12p.o.w.s held in hiroshima,
they were in a police headquarters leveled in the blast. they died. they were the crews of two american bombers, the talowa and the lonesome lady. after the bombings, a off information about american p.o.w.s was kept top secret but he researched the planes and the crew members and in the '70s, he borrowed phone books from the library and every weekend for more than 20 years he called every matching name in every possible state and was able to find the families, contact them, used an interpreter and spent the equivalent of about 30 u.s. dollars per phone call back in the '80s to speak to these families, and then exchange letters with them to get their names, the p.o.w. names officially registered at the hiroshima hall of remembrance. so this is somebody who spent the better part of his life to
help the families of his former ennoy find closure and to see this surprise invite to the ceremony where the u.s. president visits this site and then of course that incredible moment where he emotionally hugged president obama, it really still gives me goosebumps to talk about it because this is somebody who cared so much about the legacy of all of the victims of the a bomb because, of course, it killed indiscriminately. and now he is also a part of history because everybody will remember that image of him hugging the president. just really remarkable. >> it gives us goosebumps, will, to even hear you tell the story. let's go back for a moment to truman's incredible decision. my bloomberg colleague wrote about yamashita who has a daily book about the life of japan in the early '40s and it suggests japan was prepared for a massive resistant both the citizenry and
the military before hiroshima. is there any recognition in japan that is awful and terrible as those bombs were that maybe they were necessary? >necessary? it is no secret that the president administration led by shinzo abe has tried to downplay japan's wartime atrocities because the japanese imperial army was responsible for hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths and a big reason why there is a lot of tension in this part of the world particularly between south korea, china and japan. president obama tried to seize the tension and encouraging the japanese self-defense force to take an active role due to heightened threat from north korea and japan's neighbors are leery of this country remilitarizing after
centuries of passivism because they remember what happened at the hands of japanese forces. japanese historians feel bombings of hiroshima and nagasaki were not necessary, that japan was close to surrendering, anyway, but many other historians believe japan would have put up a strong fight and many more people would have likely died. the bombing of hiroshima, 140,000 people died here and other deadly attacks on japan as well. a single night in tock owe the city was fire bombed and estimated up to 100,000 died and much of tokyo was leveled as well. a brutal, bloody war, horrific casualties on all sides and the overall consensus remains today that the a bombs brought about an abrupt end to the war that could have cost many more lives. >> hunt: does this moment
today have any significance for prime minister abe or u.s.-japanese relations? >> one thing the foreign minister of hiroshima told me is he hopes this gesture of reconciliation by president obama will res made with abe and other japanese officials who have been reluctant to in essence own up to what japan did during world war ii and before. abe has no current plans to visit pearl harbor, for example, and even though japan did recently apologize to south korea for another human rights issue during world war ii, the sexual enslavement of women known as comfort women, many in this region o feel japan has not done enough to own up to its wartime atrocities. many in the inner circle believe japan apologized enough and has been a passivist country for
more than 70 years and they're trying to move forward as best they can. again, some people feel japan and its leaders need to do more and that this visit by president obama may motivate them to do so but we'll just have to see. >> well, will ripley, we thank you for just a compelling story, an account of this extraordinary day. thank you so much for joining us. we be right back. >> ian: good evening. i'm ian bremmer filling in for charlie rose who is on assignment. we continue the program wanlcies of president obama's -- with analysis of president obama's historic trip to asia. joining me is patrick cronin, director of the asia-pacific security program at the center for a new american security. and joining me in new york is jen harris, senior foul fellow at the council on foreign relations and wore by other means, geoeconomic and state craft. pleased to have both of them on this program, welcome. >> thank you.
>> ian: let me start off with you, patrick. we now have all of these photos of president obama, historic, in hiroshima. not an apology, but certainly a significant speech and before that in vietnam making large steps to normalize the relationship with the country we were at war with not so many decades ago. give us your context. how are we supposed to read all of this? >> well, this is president obama's tenth visit to asia and i think it has a clear theme of remember silliation in. the past number of trips, he's emphasized the rebalance or pivot to asia. in 2014 he was really focused onta tour through asia of reassurance, reassuring allies about article 5 treaty commitment to japan over the slavndz as well as to strengthen the u.s.-philippine alliance. but this was reconciliation with former enemies, with vietnam, lifting the lethal ban sale
totally in terms of making that announcement in vietnam, a country that he's hoping will be part of the trans-pacific partnership as well, so both a trade and security partnership in the next 20 years in contrast to being a former enemy or struggled through normalization and created a steening partnership, in japan, connecting with the people of japan at a level deeper than any president in recent memory because to have the hiroshima speech, at the same time, renne forcing his global message and his legacy message of averting nuclear war through nonproliferation and tamping ton nationalism and competition. this was about reconciliation. >> ian: jen, is obama putting points on the board? >> he's putting points on the board of a certain kind. my fear is that they are still too thoroughly of a military sort, and in a region like asia
where so much of the currency of power is, as you know, denominated more in economic than in military terms. i still see the united states over militarizing this pivot. >> so i guess the one question you have is japan and vietnam, erica, even the leaders areke well disposed to president obama, but the biggest thing out there is the t.p.p., and it's the most important for the vietnamese economy to benefit more than anything that gets done and abe had to do a lot of lifting to make it happen. immensely uncertain here in the united states. first of all, do you think it's going to get done? and if it doesn't, is this trip just ale failure when we look in the rearview mirror? >> yes is the short answer and that's unfortunate, and i think this is a bit of unforced error from the obama administration, why we waited until fourth quarter to put this thing up for passage, why it came back with
certain decisions and surprises to obama's own party i think are big question marks that we sort of did to ourselves in some sense, and if this is, as the president has called it, you know, a referendum on american leadership in asia, then seems like we would have sort of done our home work and made sure we were bringing home something that would pass. >> and you think he waited why? really good question. obviously, it's easy to arm chair q.b. these things. there is a lot on the agenda, but there is some calculus it could get through on a lame duck session with a g.o.p.-controlled congress and perhaps that was what he was hoping for. it's a pretty dicey play in an election year. >> let's go to vietnam. patrick, the big news was the complete ending of the military boycott, arms boycott lifting, and how do you feel about it? >> well, i was a proponent of
lifting the ban, not because i don't have concerns about the communist party of vietnam and its censorship and treatment of human rights. we should all be concerned about those issues as americans, but this lifting of the ban is a symbolic gesture to show that the united states has every intention of building out this relationship and wants to provide every incentive for additional reform over the next 20 years, and i think this ban and t.p.p., if that succeeds, will be a catalyst for really transforming vietnam. vietnam has a tremendous economic potential in southeast asia, and this is vital for the united states, when you think about our need to integrate with a rising asia-pacific region in the coming decades. jen mentioned the concern about being too security focused. i agree we can't let a gap grow even wider between our economic provision and our benefits from asia and our security provision
and what we gain from that. the lifting of the ban is a military move in some ways but also really a way to integrate our economies in the future as well because it's the trans-pacific partnership in the wider economic integration we may realize with vietnam in the next 20 years that will be most important. >> china, is you know, overwhelmingly the most important trade partner for most of the countries in this region, but they want the united states from a military perspective, you're saying the u.s. is doing too much militarily, but you you couldn't you make the argument that that was the trump card for the americans? because that's what they want. >> i would say selling arms to vietnam is the answer, what is the question? it's not as if it comes to a real military conflict, these arms sales are going to be doing the work in any of that conflict, just as we see with our continued military sales to taiwan. you know, the u.s. will have to come in and stand behind these
security guarantees in order to sort of be seen as credible. what is changing the regional balance of power in asia, the facts on the ground is, how china is flexing its economic muscle and raising the economic costs for all the countries of challenging china on some of the maritime claims. >> ian: patrick, you were just in taiwan. we have the new president and her inauguration. one thing i thought was quite notable was we didn't have her reiterate the one china principal, something that's certainly the chinese officials were counting on. did this startle you? do we need to worry about cross state tensions to a degree? >> i think since the election of the democratic progressive party in january and the inauguration in may, there's been a growing realization that cross strait tensions are likely to increase
between beijing and tie bay. having said that, president cy england was very calibrated in everything she said. on the '92 consensus, she didn't budge an inch in terms of her four principles. she says the two sides set up dialogue in $92 and that was one of the principals. the most startling things about the inauguration for somebody attendanting the inauguration, banquet and the pageantry was much more the domestic issues she face. it's all about the economy. the economy's in a hole right now in taiwan, three-quarters of decline, yet she wants to close nuclear reactors because that's her party platform.
she wants the divest from the mainland toward the southbound policy toward southeast asia and others k. she achieve that? because if she can't she will be under tremendous political pressure. we've seen signs in the first week post inauguration that china may be shooting indications it wants to pressure the president to adhere to her predecessors policy of integration. >> ian: is taiwan the ally americans don't really want to have? >> it's a strategic partner we find essential because, again, the proudest thing for any american attending the inauguration is this was a successful democratic nomination. this third democratic in taiwan hay hadn't had before.
there was a certain reconciliation going on in taiwan itself. that message of democracy and her message in a two-hour pageant of thousands of performers of showing the diversity, the very local dialects, the local costumes, it was all about taiwanees. she used the word "country" 23 times in her inaugural address. there is definitely common values between the united states and taiwan. neither taibe nor washington want this to lead to conflict. can we help taiwan to remain more autonomous from the mainland and not lead to tension? we don't know. >> ian: very different than the kind of transitions we're seeing and not seeing in hong kong, for example. another transition we've just seen and everyone's saying it's donald trump in asia is rodrigo
duderte in the philippines. obama's not there, you know, and that's probably wise, but is there too much highway patrol with that? >> it is donald trump on a jet ski to passion himself. we need to be very worried. there is a threat of a reckless driver as we have a defense treaty with the philippines and we now have a leader that we really can't trust, is extremely unpredictable, i think that can be a very dangerous position for the u.s. in terms of maintaining our credibility in asia with all our asian allies. i think you've already begun to see the tone change in the philippines. in the early days of this administration, when he was running for election, he was quite adamant that, you know, he was going to ride a jet ski out, plant a flag and claim this territory for the philippines.
already we've begun to see it as a decidedly different tack and we hear him make noises of possibly wanting to sit down and do business with the chinese and signal willingness to, you know, cede perhaps some ground on the sovereignty issues for economic concessions and this is exactly the kind of invitation china wants to see. >> ian: how much trepidation do you feel about china's direction, region, and the relationship of china and u.s.? what do we watch out for? >> i'm pretty much a centrist on this. i worry about an economic slowdown in china and overassertiveness in china especially in places in the south china sea where china is trying to exploit the rules and expand territorial control over its neighbors and this could lead to flashpoints whether in taiwan or the philippines or taiwan or the next u.s.
administration in particular. at the same time we vitally need china as part of the global economy to avert global problems with our own domestic economy and through international economy, for the well being of the planet. so we can't get away from working closely with china but the competition is still likely to grow, in my perspective, and china and how it handles itself will be extremely important as it's run up to its party congress next year. we need xi jinping but we won't be able to trust him on certain issues as maritime tension or viesh space but we will work with xi jinping in china to the extent he's willing to cooperate on those areas as like the ones he has gree agreed like climate change. >> ian: jen, are they running out of steam with the transition? is he becoming more vulnerable
at all? are there datapoints that give you a bit of unease? >> absolutely. i was actually just in china earlier this week, meeting with several chinese academics, more or less, and as is often the case with china, it was striking as much for what wasn't said on the chinese side as what they did say and in particular any attempt to get them to, you know, give some even just factual accounts of the anti-corruption campaign, let alone and accounting for this huge uptick we've seen in spending on chinese domestic security, not exactly your best economic return on investment as you are facing economic head winds, right? they wouldn't touch it. all they wanted to talk about was donald trump and where the u.s. elections were going, maybe not a surprise there. but, you know, they think the main point that we try to stress in our book is just because we see a china that's slowing down, that's not to suggest this is
going to be a more docile china or a weaker china in terms of what the u.s. can expect in the next decade or so and probably quite the opposite. it could be, you know, more surly china that's more prone to lashing out. the way that they have begun to structure a lot of their economic elements of their diplomacy, i see no reason why an economic slowdown needs to translate into some diminishing of their economic clout abroad. a lot of their going out campaigns, the state-led financing are financed by the huge current account surplus that is relatively insulated from the current head winds they're experiencing so i see no real downturn in what the u.s. can expect to see in terms of chinese influence in asia. >> ian: thank you jennifer harris and patrick cronin. we continue with andrew mcafee, principal research
sign cyst at m.i.t.'s initiative on the digital economy. his work explores how information technologies are transforming business and society. his latest book the second machine age argues that the robot age is good news, but that it brings with it some challenges. welcome. >> thanks, ian. >> ian: let's focus on the challenges to start. i want to know how fast, who's it hitting. >> yeah. >> ian: because the headlines seem to be coming much much more significantly these days. >> and i don't think that's a mistake. i think the technology really is getting simultaneously a lot cheaper and a lot better. on the cheaper side, we got the news earlier this week fox con is planning to replace about half of the total workforce at this 110,000 person sprawling factory complex with robots that are working more cheaply than the chinese now. on the better side, an announcement from google i believe yesterday or today that they built a technology that can
identify where a picture was taken just by looking at the pixels better than any human being can do. we used to think the humans were the world champion visual pattern recognizer. i don't think that's true anymore. >> the last 75 years of globalization have been developed market labor, made redundant by emerging market labor. is that not turned on its head as develop market technology as trump emerging market labor? >> a little bit. there are two tectonic forces that are reshaping workforces and economies around the world and they are globalization and tech progress. you could make an argument that so far globalization may have been the bigger deal out of those two and that's why the american middle class has been getting hollowed out and the factory jobs have been getting moved overseas. what i think is that tech progress with artificial intelligence and self-driving cars and drones and all this a.i. that this is going to be the bigger story moving forward. >> what should we be watching
for now? what are the places that are going to be most fundamentally disrupted/subverted by the coming of the machines? >> the coming of the machines is good news for all of us. if we leave aside us as workers. and we're not just workers. we are also people who want to be entertained, we want to communicate and have better health and health care. we want higher quality gooppedz and services at lower prices. all of us do. tech progress is the only free lunch economists believe in. it's giving us more and better stuff for less. we need to be clear on the overall good news. the question you ask is what kinds of people in their capacity as folk who want to offer their labor as an employer. want to be a working somewhere in the economy, who's going to be challenged most by this tech progress that we're seeing? so far the people who have been most challenged are the ones doing routine work. so assembly line workers do the same thing all day every day. we have technology that can do that. the payroll clerk in that
factory was doing the same thing over and over. it was routine knowledge work as opposed to routine physical work. we automated a lot of those jobs away. what i think is going to happen going forward is that sweet spot of technology is going to get a lot bigger. so if you listen to people all day and try to give them answers to their questions, there's a lot of technology coming that's good at that. if you provide financial advice, if you do legal research, if you do medical diagnosis all day, those are tasks that we've seen the technology get very, very good at in the past few years. there is going to be automation coming to those sectors as well. however if you're a home health aid, if your job involves taking care of someone else, calming them down, climbing stairs to be with them, we don't have robots that can do this, so there is a lot of work at the low wage end of the economy that's not about to be automated, and the superior high end where you have entrepreneurs, data scientists and litigating and all that, i
don't see technology coming that way. but the sweet spot in the middle, i think that's getting bigger. >> right away, fundamental changes in workforce composition in the next five years across sectors inajor countries? is china going to have to retool itself in the next five year plan? >> five years sounds a little quick to me. again, i don't think we'll have the stair climbing, medication dispensing nonterrifying robot in five years at all. where my crystal ball gets cloudy is where i start thinking about 20 years, 30 years, 40 years, when they take the kind of progress we're clearly already seeing and project that forward a generation or so from now, are we going to have human beings driving trucks around our economy in ten years, let alone 20? i can't see it. >> who do you see out there? what governments, what corporations that are most ahead of the curve in understanding the nature of this challenge and what kind of solutions are you starting to see offered? >> let me give you a couple of
examples. i think singapore is doing clever work, instead of trying to resist the trend toward automated driving, they're doubling down saying let's set up a test bed and see if that can work here. in general, the pro business, pro innovation climate in the u.s., i think, is a pretty good idea. larry lessig at harvard has a wonderful way to talk about the choice. he says we can protect the past from the future or the future from the past. i want to protect the future from the past. in the future, we're living longer, healthier lives. we have access to more stuff. i say bring it on. i see a lot of attempts to protect the past and protect the current companies, the current job holders. i look at the battle that uber fights, city after city, country after country. city after city in the u.s., they've got to go to war to roll out this service that you and i value a lot. my guess is you've taken a few oobers in your day providing labor income for people who didn't need anything more than access to a car and a
smartphone. i'm all in favor of that especially in this climate where a lot of people would like more opportunities to earn work with labor. >> if we get away from the doom and gloom and talk about opportunities, how it's benefiting human beings, not as workers but in terms of all the services we want to engage and enjoy, where are the placous see people's lives changing the most from where they are today in the coming years? >> right at the base of the pyramid. right at the people all around the world who have been living in dire poverty and closely related they have been cut off from the rest of the world. they've had no access to communication. they have had no access to knowledge resources. when you think globally, access to both knowledge and communication, these have been reserved for the elite. all throughout human history till now, and realizing that change should make us really optimistic. if you look at how incomes for the people, the absolutely poorest people in the world have changed just over the past generation, we've never seen faster progress at eliminating
dire poverty and helping out health at the bottom. i think it's really telling that the country with the world's first drone delivery network for medicines -- >> sub-saharan africa, rwanda? yes, there is an example of a country leading in the future and doing the right through, bringing on the drones. >> i see the assisted automation and full driverless and modules and pods. who do you think is most likely at this point to be the winner sneer. >> i think over any decent time period, maybe not tomorrow or next month, over any decent time period, completely driverless is going to be the winner. i think there are about 30,000 hayden deaths in the u.s. per year. the majority are caused by drivers falling asleep or other kinds of error. let's get that error out of the system. the driverless cars are not perfect yet. that's not the right test. they are improving really, really happenedly and they're going to be better than us.
i say bring those things on. >> it starts with freight and trucking and these sorts of things and then sits consumers? >> that feels right. the easiest, most routine driving is hong haul interstate driving of trucks. i wouldn't be surprised if a couple of states said we will allow that on a trial basis going forward. it would start that way. i think taxicab here in manhattan might be one of the last kinds to be automated, but it will start with the easy stuff and edge into the rest of the economy as technology improves. >> we've seen gaudy wealth generated by the big core i.t. firms. where is the place you think the next big pops are going to be in terms of the actual returns for these companies, where the sectors that are going to suddenly see radical expansion and profitability and revenues because of these things? >> i think the companies that figure out how to take these very recent advances in the field of artificial intelligence, and when you hear
liebles like machine learning and deep learning, that's what they're talking about, these technologies in the past three or four years have come on like gangbusters, they are going to transform many sectors of the economy, many from driving the vehicle, responding to a customer, troubleshooting, equities research, medical diagnosis, pathology, radiology, this is going to happen. i think it's going to happen a lot quicker than most of us aree our existing infrastructure, lick we've sean happen with airports around cell phone technology and the rest. >> we are playing in america from an extremely strong hand. most of the great technology companies happen to be american. it's a bit of a mystery why. i was talking with mark
andreasen, a good entrepreneur venture capitalist and he says there are about four factors a country needs to be excellent with tech innovation. you need great research universities, pools of risk seeking investors like venture capitalists, respect for rule and property law rights so no one can take your invention and a cultural tolerance for failure, weirdness and outsiders. america has all four of these. a couple are headed in the wrong direction. we have all four. very few countries have everything on the list. maybe israel. i think the hand we have now is a fantastic hand. what i hope is we don't overregulate, we don't let special interests or incumbents weaken the hand for us. it's bizarre to me that in about six states now you cannot buy a tesla car from tesla. there are laws forbidding you from buying from the
manufacturer. >> ian: i couldn't help but think as you went through all four of those, none of them is going to be the world's largest economy. how do you think about a country that will have that kind of impact and seems to be hampered structurally in every way you say they need to be going to take advantage of this revolution? >> i think that will be one of the huge questions going forward. they have a huge market, an extraordinary entrepreneurial community and risk tolerant investors. there is lots of venture capital happening in china right now. we've seen some of the chinese tech companies. i'll believe in that more deeply when i see the first chinese innovation jump over the great fire wall of china and have big success elsewhere in the world. you can still have great companies in a 1.4 billion american market, but the global
investors are primarily american. >> do you think the technology gists themselves are becoming more political actors as the occurs? you see someone like jack baugh who is doing more driving on this publicly that be from the chinese government and the fire wall. how do those things come together in your view? >> the technology gist is know in silicon valley are engaging more often and deitschly with the political process, with the conversation. there's a fear that i sense out there, they're worried silicon valley might become the next wall street in the minds of a lot of people. a great wealth generation that is not benefiting most of us at all. i think that's inaccurate. i think tech progress is benefiting us hugely and i think we immediate the leaders of the tech industry to get out and make their case better and better and stop doing some of the shooting themselves in the foot things that we've seen. >> you could make the argument that some of these companies are easily as strategic. do you think that's changing? do you think that the culture in
the valley and technology is becoming not just more globalist but more aware of the political nature of what they're doing? >> absolutely. they have to be. it would be very foolish for them not to be, but the guys that i've talked to and the people i've talked to out there do have a real sense of mission. they believe correctly they're changing the world and part of that sen gauging in the political processes to make sure that change unfolds. we have tech no libertarians who want to build an island off the coast themselves. that's not entirely accurate. a lot of the people i know are engaged in different kinds of lobbying effort, philanthropy and the political process. >> so on balance, we'll see more balance coming out of this part of the world? >> i think we'll see more variety which i believe is healthy, and i do think they're going to have to continue to engage more often and more deeply with these conversations. the classic silicon valley leave us alone and let us build our stuff, it's not going to work in
the world that we're heading into. >> have you found yourself as you've worked more in seeing the advances actually come to light that you have been working on, have they overwhelmingly made you more optimistic about the future or are there some that you're seeing now that are saying wait a second we're playing with fire? >> overwhelmingly more optimistic. we have tough problems. we have to take better care of our fellow man. we have planetary global chamgs to face in the next 20t 20th century. we won't be monks and turn away from consumption to what's not going to happen. the only way we'll meet the challenges is with good tools. the tools in the past five years have gotten amazing by better, exponegligencely better so i'm a big optimist. a couple of things i find scary maybe just because of ignorance, the ability we have to edit the
genome has gone through the roof and that ability is incredibly democratic. a high school kid can order a kit and do some flavors of genetic work. the people that know tell me to calm down so i try to sleep easier. >> andrew mcafee, thanks so much for joining me today. we conclude with news of the zika and superfu superbug virus. federal officials are reasonably sure there could be a zika outbreak. 157 pregnant women in the continental united states show evidence of possibly zika infection. all of these instances are related to travel outsaid of the united states. president obama has asked for 1 billion, the house counted
with legislation that would fund one-third of that. researchers also identified the first patient of the united states to be infected with the so-called superbug. the patient ones infected with bacteria that proved resistant to antibiotic. the patient is well now but the case raises the possibility of a bacteria that could cause untreatable infections. joining me from bethesda, maryland, is dr. anthony fauci, director of the national institute of allergy and infectious diseases at the national institutes of health. welcome. >> good to be with you. >> ian: question for you. zika virus, heard president obama is now asking for a couple billion to fight it. we've obviously heard about large numbers of cases across latin america and increasingly here in united states. how are the brazillians doing here?
what kind of a grade do you give them? where are they falling down and where are they getting it right? >> i don't think it's a question of falling down or getting it right or wrong. they have a terrible challenge. they have a major outbreak that they're in the middle of zika, which otherwise would have been relatively inconsequential infection, but since it has hit brazil in its explosive nature, it's clear now that there is the association of infection of a pregnant woman who would rather die of consequences than the fetus. they're dealing with encephaly in the fetus. mosquito control in certain parts of brazil particularly the northeastern part with the capability to do verdict control is really not very good. they're struggling now about what they're going to do.
>> bifer get to the naidz, the olympics are coming up and will probably make it hid headlines everywhere around the world, i've seen in the past couple of weeks calls from harvard doctors that they should be closing down the olympics or at least rescheduling, given the number of people that will be coming in and the risk that will pose. how do you respond to that? >> i don't think we're really justified in doing that. the one thing you want to make sure that we do, and if the guidelines of the c.d.c. are followed carefully, we can mitigate that problem considerably, not completely. we have to protect pregnant women. pregnant women are highly vulnerable if they get infected to having a situation with a congenital abnormality in the fetus. so clearly if a woman is
pregnant, think they might be pregnant, could be pregnant, should stay away from regions including brazil where you have ongoing outbreak of zika infection. if you do go down there, there are a number of precautions that need to be taken, but i do not think at this point that one needs to cancel it, at least from the standpoint of a public health issue, even notwithstanding the olympics, if you look at the number of flight patterns and visits back and forth in the united states back and forth to south america, central america and the caribbean, per year, about 40 million people go back and forth. so though a lot of people will go to brazil for the olympics, it's not going to make that much of an overwhelming difference in the region. >> ian: we've seen not only in brazil but across south america,
pretty unorthodox methods of releasing rejectly altered mosquitoes, calls to tell women to wait on pregnancy. do you see the united states responding in similar ways or different? >> i don't think we'll need the draconian developments as in the south american countries. puerto rico is in an entirely different situation than the continental united states because puerto rico is more like brazil than continental united states. so there really is a serious problem that's going to get worse in puerto rico because puerto rico has had a situation with a similar virus called
chicken gunia where 25% of the population got infected when it came there a couple of years ago, so we fully expect the same thing is going to happen with zika. >> what lessons can we take from how the world did or didn't respond to ebola given your understanding of what kind of outbreaks we're likely to see in the future? >> well, first of all, we are going to surely see other outbreaks. i remember at the end of the curve of the ebola outbreak, i was on many programs with the press talking about the inevitability of our seeing another emerging infectious disease outbreak and unfortunately it was present because very soon on the tail of ebola came the zika outbreak. we need to be prepared better as a global community and realize we live in a global community. the borders don't mean anything when you deal with emerging and reemerging infectious diseases
and things need to be done differently. we've initiated a global health strategic network. we've got to be able to diagnose early and respond early before things get out of hand, and those are the kind of things that we in the united statessics together with some of our colleagues in different countries throughout the world are doing. you can't be behind the 8 ball every time there's a new outbreak. we have to be better prepared for emerging and reemerging infectious diseases. >> ian: finally i want to ask you about the superbug we saw emerge in pennsylvania, resistant to everything out there. what needs to happen from the united states to respond? >> emerging infections also include the emergence of drug-resistant microbes, and that's exactly what we're seeing now. this is a particular type of a drug-resistant mik microbe calld
m.c.r.1 european which means the bacteria has a gene that makes it resistant to even the last line of antibiotics, and in this case an antibiotic called colistin which is the last stand against multiple drug resistant microbes. to approach that you have to have good infection control and surveillance to prevent the outbreaks. the original cause is likely giving animals in china and other places antibiotics to make them grow better and be healthy so they can be better livestock and other types of animals which is very very dangerous to do. our program in the united states about combating antibiotic-resistance among bacteria is to make sure that we're careful in not willy-nilly giving antibiotics the to animals. but there are other things that need to be done and namely the prudent use of antibiotics so that you don't induce and select
for resistance as well as hospital control. the president, president obama, just a year and a half, two years ago, instituted with an executive order a program to combat antibiotic-resistant bacteria with action plans and new funding, particularly for areas such as in the n.i.h. and the c.d.c. so we are aggressively attacking this problem. >> you can imagine political responses in this environment both in terms of saying americans in the military and other aid programs shouldn't be involved in countries like that because they'll come back with something, and/or the trade and sensitive agriculture should be cut off because it's a danger and there is not enough control in emerging markets, what should the united states do in a policy perspective given the fears that will emerge in headlines. >> the policy of complete isolationism is foolhardy and doesn't work.
we live in a global community. we've just got to get it and face it. we live in a global community. to say our military should not be doing any projects of humanitarian aid in other parts of the world and we shouldn't be having interactions in other parts of the world because of fear of bringing microbes here is very short sighted and fool hardy, i think. >> ian: the message we need to hear. dr. grow fauci, reappreciate you being here. >> good to see you. >> rose: for more about this program and earlier episodes, visit us online at pbs.org and charlierose.com. captioning sponsored by rose communications
kacyra: it kind of was, like, the bang that set off the night. rogers: that is the funkiest restaurant. thomas: the honey-walnut prawns will make your insides smile. [ laughter ] klugman: more tortillas, please! khazar: what is comfort food if it isn't gluten and grease? braff: i love crème brûlée. sobel: the octopus should have been, like, quadripus, because it was really small. sbrocco: and you know that when you split something, all the calories evaporate, and then there's none. whalen: that's right.