tv Charlie Rose PBS November 18, 2017 12:00am-1:01am PST
>> rose: welcome to the program, tonight we tbin with part 2 of our look at 50 years of "60 minutes" with jeff fager, the executive producer of "60 minutes." >> there is that drive in our broadcast to, you know, to do something important. and to really be better than last sunday. you know. and that's a big part of the culture too. i think from my perspective, i'm so busy thinking about next sunday, i can barely remember what happened last sunday which is what made that writing the book so interesting. >> rose: and we continue this evening withdrew faust, president of harvard university who stepped down on july 30th of 2018. >> part of creating the exchange of ideas that is so essential in a university campus is not just to permit speech but to encourage an environment in
which speech is welcomed and difference is sought after. so we have to not just be passive in protecting speech, we have to be active in enabling speech. and making sure as i said before that we have students with different points of view making sure that individuals understand that when they speak, they will be listened to and respected in their speech and that people aren't just shouting at the top of their lungs with their fingers in their ears. >> and we conclude with a review of president trump's asia trip and also a profile of saudi arabia today with ian bremmer, president of eurasia group. >> let's be clear, when he says america's back. i was there. i met with a lot of the leaders at the apex summit in vietnam and it's very clear that the role of the u.s. president on the ground with this trip is much more limited today than it has been historically. >> rose: fager, faust and
bremmer when we continue. >> funding for charlie rose is provided by the >> 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: we begin this evening with part 2 of our two part conversation with jeff fager looking at 50 years of "60 minutes." >> and you've had conflicts between correspondents too, have you not. >> there's always a conflict between correspondents. >> rose: well, because they're
in competition but also sometimes one correspondent will get upset with another for another reason. >> i think is t is more college y'all than people realize. the conflict from the reputation that comes from mike wallace. we're kind of famous for being a tiger and he was the tiger, he was the biggest cat of all, as dan rather told. >> rose: he prowled the hauls. >> looking for trouble. but it is a pretty collegial place but the competition is people want their store hes to be the best. >> rose: you keep the c kors to strong standards and if they have not done that anyway, it is a responsibility to remind people. >> sometimes. and there's a code up there in terms of how we collaborate and it is an ensemble, after all. and i think everybody respects that. there are people who came and went who preferred to have their own show. >> rose: right. >> and the people who stayed
respect the ensemble of it. it's important. it matters. it's part of what makes us what we are. >> rose: that happened to me. i have essentially worked as a single, solo player. >> yeah. >> rose: and when i went to "60 minutes" people said this is an ensemble, is that for you? >> yes. >> rose: you know, and i learned. and they also wondered whether i was right for the forum at the time. it turned out pretty well. >> it turned out very well, it is an amazing body of work, a lot of stories. but at the same time you learn, you treasure the collaboration. you treasure it. >> you do. and you know. >> rose: because somebody will make your piece better. nothing i want than to have the single best piece, all of us, every correspondent there, and every producer there wants their piece to be considered the single best piece in every way, among your colleagues, among yourself, on the ratings, in your eyes. >> and they all know there is reward in it if you have a terrific story on sunday night.
there is an extra rags of rum. >> rose: exactly. we know how much we love run. >> a couple people to mention too, one is allison pepper, who has been there with you, someone can go to who you know knows what is going on. >> she knows so much. among the many strengths that allison has brought to "60 minutes" over almost 20 years, is that she can hire just the rate person for the right job. and that's an amazing talent. she knows the place so well. she knows who will fit where. she knows how to find a good reporter. she knows that a kid who is coming out of school, journalism school, she finds them show. >> rose: she knows the culture and knows who will fit in the culture. >> and brings in amazing people and there are a ton of really young, excellent reporters at "60 minutes." >> rose: we talked about bob simon. >> bill owens is number two, he has been with me now for many years. he was a producer for years.
he is the classic example ofweb who understands "60 minutes" because he has been out in the world. >> rose: done everything. >> everything and done it brilliantly. >> rose: you became chairman of cbs news. >> yes. >> rose: you were the c.e.o. >> of cbs news. >> rose: of cbs news. >> uh-huh. >> rose: why did you do that? a mike wallace question. >> that is a good mike wallace question. i was frustrated with cbs news. and i think part of what frustrated me was the morning prarm pram, for years and years it was reinvented cheaper than before. i hate to say that for the people who worked on it. i know they cared and tried hard but it was a cheap imitation of the "today show." i never understood why with our history and heritage, why wouldn't it be an imitation of cbs news. why wouldn't we want to be covering what is important and doing what we care about at "60 minutes." those values i think stand out so much. so les asked me, leslie moonves
asked me to be chairman and hire a president, that ended up being david rhodes who we worked incredibly well together and one of the first hires we made was chris licht. >> rose: the executive producer of cbs this morning. >> cbs this morning. there we have it, with a bril want producer like that, bsh-- brilliant producer like that, we were able to create a new version of morning television. and people weren't sure, charlie rose, really? in the morning? i mean-- it was amazing. and yet-- . >> rose: 60-- "60 minutes," yes, his own show yes, but the morning? >> charlie, i knew that you were perfect for that and i think everybodies with a little sceptical because of all that you are taking on but you are so well red in on life, you know the stories of the world. and you don't need to spend a lot of extra time to do the morning program in terms of presentation. so and i think it shows. >> rose: it is the same read in, it really is the same read-in. >> so gayle joined right awayment and that was a-- chris
licht had the idea of gayle. and just as soon as i started listening to her radio interviews and the other journalism that she was doing, i realized that is an inspired choice. and then norah joined, the chem stree. >> rose: the chem stree and combination of talent and people who are serious minded yet know how to have a laugh, which is really-- . >> rose: you can't make that up. >> no. >> rose: you can't make chemistry up. you have also had this tradition at 60 as contributing correspondents, i started as a contributing correspondent, anderson cooper who has another job. >> yeah. >> rose: as i do. but does 10, nine, ten pieces. >> 12. >> rose: 12 pieces. the other is bill whit ker who you add-- bill whitaker, he waws 20, 30. >> how many stories. >> a workhorse. >> rose: i guy that comes to this broadcast and looks like a natural. >> he is, is he wonderful.
what i love approximate bill is what has worked with so many people that have come to "60 minutes." he's a veteran cbs news correspondent who has covered every kind of story. >> rose: domestic and international. >> everywhere. based in asia for awhile, based in l.a. for a long time. he's just an amazing proand it shows when he gets ahold of the story. he did the opioid story with ira rosserman. and it was so well done. >> you know the implication of what you are saying, that these big companies knew that they were pumping drugs into american communities that were killing people. >> that is not an implication, that's a fact. that's exactly what they did. >> you know, he is a natural for us and i think a big part of it is because of the level of experience. but he hit the ground running. and i think it came as a shock that the intensity of it allment and he has been more than up to
the challenge. and i think has really exsealed. >> rose: he loves it. >> he does love it. >> rose: that's why he does so much. >> i think you can feel that on the air, by the way. >> rose: oprah, my colleague norah o'donnell. david martin will come in. he did brilliantly in a recent piece. >> david has been contributing starting with me at "60 minutes" 2, he did schwarz kof in first gulf war. >> rose: what is the theory. >> see for me, you are sort of the, i think the symbol of that and why we should do that. we wouldn't have drk dsh. >> rose: i'm the one that started it because i refused to give up the show and it worked. >> it worked in every way we didn't even imagine it working. so i would rather have anderson cooper and have him doing his program on cnn than not have him. and you know, anderson loves being at "60 minutes."
he just loves it. and he-- he is another amazing work ethic who will give up weekends, which he is doing this weekend in puerto rico for us. with tonya simon. they're going, i would rather have him than not. so then oprah is the same way. >> rose: right. >> and norah as well. i think that the contribution from the contributors is significant enough to justify it beyond that. i think we're better because of them. >> rose: so 50 years and counting. what do you worry about? >> that nobody is going to know what the hell a stop watch is. you know, it's a funny thing am but i guess what i worry about, that is guarding the values. there have only been two of us that run it. and that's a little bit, you know, that's important but it's also steve and leslie and all the people, you, charlie,
everybody that appreciates the values and bill owens who i expect would take my place when i move on, understands them. you know, that is what worries me. that we fall into the same rut, that a lot of television news falls into. which is pandering to an audience, trying to reach a demographic with a particular kind of story that they're going to want to watch. we don't do audience research to determine what stories to cover at 60 minutes. we decide what we want to cover. and that's important because we don't, since we done know what they might want us to cover, we have to work harder on making it compelling. it's one of those things on monday morning that i look forward to is someone that says i didn't think i was going to be interested in that story. and i loved it. >> rose: that's exactly what i look for in terms of an interview. you want somebody to say is i had no idea that i would be interested in this am but what you brought out of that person, or what came out of that person, was a fascinating personal.
even though they did things i didn't know about, even though they seemed to be something i wasn't interested in, it became compelling because of storytelling. >> soo that's a big part of it. and i think if you asked me what i worry b it's just that we get caught up in the television business the way typical chasing ratings, when that happens. it's not-- it goes against what we are about. and what is interesting about that dynamic is that we don't pander to particular audiences but we're by far the most watched newscast in america. there is nothing even close. >> rose: thank you for coming. >> thank you for having me. >> rose: jeff fager, my friend, my colleague, my boss, many things. someone who i know i would turn to at any time for advice. he's a man who is committed to great reporting, great storytelling. and as he has said in a recent conversation we had before a live audience, a program that respects the intelligence of the
audience. we know that the audience has not spending the same amount of time we do in preparing something but we respect their intelligence and we know they expect us to do our best. and that's what we try to do at "60 minutes." this book 50 years of "60 minutes." the inside story of television's most influential news broadcast. jeff fager, the executive producer, back in a moment. drew faust is here president of harvard university, she was appointed in 2007, becoming the first woman to lead that institution. in june faust announced she would step down in july of 2018. during her tenure she has increased diversity, expanded financial aid and fostered greater inclusion on harvard's campus. in announcing her resignation president faust described her time as harvard as a privilege beyond words. we'll hear more about thatment i'm pleased to have my friend drew faust back at this table. welcome. >> thank you so much, charlie. >> rose: good to see you. >> great to be here.
>> rose: you officially leave june 30th. >> that's correct. >> rose: where will you be july 1stk cambridge? >> great question, possibly on cape cod, we'll see. >> rose: give me a sense of what it means to be president of harvard, and what it meant for you to be president of harvard. >> well, when i use the term privileged beyond words, i was really thinking about the long scope of harvard's existence, 1636, before the country was founded. and the way it has dedicated itself to what education can and must be for individuals and for the society in which that institution is located. so watching as a historian, which i also am over the years, the impact that harvard has had. and then seeing the people that it attracts today and what is possible for them, and recognizing-- . >> rose: meaning students. >> students, faculty. >> rose: everybody. >> people doing research, people studying for careers, people
coming back to harvard to refresh fields that they have been working in, feeling that i have the opportunity to enable that, it just, it's very humblek. and inspiring at the same time. >> rose: what's great about a university? >> what's great about university is that it's rather chaotic in its encouragement of cur whys-- curiosity and exploration and aspiration an human betterment. and people all believe in that believe in that but go in different directions to find out how best to accomplish it. and i said it was chaotic but in some sense it's also very ordered in that it's a kind of symphony of people working together towards common ends through very different-- . >> rose: a certain structure. >> yeah,. >> rose: a certain structure and a certain sense of-- if it's up to us to make sure that in a
four year experience at this place you have certain essential experiences for your mind, for your soul, you know, for your sense of being a human being. >> uh-huh. >> rose: this is a rare sort of, your first time away from home. and you are in a new place with new challenges. and the richness of the challenges, the exposure to such a variety of experiences, challenges, intelligence, and learning, is i think, a beautiful thing. >> see, you are focusing on what you just said on the college which is of course at the heart of the university. i think it's important to remember it's not only part about the university. when i think about the college in this day and age, we're making a choice to offer a residential experience in an era when people could get so much information online. so what is it about
bringing people face to face that is the added value, that is the special part of a residential university experience. >> rose: what is it? >> and i think that's very much at the heart of what you were saying. students are learning in classrooms and laboratories and libraries but they're also learning in how they interact with one another. and that is perhaps one of the most important lessons that they learn. which is we try to bring together in the college a class of people who are different in every possible way. so that they have the maximum chance of educating one another. and of introducing one another to experiences and points of view and backgrounds that one may never have encountered before. and that to me is the magic of the residential experience. >> rose:-- said i want to create a great university lake harvard, how long would it take
him to do that? >> well, there are many aspects to thatment but i say one is that he would be challenged because he would not, i believe, like the kind of diversity of opinion and difference that is essential to a great university. >> rose: so they're inhibbitied of having a great university if there is an impediment to free expression which we clarily know there is. >> they certainly have exslent universities that teach wonderful science, wonderful subject matter, they have brilliant scholars and we have many exchanges and partnerships with places like pe king university, but i think that element of freedom of expression is one that has to be at the heart of real learning. because you've got to be able to challenge. that's how we get to new places. >> rose: that's why i asked that question, that very reason. it's essential to a university. >> and now today at certain universities we see some shout
down free expression. >> i think that's a characteristic. >> we are not very good listening to one another. this is certainly reflected on college campuses, i think we have to work as hard as we can to sustain free speech, to make sure different points of view. >> it is more conservative than. >> it srnl can be the case but we also can see disagreements in which one or another side shows intolerance of each other. i feel that part of creating the exchange of ideas that is so essential on a university campus is not just to permit speech but to encourage an environment in which speech is welcomed and
difference is sought after. so we have to not just be passive in protecting speech, we have to be active in enabling speech. and making sure as i said before that we have students with different points of view, making sure that individuals understand that when they speak, they will be listened to and respected in their speech and that people thp of their lungs with their fingers in their ears. >> rose: you set out, you said one of your primary goals was diversity. >> uh-huh. >> rose: how have you done on that? >> we have greatly broadened our financial aid program so that individuals from economic backgrounds of every sort can come to harvard college. we have a financial aid program that enables students from families that make less than $65,000 a year to come with no parental contribution to tuition or room and board. that has changed the demographic of the college class.
i think that's very important. >> rose: more than 50% quite. >> this year the entering class is majority minority. we have many more international students across the university s decades. we also recognize that diversity is just a beginning. that it's not simply having people on a campus who are different in their identities. >> rose: it is? >> it is making sure that they feel they are fully part of that experience. not just on the margins, not just tolerated but fully own the experience of being there. >> rose: and not put in a ghetto so to speak. >> exactly. so we talk about diversity inclusion and belonging. that people must feel this is their harvard too. it's not someone else's harvard in which they have been permitted to have a small part of. >> rose: you mentioned the value of the on-campus experience. but are you seeing a dramatic increase in online education. >> we've been very engaged in
that. we founded something in 2012 together with m.i.t. called ed exwhich is an online learning platform and in the year since then we have through harvard ex put more, almost a hundred harvard courses online and 6 million people have signed up and registered for these courses worldwide. one of the most exciting things. >> rose: isn't that amazing. >> isn't that amazing. one dimension of this i find so interesting is that of these registrants, about a third are teachers, which suggests that they are using this material so that they can share it with students. and that makes it an exponential. >> rose: learning experience for teachers. >> an exponential dimension of this opportunity through ed ex. >> rose: you have a strong advocate for studying humanities. why? >> well, the very name humanities, it is about what it means to be human. it's about all those difficult dilemmas that are never going to be reduced to a formula or a
number. what is life, what is death, what is love, what is fear. >> rose: what does it mean to be human. >> what does it mean to be human and how have people asked and answered that question through time. whether you approach that by reading literature from another place or era. whether you study the history of another place or era, you just amplify your own ability to be human by understanding how other people have been human. >> rose: you say it is skills that slow it down. >> that's another aspect i think humanities. you have to con tell plate. you have to back off. you have to be humble in face of what you don't know. you have to think deeply and so many products of the humanities demand immersive attention. a work of art, we have a wonderful art history professor who has assigned to her students the assignment of looking at a work of art for three hours. now this generation of students find this astonishing, how could
they possibly do something for three hours when they are used to tweeting and snapchatting and all the rest. but as they do it they realize they see something at the end of hour one and at the end of hour two they see something else. it is a lesson in the rewards of slowing down and immersing one self in observation and thought. >> rose: you also suggest that the humanities teach you empathy. >> that's part of being human too. to understand what other humans have seen and felt and to be able to look at the world through their eyes. >> rose: you talked with me about this before but growing up in virginia, when did you want to be a historian? >> in a way i was born a historian because i grew up in the shenandoah valley surrounded by relics of the civil war, memories of the civil war. my older brother collected civil war weapons on weekends our family would go to visit
battlefields. so i always had that spends of-- that sense of history being present and having this impact on our lives. it was also, i was a child in the 1950s and 1960s. and as the civil rights movement began to immerse-- emerge, brown v boferred, i lived in har's bird's home county. he said virginia should close its schools rather than integrate them. so it seemed that momentus things were going on around me that show were related to all these battlefields and what the civil war was about. so that link between past and present was very strong in my consciousness as a young child. >> rose: what is the unfinished business of the civil war? >> we have not trawly grappled where the issues of race in our country in a way that fully confronts the past. i'm always astonished today at how little we seem to know about
slavery as a nation. and you will remember when michelle obama said that the white house had been built by slaves, there was all this uproar and objection to that. well, it's a fact. we should know that. and yet show in my mind it was underscored once again how little we have confronted our past when people rejected that. that's just like knowing the sky is blue or the sun is going to rise in the morning in my view and yet that isn't known. >> rose: will you talk to some people who, i don't want to put words in their mouth but don heathcoats and brie an stevens that we never have completely dealt with slavery. and in a sense of the scars of slavery and how we see each other is never quite been come to grips with. >> i agree with that. we've been some ways at harvard by asking what our past has been in relationship to slavery at the university. >> rose: and georgetown did the same thing. >> uh-huh.
and the striking aspect of harvard is asking this is that harvard is in new england and i think much of the nation well, new england had nothing do to do with slaver. well slavery was legal in massachusetts until 1783 and even after that, harvard and other people in new england were deaply involved in trade and other kinds of connections to slave societies and economies that had a big impact on the wealth of new england. so as we begin to explore this at harvard, we see a whole different aspect of harvard's history. we placed a plaque on a building at harvard, almost two years ago now, that had been the residence of harvard presidents in the 18th century. and those harvard presidents lived lived there with enslaved people. and we had in the records the names of four of these individuals. so we put their names up to remind ourselves and anyone who walks by the plaque that these are real people whose lives were
stolen, who lived in this place, that we thought about morin terms of traditional new england imagery of pure tans and-- puritans, abolitionist, that is how harvard has traditionally looked at his history. but it has another history that has had an influence on how it evolved. and another group of people who need to be acknowledged as contributing to what harvard became over the years. > rose: have we lost the sense of civility? >> we're certainly not exercising it adequately. i hope we haven't lost it. >> rose: i'm not talking about speech, i'm just saying the capacity to seek common ground. >> in elementary schools children are still urged to be civil to one another. we at harvard work very hard to build a community that is erected around civility. in many places in our society we emphasize the significance of civility. but there are places where we're
not emphasizing it enough. we can't be an adequate democracy if we can't talk to each other. if we can't argue honestly and respectfully, try to learn and revise our own opinions by listening to those of others. and improve our own thought by incorporating the ideas and insights of those with whom we have disagreement. >> rose: obviously doing what i do and sitting at a table like this, i have a pronownd-- profound belief. >> are you modeling it, civility, conversation, common ground. >> the whole show is about civility. >> rose: that's exactly what it is about. the capacity to talk to each other. yes yet at the same time i'm also a little bit concerned, sometimes we think that's all that is necessary. that it is as if we just talk about things, everything will be okay, you know, if we can just engage. and it's not, there's something else that is necessary beyond that in addition to that. >> that's such an important point. because if you are in a place where individuals are feeling
deprived or scorned or left aside or treated unfairly, you have got to go beyond talk. you can begin with talk and then understand what actions need to come out of it. in our country today there's growing inequality as so many have documented. >> rose: right. >> so many people who feel that they're not getting a fair shake from other people. talk can help us understand the dimensions of that, the emotions that fuel it. but then we have to do something about it. because it's hard to tell someone to be civil if you are withholding from them what they deserve and have a right to have. >> rose: one of the things i have discovered is the idea of fairness. it is sort of deep within us. >> uh-huh. >> rose: people really do recoil against what they consider it's not fair. >> uh-huh. >> you know. and they're not, they're not, they don't on jeblg to people being rich. they object to something that is
not a fair system so that they have an opportunity to be rich. >> and that's why education is so important. >> rose: or whatever they want to be. >> but that's why education is so important. because i think that can be the vehicle of fairness, of offering people the opportunity. >> rose: and great mobilizer. >> yeah. >> rose: and i think that's sort of what-- it has to be also, i mean i don't want to-- it's something i grapple with, is the idea of how do we go from conversation, you know, and how do we speak to and understand the experiences of others so only if we can deeply understand their experience. and have respect for their dignity, can we address, you know what is deep within this. >> uh-huh. >> the conversation is the foundation for action, not the sub stew-- substitute for it. i'm so struck by our students these days, because they have a real sense of purpose and
obligation and need for service. they want to fix the world that they think we've messed up. >> rose: i know that. is it an observation of how the world is messed up or a sense of, show do they have an altruistic gene in them or is it the environment that they have grown up in whether it's parents or whatever, education or whatever it is has given them the sense of unaccept ability, the way things are are unacceptable and i want to do something about it. >> by the time i see them they're 18 or older. almost. >> rose: and smart as hell. >> and what i see them doing is identifying tools through which they can do this. is it learning about public heal or is it going into law or what is the way that i can bring this passion to make a better world into action through what means. and so watching them match themselves up with what it is
that is going to enable that spirit, that's part of the privilege that we were talking about in the beginning. >> rose: i was just in london with a lot of smart people, young people. and they were rhodes scholars, young doctors, young medical students. but their passion to use their science for a larger good, not just an individual, person to person but a larger good, was stunning to me. you know. and hopeful to me. it gave me great enthusiasm about the possibilities. because they were so engaged by the teubt of making a difference. >> uh-huh. and so aware of all the things that are available to make a difference in medicine and law and all the different fields. >> rose: i was somewhere with a major executive in america.
and it was jamie diamon, the c.e.o. of jpmorgan. >> harvard alum, business school. >> rose: and jamie was so very proud of the fact you know, that 50% of his principal executives, and i want to get this right, were women. >> uh-huh. >> rose: so where are we in terms of coming to grip with both opportunity and also eliminating all bias. >> we have a long way to go. >> rose: a long way to go. i go back to your mother who said, it's a man's world. >> it's a man's world, and the sooner you figure that out the happier you will be. >> rose: that is what she said. >> constant constantly when i was a child. >> rose: we have a long way to go, tell me how we get there. >> well, we get there, but again
if we were saying about race, we have to confront the kinds of prejudices, assumptions, inhibitions that have limited women's opportunity. we have seen all these instances in recent days of sexual harassment crges, in a variety of fields. we're learning that workplaces have been difficult for women. we've got to address that. we have to challenge assumptions about women being less able in whatever ways or legs rational or not good at science or not good at whatever marginalizes them in their aspirations. we have to provide child care so that, still traditionally it's the woman responsible for the child's care. and women drop out of the workforce because it's so hard to get child care. there are just so many structural as well as attitudinal dimensions of moving
women forward. >> rose: where is the resis stands in-- resistance, is it cultural? is it. >> it's cultural in part. it's financial in part. child care is expensive. we as a nation don't do enough about it. it's sometimes just ignorance that people don't recognize the things they're saying or the things they're doing and the impact it has on limiting other opportunities. >> rose: not being able to put yourself in the other person's shoes. >> uh-huh. >> rose: if you were going to give a speech about-- what would be your first par graph, what have you learned, it is the last lecture question. >> my speech would be in this moment, especially, about how what i always knew about
universities from having attended college and then being a professor for 25 years, has been so reinforced by moving beyond being in just one part of the university. and seeing the brept of human betterment and possibility that universities embody. and the importance of knowledge and facts and analysis. to social good, to democracy, to the best of humankind. and i would be saying that at a time when facts are losing their fourth as determine ants of how we act and how we judge and how we move forward. >> rose: it's scary. >> it's very scary, very scary. >> rose: is that a trumpian
reality? >> it's a national reality at the moment, as we compartmentalize our news nsumption so that we never listen to views that differ from our own as we lead with emotion, cause it's so much easier not to have to hear difficult things. there's so many ways in which this is becoming a part of our social fabric. >> rose: and if in fact your second speech is going to be a bit like when presidents leave and dwight eisenhower made the statement be warned of the military industrial complex. >> i say be warned of abandoning facts. >> rose. >> and abandoning the kind of hard, delib raise that is required in order to stay focused on facts. i mean harvard's motto has been very tough for a long time. what a great motto.
that's truth. that's what it's about. that is what we have to commit ourselves to. it's not always easy to face truth. i think one can see, daily life as well as in much larger dimensions but that's what is at the heart of it. >> i love having you here and i love you and i thank you for coming. >> thank you, charlie. >> rose: drew faust, president of harvard until june 30th, 2018. back in a moment. we begin with the president's trip to china. he returned on wednesday from his 12 day trip to asia. the white house described the five country tour as a major success. president trump claimed progress on trade and north korea. in a speech the president said america is back. joining me now is ian bremmer, president of eurasia group. i'm pleased to have him back at this table. welcome. >> so good to see you. >> rose: let's talk about the president in china. tell me what he accomplished and what the positive and the negatives are about this trip.
>> well, didn't make any big mistakes at all. all of the bilateral meetings went smoothly. he stayed on talking points. he was treated very well. what went best i would say, first the fact that prime minister abe really feels like he still needs america, needs trump. and the two men actually have a lot of charisma. secondly, trump was able to talk a fair amount about this new indo-pacific concept, national security-driven, not about democracies really or human rights but india, australia, japan, all cries that-- countries worried about china's military capabilities which are growing quite a bit in their backyard. and trump is very happy to aline himself as a consequence. so that's a useful thing. but let's be clear. when he says america's back. i mean i was there. i met with a lot of the leaders at the apex summit in vietnam, and it's very clear that the role of the u.s. president on
the ground with this trip is much more limited today than it has been historically. >> rose: how so? >> well, the biggest thing that came out of the entire trip was moving forward, a preliminary agreement on the transpacific partnership 11 which is the deal that of course the united states pulled out of. that is the trade-- . >> rose: moving forward without the united states. >> they did. and also the, you know, every one is focused on xi jinping, on china and it's reacting to what the chinese are doing. the checks that they are writing, the policy pronouncements they're making. they are the ones saying they're going to be a leader on global climate. trump obviously is not. they're the ones that say they want to be a leader on global trade. they would much rather have the united states but if the u.s. is pressing everyone bilaterally on a more fair deal for america, who you listen to.l like china so i mean the reality is everyone now understands that the way to make trump happy is
just tell him how awesome he is. >> rose: how awesome. >> how awesome, not awful, tell him how awesome he is. but privately these countries tell me, these foreign ministers, these heads of state tell may that they believe that trump is the least fit for purpose president that they've seen. and they're not paying, taking him seriously or paying as much attention to him. and that's a real problem. >> rose: what is it about trump that suggests that to him? >> well, there's the obvious. there's the fact that he dnt really know much about national security and he says things that have to be reigned back in by his advisors all the time. but then there's the general ideology of america first. which on national security i would say whatever trump says the reality has been more modest. it is much more-- if you look at the alignment of the national security advisors, secretary of defense, secretary of state, what you see are national
security polszees that don't look like obama but quinn tonnianment but on trade, on values, on climate, the reality of trump's policies outside the united states are antithetical to those of american allies, little rattily antithetical. and it's coming at a time where china. >> rose: both in asia and europe. >> absolutely. and coming at a time where the chinese-- but it's more important in asia because in europe, you know, who else is there really to play with. no one big. in asia you have the most powerful leader that we've seen from china since marks mao. >> is he now the most powerful leader in the world. >> you saw that with economist magazine, absolutely. i think he probably is. i do. i think he has consolidated an enormous amount of power over his first five years as culminated in the 19th party plenum. it's interesting, if you ask me what trump's biggest international accomplishment has been in terms of impact since
he's become president, it's probably that he facilitated xi jinping's speech, which i consider the most important speech on the global stage since gorbachev declared the diseslusion-- . >> rose: because he announced that china wanted to play, would play and could play a huge role in the world and intended to, it was willing at long last to live up to everybody's pronouncement of what it was becoming. >> that's right. that's exactly right. and i think if trump weren't president, xi jinping would not have given that speech yet. so it's directly impacted by the fact that he sees an american president that provides a lot of space. >> rose: did the president make any progress on north america, did he get the chinese to do more? >> trying to get north koreans to resist test. >> so north korea was virtually not an issue in the headlines
when, during trump's trip in asia. so the asian newspapers didn't talk much about it. and that's because trump's statements on north korea for those constituents for whom it really matters, the japanese, the south koreans, the chinese were so much softer, so much willing to couldn't thens, diplomacy. >> rose: that is what they wanted to hear. >> that is what they wanted to hear. even the jees wanted to hear that. absolutely. here in the united states it's a fire, fury and little rock etman. yes, he did put that tweet out, of course, saying i would call him short and fat but i'm not going to. but did he that after he left japan and south korea. safely out of, sort of short-term test range. and of the the north koreans were unlikely to to respond to that. >> rose: have the chinese agreed to do por. >> yes. but the most interesting piece on this is that when trump was pushed, he said the chinese to doing more and the russians could do more but i'm prevented from getting them to help me because of my con streants in
the united states from the fake news and mueller and everything else. trump used the lack of cooperation on russia to turn back and blame the americans. because he knows he can't get it done. russia is trading more with north korea this year, 07% more than they did last year. russia clearly-- . >> rose: what does it sell them? >> i mean, definitely some technology there, there's definitely some finished goods. i mean it's cheap manufacturers and stuff that otherwise the north koreans don't have. it's nothing enormously important, at least not that we have tracked but the point is it is stuff that the north koreans need, the chinese are squeezing them. in the chinese become an outlet what have we accomplished. this is the guy trump wants to be so close to. i think for those people that have been saying that we are close to a preem tiff strike on north korea, this trip should have given them a, the ability to take a couple steps back from the cliff and breathe a little bit. >> rose: let's talk about
saudi arabia, tell me what is happening over there and what is salman doing, will there be some kind of blowback. >> i feel better about what he is doing dommestically than what he is doing in the region. >> rose: talk about both, dommestically. >> at home the-- . >> rose: both of them have popular support, don't they? >> yes, though you know, if you are spending money and people are getting killed in yementen-- yemen, for example, that's a little more di vicive inside the king doll. more di vicive in the regon. while trump provides support for whatever he wants as well as jared kushner this is where you see the biggest divide, with mattis, with tillerson, virtually everything done in the region, they're not aligned on that stuff, that's interesting. >> rose: state and defense are not aligned. >> they are aligned but not
aligned with trump and jared who don't again have the experience. >> rose: where was the basic flip. >> basic split for example in getting the lebanese prime minister saad hariri to resign. >> rose: how dot saudis do that if they did. >> he is a dual national. my understanding is they brought him back and said that if you don't resign we're going to pursue some charges against you. and on financial irregularities, they do have an enormous amount of influence. they've effectively been the bankers for the sunni portion of lebanese elites but to go back to your initial question, how is he doing, dommestically i think he's doing pretty well. so he's gone after a lot of princes, a number of ministers, former ministers, a lot of elites who have for a long time been treating the organization they have control over as their personal piggy banks.
they've made a lot of money. and it's very clear that the saudi government given what is happening with oil are not going to be, an the exploding population won't be able to continue to afford them that lifestyle. so the fact that bin salman hasn't executed him. he hasn't thrown him in jail. he's throne him in the rits carlton and the overflow go into the courtyard marriott, not as nice but they're getting turndown service and he's trying-- . >> rose: are they allowed to have conversations with people on the outside. >> no, i don't believe they are. but he is, he's right now working out, look, there's going to be a new sheriff. you're going to take assets and bring them back to saudi arabia. you will operate differently but my expectation is that most of them will do that and then they will be free. and they will be back. >> rose: what does he want from prince al wall ed. >> he is a slightly different character because unlike many of these other princes al wall eid is himself a kind of
irrepressible ego and he's a voice of reform. so he is seen as a potential competitor to mbs in a way that others are less so. and al-waleed's father has been quite public in his opposition, al waleed himself in the early days when he was promoted to be crown prince so he has been quiet, it is not clear that al waleed will be suddenly cleaned off. >> rose: foreign policy in terms of yemen, with respect to lebon, in trying to take on hezbollah. >> one more part on domestic which is that beyonds this anticorruption thing which is pretty popular in the country, the decision to let women drive, the decision to try to reform political islam is so critical to the saudis in anyway diversifying their economy, so he may not be able to execute it effectively but these are clearly things that all of us should want him to get right. again if he doesn't do it, no
one else is going to. so we should be rooting for that. but the international point, the iranians are as you and i have spoken about before, ascendant in the region. they are doing better every why, much more influence. and the saudis are pushing back. and they pushed back in terms of squeezing-- . >> rose: where were the iranians doing so well. >> you think about syria where the russians and iranians an hezbollahing to with assad has effectively imposed an outcome that they want. >> rose: the war is over. >> the war is misally over. >> rose: an assad won. >> and assad, the russians and iranians have won. and the saudis are not so happy about that, in yemen, you know, you have the huti rebels who have significant support from iran. you have now missile, was launched, at the riyadh airport that the saudis same cay from iran, they closed down borders, massive humanitarian cries nis
yemen as a result of that. in lebanon the belief was that prime minister hariri was not able to have as much influence over governance and over what hezbollah was doing because of greater influence of iran. >> rose: and iran because of syria now will have a route to land route to lebanon. >> correct. and then also have you have the qatar situation where the saudis and emirateis went after qatar in part. >> rose: where does that stand? >> it's at best frozen. and potentially additional sanctions to be levied by the saudis and emirateis against qatar. but certainly we're not moving towards any possibility of rapprochement. so the gcc, the gulf-- . >> rose: qatar will sur prief-- survive this. >> sure, they have a lot of money and can wait these guys out for a long time and the americans will support and the turks have more military groups on the ground in qatar too. but unlike-- . >> rose: an iran in terms of iran has given them access.
>> yes. yes. and so and they have joint gas fields that they're exploiting and all the rest. so it will be hard for them to cut them off. if you look at the domestic side for the saudis, mohammed bin salman is doing something that yes, there may be a lot of folks internally that are having a problem with it, but ultimately it's popular are the population and the world wants him to you can seed-- succeed. internationally, geo politically the saudis are losing every day, influence in their own region. >> because iran is winning. >> because america is doing a little less. the iranians, russians are playing a geo strategic role, it's problematic, a lot of the middle east is becoming a little more unstable. >> and are you mostly worried about iran. >> are you mostly worried about iran, your internal stability, about terrorism there are ten things you are worried about before you deal with israel, pal n, by the way israels have done a good job at defending their borders, at human surveillance, cybersurveillance which the saudi was like to
♪ hello and welcome to "kqed newsroom." i'm thuy vu. coming up on our program, we go to the uss hornet to hear from veterans, community leaders and activists at a town hall about the vietnam war. we'll also look at the week's big political developments from sexual harassment allegations against roy moore to president trump's asia trip. but first yesterday the u. house of representatives approved a plan to cut taxes by about $1.5 trillion over ten years. critics contend the gop led bill benefits the wealthy and corporations more than the middle class. meanwhile in the u.s. senate, republicans are trying to shore up support for their plan, which has now cleared the senate finance committee. they've added a clause to repeal the health care mandate under obamacare to help pay for the tax cuts.