tv Charlie Rose PBS August 2, 2012 11:00pm-12:00am PDT
>> rose: welcome to the program. tonight a conversation about syria with mark lyle grant, the british ambassador to the united nations. >> i think for russia, they feel that the mandate that was given for military intervention in libya was exceeded by the coalition action, now that is completely unjustified, because i and ambassador jerkin were in the negotiation and it was made very clear in the private negotiations in the runup to that resolution on libya that if the resolution was adopted, it would mean military action to take out the defenses of libya, to attack the qaddafi forces
threatening the east of the country and benghazi and that was made very clear so when that happened, when the russians and chinese said oh we don't realize we voted for this or allowed that resolution to pass, that it t this was going to happen. that is very disingenuous because it was discussed in private among the 15 members so they knew what would happen. but i think they feel a bit -- by the way that happened and are taking a much more restricted view of sir yavment you know, it is now something like 15,000 people that have been killed since russia first vetoed the resolution in october of last year. now i can't promise you, your listeners that would have made a difference and all this bloodshed coul could have been completely avoided had thad resolution gone through but it think it would have given the international community a better chance to stop the blood shed and a discussion about apple after steve jobs with an. >> andrew ross sorkin of "the
new york times". >> corporations find themselves with $2 trillion on the balance sheet and what do we do? and are we going to continue to sit on our hands? and in many ways apple is the greatest example of. this they have $117 billion as you said and by the way, they make a billion dollars more every week. >> gee. >> now you can see this is a glass half empty issue, a glass half full issue, but at some point you have to decide what are you going to do with all of this money? are you going to give it back to shareholders? are you going to buyback shares and by theay, ey are doing both of those things and still have all of this money lying around, and so the question becomes, is there something that apple made need to do in the future with the money to try to help iterate and innovate at that company and by the way people think of internally inventive and that is just that they are not, but historically they have gone outside of the company to buy many of the most interesting, innovations, the
question is, should they own their own network? >> this could become, if the thy did it right, they buy sprint for 13, $14 billion today and that sound expensive but cheap on a relative basis when you look at at&t and verizon, if you invest in another $50 billion to upgrade the network you could have the best, fastest high speed network in the united states, it could become a showcase for what the future of mobile technology could look like but more importantly, you could get into the home, forget about wires, if you have the wireless networ properly don yo could bypass cable and talk about itv, you could be streaming directly to the home off of a network like that. >> by the way, to me, i am not comparing myself in any way shape or form to steve jobs this is the craziest idea out there. >> rose: syria with the british ambassador and apple with andrew ross sorkin, when we
captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> rose: when the syrian people the desperately need action, there continues to be finger pointing and name calling in the security council, without serious, united international pressure, including from the powers of the region, it is impossible for me or anyone to compel the syrian government in the first place and also the opposition to take the sps necessary to begin a political process. i have, therefore, informed the secretary-general of the u.n.
and the secretary-general of the arab league today that i do not intend to continue my mission when my mandate expires at the end of august. >> rose: mark lyle grant is here, uk ambassador to the united nations. announced the resignation of kofi annan as special envoy to syria and a decision comes as the situation on the ground escalates raply, president bashar al assad is rallying his troops with a attacks on the cities of aleppo and new atrocities are being reported in damascus. >> country is led by saudi arabia pushed forward a general assembly resolution condemning assad's use of heavy weapons against his own people. the general assembly cannot authorize the use of force but a strong majority would send an important message to the security council, so far russia and china have used their veto three times to stop security council resolutions that could have placed sanctions on syria. as we continue to look at the situion i am pleased toave ambassador grant at the table
for a consideration of what is an important time at the u.n., as well, welcome. >> good evening. >> rose: it is a pleasure to have you here. tell me where you think, what you -- what is the mood at the united nations and what is the significance of this resolution and what might happen? >> well, i think there was a mood of frustration with the lack of unit in the security, unity of the security council, russia and china have three times vetoed resolutions we put forward over the last nine months which might have put more preure on the assad regime and might have helped to promote a peaceful resolution to this crisis. in the absence of unity of the big members of the security council, the permanent five it proved very difficult for kofi annan to work his magic as a mediator, and i share his frustration, and he comes out clearly with that russ administration in his resignation speech, that the security council was unable to give him the support that he needed and he had requested.
so i think there is a mood of frustration, and that is wha wht has led the arab group to put forward a resolution in the general assembly which will be voted tomorrow new york and expect to get a very big majority, 120, 130 countries. >> rose: even though they cannot as i suggested -- >> unfortunately they can't authorize force, and indeed the security council wasn't planning to authorize force. the resolutions we put forward that were vetoed were threatening sanctions against the assad regime, not use of military force. but nonetheless, i think it will be an important symbolic resolution and hope it will get a very large majority and we think it will and it makes clear that it condemns as you say the assadegime, the use of weapons, refers back to the arab league statements which make clear that assad needs to step down, it demands that he does not use chemical weapons because obviously there have been reports he might be preparing to use chemical weapons and supports the kofi annan plan because even without kofi annan plan which was supported in
april by the security council still looks like the best chance of getting out of this syria crisis with a minimum of bloodshed. >> rose: if u.n. does not act is it possible the arab league or someone ese might come to use force together? >> well, there hasn't been any serious discussion of that yet, the arab league in their most recent ministerial meeting did call for safe havens for civilians in syria, but they did not propose any specific measures how you could maintain safe havens and we would be very cautious about calling for safe havens unless we were prepared to put troops on the ground to make them safe and that's a lesson we learned from boss bosnia you can't just announce there is a safe haven, people go there and they find it is not fe and not prepared to defend it, so, no, there hasn't been serious discussion of that, although my government and other governments have made clear that we do not take any option off the table. what is your assessment of where it is on the ground? >> well, the situation
unfortunately is deteriorated very substantially over the nine months, so what has happened is the opposition which was originally peaceful, because their protests were not listened to, because the regime did not respond as they should have done and other arab governments haven't responded to people who were protesting for change, demanding change, because of that they have become increasingly violent in their defense of their own families and their communities across syria. so now what started as peaceful protests has generated into what is nearly a civil war. >> rose: it is a civil war, isn't it? doesn't it have all of the ingredients of a civil war? >> it is beginning to look like that and one of the elements in the last three months is that extremist groups, terrorist groups have become taken advantage of the situation of general lawlessness and the lack of control of the government and the lack of any political dialogue, lack of any prospect for political transition have come in. >> rose: so they can players
whenever the decisive moment comes when there is a change? >> i think there is a danger of that and the risk and increase we have seen in sectarian violence in the last few months is a worrying element as well because traditionally, it has been a relatively secular state and there are christian minorities and kurdish minorities and shy a minor, shia minorities and sunni who have lived harmoniously in certain parts of history in syria but if that breaks apart the very sovereignty and integrity of sir i can't will be put to risk. >> rose: i want to come back to the principal player, bashar al assad, but first what is the level of refugee issue? >> it is getting worse there are about 150 to 200,000 refugees that are now outside of the country but many more internal displaced persons. >> rose: turkey -- >> mainly turkey, lebanon and jordan. >> rose: right on the border they go. >> and. >> rose: with a and what is the level of defections from either e general sta of the
syrian army or other places in terms of ambassadors here and there? >> well, i can't give you precise figures, charlie, but clearly there have been a number of senior diplomatic detech shunls, including the charge deaffairs in london who deteched in the weekend .. >> iraq has already deteched yes, and uie and others have defected and a number of senior generals that have deteched and a large number of troops that have switched side and fighting for the free syrian army. >> rose: what is the level of the conversation betweenhe syrian ambassador and other ambassadors that he has been working with over the years? >> well, syrian ambassadors are obviously in a very difficult position, he is defending the regime in diplomacy, you have to deal with everyone, we have meetings with iranians, mort koreans, syrians, of course, we fundamentally disagree with all three of these regimes but of course there is disdiplomatic activity that goes on and a
discourse that continues. >> rose: you know that the russian president is in london at the olympics meeting with the prime minister, is there some hope that this may be on their agenda and might lead to some new resolve on the part of the russians? >> well it is certainly on their agenda, and syria -- russia, story, is a key player, and we would obviously want russia to join us in promoting a peaceful political transition, because that is what is required. >> rose: and what is required to get them to move off the position they have? >> well, i think it is a difficult question and when we have explained to the russians that if syria defends all out civil war and there is there is a completely chaotic change of regime, which spreads to insecurity in the wider middle east, that does not serve russian inteases interests. russia has certain defense interests in syria, we understand that and use the port
for instance, and they have a large number of weapons that they have sold to the syrian regime, we are not trying to displace russia from the middle east. we are not trying to break the links between russia and syria, the syrian country and the syrian people but what we are saying is, you must recognize that assad is finished, that assad, one way or another, he will now leave power, you need to recognize that fact, and help us to promote a peaceful political transition or as peaceful as it now can be with 20,000 people killed. >> rose: are there any new rules that are coming out of this with both syria and libya and a rising perhaps earlier from africa about sovereignty and when the u.n. acts? >> well, there have been a number of developments over recent years and oneof those is responsibility to protect and this was a concept that was developed in 2005 and was used in the case of libya that in cases where governments are unwilling to protect their own civilians or indeed are
themselves threatening their own civilians, then there is the opportunity for the international community to take action to protect civilians. now this hasn't been invoked in the case of sir, i can't it was invoked in the case of libya. >> rose: and there was no veto in the case of libya? >> well there wasn't, there were five countries of the 15in the security council who absined, including russia and china,. >> rose: by abstain they did not veto. >> they did not veto and that was passed and the authority was given for military action. >> rose: what is your understanding, even though ambassador cher kin has been here of the russian position? .. >> well, again i think he is better to explain it than i can, but i think for russia they feel that the mandate that was given for military intervention in libya was exceeded by the coalition action. now that is completely unjustified, because i and ambassador cher kin were in the negotiations and it was made very clear in the private negotiations in the runup to
that resolution on libya that if the resolution was adopted it would mean military action to take out the air defenses of libya, to attack the qaddafi forces that were threatening benghazi and the east of the country. and that was made very clear. so when that happened, when the russians and chinese said oh we don't realize w we voted for ths or allowed that resolution to pass, that the this was going to happen, that is very disingenuous because it was discussed in private among the 15 members so they knew what would happen. but uh i think they feel a bit boozed by the way that happened and as a result they have taken a much more negative and restricted view of syria. you know, it is now something like 15,000 people have been killed since russia first vetoed the resolution in october of last year. now, i can't pop you your royal listeners that would have made a difference and all of this bloodshed could have been completely avoided had that resolution en aopted in
october of lastear but i do think it would have given a much better chance for the international community to stop this bloodshed. >> rose: their argument is as you know that they are perfectly open to a full discussion of the issues in syria with all of the parties are, if all of the parties are participating. >> absolutely and that's what we agreed in geneva only a month ago, there was a meeting of the permanent five members plus a number of other regional players and we agreed on the parameters for a political transition. and that is good and that is still valid and the resolution that will be adopted in the general assembly tomorrow will reinforce at -- >> rose: so what is the problem? >> the problem is how do you get to that political transition? we are saying we need that dialogue to start, we need assad to appoint an interlocutor and stop the use of heavy weapons and create at least, not a complete ses addition of, cessation of violence we know that can't happen over night but the worst of the abuses and attacks on civilian areas by
attack helicopters and heavy weapons. so what we have agreed with russia is the sort of parameters of what the transition and the dialogue would happen, which means protection of minorities, constitutionality elections and all of that there was agreement on but what there isn't agreement on is how we get the regime to the starting point, get them to the table and we believe it requires some degree of pressure on individuals in the assad regime, that's what we have done for the european union and that's what the united states -- >> rose: you mean -- >> well, some sanctions, you know, you need to put some pressure, you have got to make them realize the people like assad and those around him in particular, his chief henchmen, the people who are committing these human rights ac abuses that there is a cost, there will be accountability, to make them think twice before they carry out instructions to butcher their own civilian population, and that is what we believe is the best way to bridge the gap between where we are now and political dialogue -- >> rose: shouldn't they face
war crimes trials if somehow they come out of this alive? >> they should absolutely and they will and we have been documenting through refugees and interviews with people who have fled the country human right abuses precisely so at a certain point in the future some degree of accountability will be -- >> rose: and that applies to both side who have human rights accusations against them? >> absolutely we have condemned the terrorist attacks and the bombing that happened in damascus that killed the defense minister a couple of weeks ago and any human rights abuses by the opposition that is completely unacceptable. so of course that mist to both sides, but we mustn't lose site and kofi annan and the secretary-general have always made clear that the first step has to come .. from the regime in bahamas discus her the ones damascus, so what do they have to do, give me an example of a specific thing if assad did this .. tonight it would make a difference. >> if he had said we are no longer going to be using heavy
weapons and by heavy weapons i mean artillery and tanks and helicopter and fixed wing bombers, those four categories if they say we are not going to use this against civilian populations anymore and he could do that tonight he could take a decision tonight implemented admitted night tonight it would make a massiveifference, now, what is the reason h he doesn'to that? because he doesn't want to do that. >> rose: he doesn't want to do that because he thinks it will be counter productive, he thinks he may put himself at risk if he does that. >> i think he can crush this thing like his father did by force. i think he genuinely still believes he can win this thing mill tear. >> rose: that is the central question to syria for me, the mind of bashar al assad. >> well i agree with you it is very difficult for us to speculate about what that is but all of the information we have suggests he still believes and the people around him believe, highs immediate entourage they can put down this civilian protest -- >> rose: what is his model for
believing that? the syrian army is different from the libyan army and syria is not like libya and not like any other place where there have been no regime has been able to stop this kind of thing except bahrain. >> well, i think there are a number of factors in there, one is the example of his father, his father killed 20,000 of his own people and did get away with it and did manage to putown -- >> rose:ut tt was not prt of the arab spring, that was something else. >> that was something else, i think he has seen what has happened to some of the leaders who have been washed away by the arab spring, obviously qaddafi, in particular. >> rose: right. >> but qaddafi is not the only model and this is what we say to assad if you want to end up like qaddafi you are going the right way about it but there are alternative models. >> rose: the end result -- >> we have seen in egypt and other possibilities. when you say we have said to him, how do you speak to him? >> well, we did have a dialogue with him when we had an embassy there, we do have ways of
speaking. >> #02: we t british? >> we the british, right w don't have an embassy there so we don't have the direct dialogue. >> rose: so you depend on the russians. >> we do have direct contact with some syrians close to him, the minister for instance, we with can talk to the ambassador here. >> rose: so that level of dialogue is going on, the foreign minister and -- figures in western governments. >> yes. i mean it is intimate and not on a daily -- >> rose: where is the foreign minister today? in damascus or somewhere else. >> i assume he is in damascus. so i think there are other models, but theres another aspect that the regime that runs damascus and runs syria, it is important to understand represents only about 13 percent of the population. this is a sheer, shia minority and sort of an offshoot of the shias and they have run syria for the last 50 years as a 13 percent majority. they -- minority, they obviously
feel and a lot of people around assad i think are probably telling him, speculating now, of course we don't kw, that if he makes concessions, if there is some form of democratic government in syria, then the aloites hold on power and their position could be threatened. because .. under a normal democracy the aloits represent 13 percent of the community couldn't expect to run the government they told all of the senior positions in the armed forces and government and that is partly raps why they peel embattled and why you haven't seen the sort of massive cracks in the regime that you saw earlier in libya. it is beginning to happen and we have seen the detech shunls we talked about earlier. large numbers we haven't. >> rose: the generals are talking and telling you what is going on inside? >> well obviously those who have defected are doing that. >> rose: but 35 is a government of the aloites or a government of a family?
>> well i think no it is aloites, it is an extended family that there is there as well but -- >> rose: not just a dictatorship of the assad family? >> no, no. it is very much and alloite dictatorship. >> rose: in this theame way saddam hussein had the support of -- >> saddam hussein had. >> yes, saddam hussein had his sons in position of power but it wasn't just a family business. it was the baath party. >> rose: but if bashar al assad makes a decision he would engage in the u.n. process it would happen? he has that kind -- or not. >> it would happen, obviously -- >> rose: i mean, he clearly is the man in charge and clearly the man who is calling the shots, but he is not as was once suspect a weak leader who i controlled by former allies of his father? >> no, i think if he took the decision it would happen. you know, you can argue about whether he is weak surrounded by strong men, but there is no real evidence of the act that he is trying to move to some different
path. he is the top man and he has to take responsibility for that fact. whatever the inner workings and discussions but the reality is if he said todayly stop the use of heavy weapons and i expect the opposition to respond and i am prepared to step aside, decimate someone to dialogue, then obviously the obligation would come on us to make sure that the opposition responded to that and came to the table. and we would do that. but that is the first step that we have asked him to take a, we said it in a resolution which was freed by the russians and the chinese back in april, it hasn't happened, and that is why we wanted a further resolution which would increase the pressure through sanctions and that's the one russia vetoed. >> rose: suppose bashar al assad said, the game is up. i understand. i don't want to see what happened to academy at this, what happened to saddam hussein happen to competent. i want to protect my family and i want to protect myself.
who would guarantee that? >> well d arab league have already said they would be prepared to offer him refuge in that sense. >> rose: but do they say where and do they say the circumstances or do they say -- >> no. but if that sort of dialogue was beginning to take place that in itself would be a signal of movement but as far as i know, assad has not responded in any positive way to those suggestions. >> rose: and where are the rusans because they refu to say they wouldn fact grant him asylum. >> no what i think the russians could be an important player in that sort of discussion, there were some discussions earlier on i understand about where he might go, but i don't think they ever reached a very advanced stage. >> rose: but once out he could be guaranteed safe passage out? >> well, i think that is a dialogue that would happen. from our point of view accountability is important and we would want to hold him accountability for crimes. now, you could say the same thing about other people who have done other deals and taken refuge and we understand that
happens sometimes and sometimes that can be, you know -- we don't accept the idea that there is a choice between peace and justice. some countries say there comes a time when you do have to choose that peace is more important than justice and if -- >> rose: to save lives you allow -- >> you protect someone and you won't take him to the international criminal court. that is not our view. in our view, it is a longer term game than that and international justice is important, accountability is important, lack of immunity is important and you have got to think about the next case. this is syria we are talking about today but what about the next case. >> rose:. u havgot to show that crimes against humanity will be -- people who commit crimes against humanity will be held accountable so we would always look to bring to justice someone -- >> rose: you would look to bring to use is a phrase. >> if the arabs kid did some deal which happened in yemen, yemen is a good example, that this was not a western deal. >> rose: right, right. >> it was a full corporation council deal and did a deal which offered some form of
immunity to president sale in exchange for him stepping down and away from power. now, we tolerated that and accepted that. it doesn't mean we like it, but we recognize that that was part of the deal, and -- >> rose: and you would do that 15 for president assad? >> well, if it came about we would have to consider it but we would not be party to that deal because as i say -- >> rose: by the aicials. >> yes and they have offered it and we haven't criticized that but we wouldn't obviously support it. >> rose: do you have any sense as to whether he would, when cornered use chemical weapons? >> well, there have been reports and we are concerned about that, preparation for possible use of chemical weapons, it is something we have raised with the syrians directly, it something we have raised with the iranians and something we raised with the russians. now, i think even the iranians who are actually actively supporting as scad in some of his, assad in blood 30 city action against civilians they recognize if he used chemical weapons that would be a game
changer and russia and china would not be able to continue to support assad if he used chemicals weapons so i think they are trying to persuade him not to loo the iranians or -- >> and the russians. >> rose: what are the, what other role are the iranians playing other than supply weons and showing assad their support? >> well, i think they are -- they do have military on the ground and. >> rose: they have military on the ground supporting the syrian army? >> yes. advising the syrian army, and they are providing weapons and political support. so they are very much -- >> rose: and what do the russians tell us about their anti-aircraft potential capacity? >> who? >> in other words the russians supply the syrians with anti-aircraft keablghts did they not? >> they did. >> rose: that's our understanding. >> yes. and. >> rose: how good is that anti-aircraft? >> i can't five you the details on that will, charlie but their argument is that anti-aircraft weapons are clearly not usable against civilian pop lace and therefore it is entirely
legitimate for them to do it but the russians have said they will not provide weapons that can be used against the civilian population and i think they have genuinely kept to that in recent months and as far as we know they aren't sending them helicopter gun ships anymore which they did obviously do before. >> rose: and clearly tell them don't use chemical weapons? >> and they are clearly telling them not to use chemical wepons. >> se: so what is your best guess as to how this will unfold? >> well, i think there are a number of different possibilities. i think for certain that assad will go. the question is, will he go in some form of managed process or will it be completely chaotic and with breading instability across the region. i think those are the two options. those are the only two options one way or another assad is finished and there will be some sort of political transition. now we would like to work with the russians to manage that in a way that maintains all of our interests in this region, as i said before we are not trying to
push the ruks russians out of the middle east and recognize they have interests in syria and we are not trying to damage those or undermine those. but we do believe and we are said this to the russians that if it is a completely chaotic civil war with the terrorists coming in and taking advantage of it, al qaeda and a whole range of groups that appear tobacco there allied to al qaeda, then we are in for a complete bloodth, and it will make what has happened already look trivial compared to what could happen. >> rose: and the russians say we don't want that to happen, clearly, don't they? they are aware of that danger -- >> they are aware of that danger and theeks why they have been working with us for instance in the gentleman they extra foreign minister's agreement but they don't take it to its logical conclusion in saying how do we prevent that from happening? how do we make it a more managed transition? you need to help us put more pressure on assad to bring that about.
>> rose: it is a pleasure to have you her >> thank yo very much. >> rose: grant is the ambassador from the united kingdom from great britain to the united nations. back in a moment. stay with us. andrew ross sorkin is here, he is a new york times columnist in the paper's merger and acquisition reporter and cocaine for on cnbc squawk box and $117 billion question on the mind of wall street and silicon valley, what what should apple do with its potentially brogue stockpile of cash? after sub par earnings last month there is interest in what the next big move for the company might be. i am pleased to have andrew ross sorkin back at this table. welcome. >> it is great to see you, charlie. >> rose: you are writing another big book? >> not yes yet but stay tuned. >> i am looking for an idea? >> i am always looking for an idea. it is hard -- it is hard to find a crisis as big as the last one
we lived through. >> rose: indeed, and european debt crisis doesn't offer that to you or not? >> it could. we haven't -- you need a narrative that has a real climax, and unfortunately. >> rose: you don't know where the climax -- >> i am not sure we know when and where the climax will be. >> rose: well that ties me up to do your footwork. >> yes, absolutely. >> rose: so in the meantime you focused a bit on silicon centrally and the tech community. tell me about the alabama mindset, about having so much cash. >> which was the way microsoft was for many years and which is the way a lot of corporations in america -- >> and right now, by the way, corporations in america find thethemselves with $2 trillion n the balance sheet and all trying to figure out, what do we do? and are we going to continue to sit on our hands? and in many ways apple is the greatest example of, this they have $117 billion as you said, and by the way, they make a billion dollars more every week, now,
you can see this is a glass half empty issue, a half glass full issue but at some point you have to decide what are you going to do with all of this money? are you going to give it back to shareholders are you going to buyback shares and by the way they are doing bo of those thin rightere and still have all of this money lying around so the question becomes, is there something that apple may need to do in the future with the money, to try to help iterate and innovate at that company, and by the way people think of apple as a company that is internally inventive and that's not, they are aren't but historically they have gone outside of the company do buy many of the most interesting innovations, your iphone when you -- >> the gestures called finger works, they bought it. >> >> serie,. >> rose: talk to me. >> talk to me, they bought it. but even if you think about the operating system of today's mcintosh, that was an
acquisition of next which was steve job's own business. >> rose: so when he came back that was part of the deal. >> so steve jobs is a acquisition guy and picks star he bought from george lucas, the underlying business of picks star he bought from somebody else that is hot to say he is not inventive but at some point maybe they would consider doing other things with the money. >> rose: i thinkhe only paid ten idea. >> it was it was a very cheap deal. >> he not it for a stopping. >> rose: okay. there is this question, then, what would steve do? >> well, i came up with this list and by the way -- >> it is sort of speculative, sort of fun list to start thinking and pie in the sky, blue sky, what would you do with all of this money? i think that steve jobs would probably hold on to that money until he could find one or two big target, parks and by the way before his death in 2011 he talked about using that cash for the day that some great opportunity came their way, so the question is.
>> rose: like google? >> the question is, when a great opportunity comes their way. and i think that at some level now steve of. that steve jobs is no longer there the company is in a bit of a crossroads, never continuing to invent and get better, but by the way, everybody else is inventing and they are coming up quick, if you go look at what google was doing with their android, i know people who think the android phone is thousand better than the iphone, and so you may have to think about a lot -- >> rose: a lot of people think that. >> increasingly so. >> rose: and there is also this question that google is getting into hardware. >> uh-huh. >> rose: which is the business that apple has been in. >> a and so what do you do? so i came up with a list of potential ideas, one, should we go through them. >> rose: yes. nuance. >> nuance is the most interesting and i said in the common the no-brainer if you buy one thing this is the company, so we talked about serie and currently there is voice dictation, speech recognition on apple devices, it is not apple
tenology. they license it through a company called nuance. at some point you would think that new answer would hold them for ransom and say look you built bite every piece of your business, we can now charge you for it so why they wouldn't buy a company like that, and by the way i am not the only person who thinks that is company that you put on the apple wish list, if you will. >> rose: right. >> that makes, to me, a lot of sense and by the way, microsoft and google are building their own voice speech technologies, speech r mission in ways that in some some cases surpass what apple is able to do so the idea to be able to control a company like that and really be able to take it and take it further i think is a huge u opportunity. >> rose: rand then there is twitter. >> then there is twitter, there is a story on the front page of the new york times, last week talking about the fact that apple actually look at this company before, so this is not totally pie in the sky out of nowhere, if you think the social
networks are important, social yield are important in is the last, last man standing in terms of a real big independent opportunity to buy, now, again, those you look at what happened to facebook and the valuations for some of these things are coming down. >> rose: let me stop for a moment. what is happening to facebook? >> okay. so there are two things happening to facebook and we should probably divide them. there is facebook the business, which continues to go along and hum along and by the way do quite well, the i it is still a remarkable, fast growing business. and then there is the stock price, which is doing quite horribly if not horrific situation. >> rose: whichis what. >> we are coming up at 50 percent. >> rose: 50 percent? >> from the offering price? >> from the offering price, we are in bad news territory here. >> rose: and the reason is? >> there was a miscalculation among the public, though you
could also argue am honk the bankers that took facebook public, about what the ring valuation should be, so it is not that too much has changed at facebook, there is, it is still growing relatively on pace they actually met quote unquote analyst estimates, it is that there was a factor -- investors were building in this idea that this thing was going to go to the moon. >> rose: yes. >> and it was the my myth -- it was a wall street myth, not a business myth so the real question is, facebook is what it is, it is a good business, it is a growing business, they haven't had a eureka moment and haven't figured out mobile and all of these things and how do you value that business? and that's the question mark on wall street, and today that value is 50 percent of what people thought it was frankly a few months ago. >> rose: how to advertise on mobile tn ey have problem? [unless they know how to advertise on mobile -- >> if you want to believe worth, you know, 50, 60, 70, 80, $100 billion, yes, they have to figure out mobile, this have to
grow advertising and do a lot of things. if you think the company is worth, i don't know, ten, 20, 30, $40 billion, 40 is where we are now around, a little over, that is a different story. >> rose: do they take any responsibility for the way the ipo was handled? >> basically not, facebook says, look we put it in the hand of the bankers, there were three firms involved, morgan stanley, leavitt, j.p. morgan and goldman sachs and they will say we depended on them and by the way at the time, odd my enough, those banks went out and met with investors and by the way found investors that were willing to pay this money and by the way allows their shirt in the rose. so. >> rose: anybody who bought into the ipo at the top lost a lot of money. >> it is like life, everything is complicated. >> rose: so back to here, so there is path as well? >> so path is actually one of the more interesting developments on the weband i know you are an iphone user, i think.
i don't know if you can download the path app, this was developed by dave warren who used to work at facebook and prior to that used to work at apple and it is an attempt to actually get the mobile social experience right. it only works on a mobile device. it looks gorgeous, it has all of the hallmarks of everything you would see in sort of the apple design, and yet also gets a lot of the social things that facebook has done right. it is a much more limited in terms of who your friends are. you know, on facebook you can have thousand of friend on path 150 friend and the idea is that it is a closed network, it is private, if you share a picture from your vacation, only 150 are going to see it and not be able to send it to 20 of their other friend and it is sort of a journal of your life on line, and because it is mobile, it is in your hand and they have actually got it right. they haven't figured out the advertising piece of it yet but to me if you take path you mix wit a little bit of twitter and you take for example what apple
already has called photo stream on their devices so you can share your pictures and all of this, that would be a pretty powerful and interesting sort of social media play and again another moat around this network, that people buy the ipad, the iphone and mac and do it all in concert. >> is twitter for sale? >> everything is or sale, charlie. >> rose: okay. just name the price. >> you have to name the price. i shouldn't say that actually because you could think about group upon, group o n turned down $10 billion f eir company. >> rose: they regret that? >> i don't think they admit they would regret that. >> i think the market value is four, 5 billion and it kowk could be a longer term play. my skepticism of the groupon model, i am not convinced. >> rose: and they offered 6 billion. >> 6 billion from larry page and
sergei -- >> rose: i tell you one good investment made is youtube. >> fantastic and by the way a business that was make nothing money at the time. >> rose: exactly. >> and they figured it out, absolutely, and by the way that is a little bit of the way apple i think has to think about some of these investments. meaning you are going to take some of the -- >> rose: it may not be today -- >> right. it may not pay today but down the line and you have to suffer through by the way which was a lot of criticism and skepticism of that youtube daily loo but the idea nobody will have youtube because they don't know what it is going to come up against, what is the next picture. >> absolutely. >> rose: and now they are developing channels for everybody. >> in five years from how we should have this conversation about where google is in the media space. i uld not be sprised if they are not as significant a player as -- >> rose: you have a show on youtube. >> as the networks are. and by the way, you have had -- your show is on google, so there. >> rose: on youtube, yes. >> on youtube but through google
originally, right. >> rose: right, right, right. i am everywhere. i will be here five years by the way so we can have this conversation. >> i very much hope to have this conversation. >> rose: all right. let me finish these other questions. rim, research in motion. i thought they were on their -- >> left for dead. >> rose: yes. >> so i carry a blackberry on the side and an iphone -- >> rose: why do you carry a blackberry? >> because of the keyboard, because of the keyboard. >> is that it? >> because of the keyboard and for messaging and because. >> and so -- >> i am different than a lot of other people, there are a whole world of people that carry blackberries because they work with government and they are secure. >> rose: right. >> they are secure and by the way, you know, google and i-phones are not. >> rose: closed network?. closed network, they use their own servers, there is a lot -- and by the way they have pants and pants, patents galore, the company has been so devastated you can buy the thing for $3.7 billion that is its value out there. >> rose: so apple should buy rim. >> if you are sitting on
$117 billion, you could buy it -- google because motorola less for the handsets than the patents and another thing you have done on this show a million times, the whole patent war is fascinating in silicon valley right now and how important it is to have a war chest literally because it is like a nuclear arms race over there over owning the patents. >> rose: maybe apple shoul buy "the new york times" and after that they should buy cnbc. >> is your show for sale too. >> rose: well, yes, no, no but "the new york times" might be for sale at some point. i don't know if they would buy content. >> rose: i don't either. that is an interesting question. >> i don't know if apple would buy content, i thought about that and in fact i when i thought about putting a list together do you want to own a barnes & noble or music or actually want to own the studios? there was years ago covering it there was a time when apple was looking at buying what was then universal music. >> rose: yes. >> and by the way if you own universal music, how difficult does it become to then make deals with all of the other
music providers? so content is tricky, content is tricky. >> rose: here is the interesting thing, steve jobs, according to walter" sack son was coming to television, he wanted to focus on television and didn't get there and that was in the pipeline, i don't know what the pipeline looks like. >> we still may see it, itv that is what every analyst and apple watcher says we will eventually see some form of a tv device. the problem is, you still have the cable operators which are the last mile into the home so the question is what does that device look like? how do you work with content players? >> rose: and by the way one of my suggestions which is probably the most controversial on the list. >> rose: i will get to it. hold that for last. square is next. >> square is jack dorsey, jack dorsey, cofounder of twitter as well. >> rose: right. >> and i think chairman of twitter, isn't he? >> he is now chairman of twitter. if you think about apple and you think about all of these
electronic devices that are ultimatelyeening you your electronic wallet i know it is a raise and we haven't gotten there but it is pretty close. >> and they are the closest? >> they are the closest and most interesting in terms of what they have created thus par, you can literally swipe your credit card on the top of an iphone and increasingly you can walk into a cafe because of the wifi and where you are, the cafe will know you are there, you will walk up to the cash register and they will say, $6 andrew, you say yes, i am andrew, $6 and they see it on the screen and see your name and no money changes hands, no hand, nothing. and that is the future. >> rose: all right. >> and they have an opportunity to do that and by the way if you take square andçó understanding that apple already has 400 credit cards, 400 million credit cards on file you put the two of those things together it is very interesting.
>> rose: and so you could buy twitter and square? >> you could buy -- >> everything i. >> us said you can buy -- you can buy all of this stuff,. >> rose: so if you bought all of it what would you cost? have you put those numbers together? >> we haven't put the in the last one which is the most expensive, sprint. now, this is probably the most out there, wild idea on the list. if you ultimately think of apple as a company who likes to have a moat and have its own network, the network effect, the question is should they own their own network? this could become if they did it right the buy sprint for 13, $14 billion today, it is that cheap i know that sound expensive but cheap is a relatively basis when you look at at&t and verizon, if you invest another and this may sound crazy $50 billion to upgrade the network you could have the best, fastest high speed network in the united states and become a showcase for what the future of mobile technology could look like, but
more importantly, you could get into the home, forget about wires, if you got the wireless network properly done, you could bypass cable, and you could, talk about an it. have you could be streaming directly to the home off of a let work like that. by the way, to me, and i am not comparing myself in any way, shape or form to steve jobs, this is the craziest idea out there, but if you were doing something crazy and steve always talks about the crazy ones, this is the crazy kind of thing you might even try. >> rose: so what is the judgment on steve's successor so far? >> solid. >> rose: solid? >> solid, dependable, you know, when you look at the iphone 4 s which is the last iteration of the iphone and the new ipad, they were all iterations of what came while steve jobs w still alive. the big question mark is going to be on iphone 5 and the devices that you start to see get rolled out over the next two
and three years, that would be the measure of tim cook, the ceo, the inventor, the visionary, does he have those qualities and if he doesn't have those qualities was there a bench at apple the whole time that did? and that is when we may find out -- >> rose: a huge bench at apple. >> a huge bench, but the question will be did they immediate that leader in eve jobs to make it all work or can tim cook do it? >> rose: i asked someone .. because i was in silicon centrally last weekend talking to one of steve's friends and i asked him and i asked a lot of other people out there, venture capitalists and who is the next steve jobs? they said the one, number one vote getter in that, jack dorsey was one of the nominees, the number one was larry page, larry page .. is really the next steve jobs and he is driving google like it has never been driven before, although he has a problem with his throat right now. you what?
>> no. i was trying to think of -- >> rose: i am asking you now, who is the next steve jobs? and if you don't believe it is larry page, why not? >> to me, i think page is great and google is great if you ask me who is the next steve jobs and something crazy huff to do something truly interesting and revolutionary ron musk and you have had him on the show several times. >> rose: yes, several times. >> >> rose: paypal, was he paypal. >> he started paypal and he now does space x which is privatizing spaceships. >> rose: and developing a whole car company. >> tesla. he really thinks out of the box, now whether he will get there on my of these promises ultimately i don't know but when you think of somebody who is really thinking i mean far out ahead, he to me is doing some pretty interesting things. one will note by the waiing we talked about all of this money, this $117 billion, this was sort of speculative because you can't really spend all of it.
because so much of, about wo-thirds of it are abroad and that is a huge issue, just -- >> rose: to bring it back you have to pay a lot of tax. >> that's a huge issue that is facing apple, it is an issue facing corporations across the world, but -- across cash. >> rose: so look forget a tax holiday. >> they are all look forget a tax holiday so one day they can bring it back and make acquisitions like this, right now if you actually make this list and really consider that, you might have to start buying companies in china. or elsewhere or in countries outside of the u.s. >> rose: and spend the money outside of the u.s. and not have to pay tacks. >> exactly. >> rose: let's go, what is your sense of where we are in the european debt crisis? >> not that you are an expert on that. >> no, no. i study it and i talk to people both here and abroad every day, my sense is that we are not that much further along than we were yesterday or the day before.
the famous, i should carry a dented can wherever i go. >> rose: right. >> i don't know when and if we get there, i think this is a two, three, four-year long project, i think you are going to hear a lot more head lines over the summer, post labor day, where we might get incremental steps, but the idea that we are going to come up with either a solution or frankly that we are going to have a lehman moment,. >> rose: the question that is always asked what is the lehman moment. >> i am not sure either is coming soon. i think we will be -- we are going to be treading water for a long time. >> rose: so what would be a break through to get this thing solved? >> a true breakthrough would be to issue euro bonds. >> rose: that would come fromro- >> no but you have to really get everybody on board, all 17 countries, and, again -- >> rose: didn't grogni we are
not going to let the euro zone fail. >> last week he said .. we won't let the euro zone fail and the market expected by the way this week we would hearder hear from him and lay out a plan? what happened today? he said i am working on a plan which we may lay out later. in the next couple of weeks we will keep working on a plan. the -- >> rose: so they read that he doesn't have a plan? >> he is working on a plan. his problem is not that he doesn't know what to do. >> rose: right. >> he said his hand are tied and he can't do it yet. he has to print a lot of money and the only way he can do that is get everybody on board and that is a very tough political thing to do. >> it is great to have you here. >> it is so great to be here. thank you, charlie. >> andrew ross sorkin writes for new york times and on cc canned and you get up early, don't you? >> just like you. >> rose: yes indeed. thank you for joining us. see you next time.