tv Charlie Rose Bloomberg December 17, 2013 10:00pm-11:01pm EST
parliament in order to become chief executive of the international rescue committee in new york. i am pleased to have him back at the table. welcome. >> it is great to be back. >> coming with the international rescue committee is. >> it was founded by albert einstein in 1933. it now works in about 40 countries helping victims of civil conflict and natural disasters and it helps resettle americans. 9000 people come from around the world. we settle them. we help teach them english, we help get them housing, we get them on the road to being american citizens. this is a domestic organization but it is also in difficult and dangerous places. we are doing emergency relief in 72 hours within a disaster. we have been in afghanistan, the protection of women and kids. >> you are overlapping with what
the international red cross does? >> it is a similar business. we are an ngo. they are a formal international statute. we are working on the victims of civil conflict and disaster. this humanitarian space created by einstein, but now it is not about wars between states -- it is about civil wars. it is about the host communities, not just the refugees. the defining image of a refugee is really in a refugee camp behind wire. 75% are not in camps. they are squatting, baking off neighbors. we have a mandate to go to the toughest places to help. we also have to innovate because we have to do things different ways to get sustainable and
diverse solutions. >> syria is exhibit a. >> syria the defining humanitarian crisis this century. we are failing the test. there are literally millions of syrians displaced. the issue is that you have a war and neither side is respecting the rules of war. civilians are being targeted. nearly one in two people are displaced by their homes, 9 million, 10 million people. now there are 3 million people in neighboring countries. people say the syrian civil war. it is bigger than that. it is consuming the region, the neighboring countries, turkey, iraq, jordan. it is a regional conflict as well.
it is bigger than a syrian conflict. >> you have the turks and you have saudi arabia supporting some element the islamist and moderate elements of the campaigns against the government. how does this end? >> the country of syria is dissolving in front of our eyes. there is hardly going to be a syria left for the "winner." neither side feels they can yield ground or compromise. the people caught in the middle are the millions of syrians who whether they were sunni or shiite were living side-by-side in a country that for a long time has been relatively stable, albeit a dictatorship. now what you see is regional
powers, not just local powers, seeing this as a fight they can't duck. >> are you hopeful about what might happen in geneva? >> i would be lying if i said i was hopeful. the person trying to get the negotiations to go said he had severe doubts. my point is this -- we fought hard to get the humanitarian issues, polio, the hunger, the lack of shelter, onto the agenda for the peace conference on the 22nd of january. the political division about the ultimate solution in syria has been mirrored on the humanitarian side. we cannot get a resolution to the council insisting that each side obey humanitarian law.
there is a great power on each opposing side. it would be the ultimate irony that getting humanitarian issues onto the agenda for the conference. if the conference get canceled, we will not even get to the humanitarian issues. if that conference is not going to be about peace, it is got to bring some semblance of order about war. we're going back to the dark ages. if aid workers cannot cross lines -- doctors said to me, our colleagues have been targeted for helping people who were on the "wrong side." that is the kind of retribution you are getting.
organizations like mine that have helped one point 5 million serious with medical aid are finding it increasingly difficult to get to civilians. that is the scale of the crisis. it is now spreading. >> what is your action plan? >> there are three things. today is the day that the -- issues their request for $4 billion in need. more than 70% are not in camps. this is what has changed. the old way is that you could get help to them in camps. today in lebanon, 800,000 refugees, 250,000 kids not going to school, none of them in camps. >> where are they? >> they are in thousands of towns and villages in lebanon. lebanon's population is about 6
million people. they have at 800,000 refugees. that is like the whole of britain coming to america in the space of a year. >> beyond destabilizing things and the humanitarian need, does it have other impact in terms of what it does to destabilize the host government? >> that is exactly the right word. the neighbors of syria, fragile countries, of course it is destabilizing for them. the world bank says the hit on the lebanese economy is $6.5 million. jordan, a deep ally of the united states, has got six hundred 50,000 refugees that it can ill afford. remember, this is a strong way of putting it, but i think it is right -- after the second world war, there was the marshall plan to rebuild europe.
these countries come a they need a marshall plan. if they are to survive -- >> the marshall plan came from the u.s. government. >> political leadership can come from the west. the funding is not only going to come from the west. we have a different shape of economic power today. we have got to get the cash aid in two organizations so mike and deliver. polio -- you have to keep the vaccine cold. we have a cold chain. we can deliver winterization. there's a whole range. i want to speak up for the humanitarian imperative of saving lives when you can. that is what we face. we could save more lives. that is the catch. don't forget to other things -- we have to innovate in the way we deliver aid. we can run cash for work
programs. people working hard just not getting cash. third, we can stanch the dying. we can't stop the killing. to stop the killing, you need politics that works. that is why i'm a far from the chemical weapons deal, the the humanitarian issue has gotten worse. that is why we can't afford to political leaders to turn away. >> suppose sitting at the table was president obama, david cameron. they said to you, ok, we hear you. how much money do you need? >> follow the u.n.. they said today, in order to save life is your you need $6 billion. that is all of our number. that is based on evidence on the ground. $6 billion a year to save lives in syria in the neighboring countries. the british economy is $1.5 trillion. the u.s. is sometimes that.
we have incredibly brave syrian partners who are taking medical aid across the border. we the situation in lebanon, a whole generation of syrian refugees is not getting educated. 250,000 kids without education. we know from our experience is that we can deliver community- based education. >> i have been to a camp in jordan. is the u.n. likely to give you the $6 billion? >> the u.n. needs to get the money from the member states. up to now they have only succeeded in getting 60% of the funding. if that is repeated, we will only get $4 billion and that means the kind of aid that is needed will not get there. but we can make a difference, not just to save lives, but to get education, to get some support for these neighboring countries.
we are in need of an some kind of a marshall plan. let's be honest about this -- maybe three years ago, people came on the show and said, assad is going to go. it has not turned out that way. >> less likely to now. >> both sides think they can't lose but neither side can see how to win. that is the essence of stalemate. >> neither has incentive to go to geneva. >> that is right. that is why the division in the security council between the u.s. and russia is so damaging. >> why did you choose this job? >> i felt this would give me a sense of real fulfillment of the values that i hold dear. the visor to me to domestic politics in the first place. i felt was a soap opera attached to any time i said anything.
>> you felt like you had to leave britain? >> yes. i was looking for a big stage, but i wanted to do big things. the ngo sector is famous for its innovation. they are risking things governments do not want to do. this ngo has a nobility of purpose but real bravery and delivering it. i wanted to associate myself with that and try to write the next chapter in this illustrious history. >> you assume you could leave written to go do this? >> you can't assume anything. one of the things you learn in life is that you write one chapter at a time. i am very committed to this
organization. i have been there for three months. i moved the family to new york. that is not the thing you do to change her mind in five minutes. my focus -- change your mind in five minutes. my focus is how would take this humanitarian aid to the next level at a time when many people in -- >> you take it because of the challenge. what else did you consider doing? [laughter] >> i look for an opportunity to make a difference around the world. i thought it would be hard to do something in written because people would say, why aren't you in politics? i spent three years as foreign minister. i wanted to give vent to the internationalism. my parents were refugees. i am the first generation in my family to be born in britain. my dad came to britain in 1940. my mom came in 1946. i get from belgium, my mom from poland. they lost many relatives in world war ii.
i felt i was closing a personal circle by repaying a bit of the debt that help my parents. >> what did your mom think when her to brothers ended up fighting each other for the lead of the political party and you were surprised at what happened? >> the best thing to say about it is that mothers should never make solomonic judgments between two children. it is important that mothers love all the kids. >> what does it do to be sibling relationship? >> i think the fairest way to answer is to say where professional challenges get in the way of personal relationships, you have to be careful to not say thank you come to regret. that is what i think we both try to do.
>> says you were young, people said, david miliband was a future prime minister. you would assume that was the next step for you. and it didn't happen. because her brother, not someone you did not know, got the nomination. but i want myself to eat the story. i want the issues i care about to be the story. >> to you to have the same political point of view? >> no. beware small differences. we are in the same party, not different parties. it is important to remember that. within the party, we talk in the u.k. that you can have a broad church. you don't have to be occupying the same pew. >> this is my last question about this -- >> now i know why you are the championship interviewer. as it is said that you are more policy and he was more politics.
>> people can go and make up their own mind. we were brought up with the values we hold dear in the way we understand the modern world. hopefully we both make a success of what we are doing. we both want to make a success of what we are doing. it is tempting to lead your life asking, what might have been? if you live your life like that, you end up torturing yourself. that is a route to disaster. i'm trying to focus on what could be and what responsibility i have to make a difference in the role i have heard what i can say -- i spent three years on the back benches. you are on the back pages, you can speak but it is hard to act. what i feel now is that we have a 15,000 staff around the world in very dangerous circumstances
making a difference for people who need a voice and need help. that is because i want -- >> let me make this point. "the new york times" today huge profile on you. it was because you are david miliband and you have the background that you did. i don't know when they last did a huge profile on the head of the irc. do you? >> no, i don't. like it is because you bring a certain international presence to this job. >> let me help your viewers understand the event between politics and the humanitarian sector. people in the humanitarian sector are always concerned that we don't become politicized. we want to humanize them. the people who pay the price should not be the poor civilians
who do not get the help they need. that is the humanization of politics in there. >> let the politics be about power but let the issues be about the humanitarian issues. >> that is the thing that i remind myself every day and ask myself at the end of every day how much difference have we made to the people striving for a decent life? in afghanistan, we are in treat thousand afghan villages making a difference.
>> whether it is rawanda, what happened in the balkans, people make documentaries and books about, how could this have happened? five years later, 10 years later, that is the book they write. they don't write about how great was the intervention that saved lives. >> there are risks in action and in action. we are learned today that there are risks in inaction, too. >> it used to be said about certain political conflicts that if you sand decided, history will judge you badly. that is what happens whenever there is genocide. we have seen in the end of the 20th century and beginning of the 21st cases in which well- known politicians talking about intervention and/or humanitarian crisis have literally apologized
because of the happen on their watch and the did not do something. >> they say in the middle east you pay interest on your mistakes. that is a powerful point when the world is now at debating, is syria our problem or their problem? it is our problem as well. >> the humanitarian aspect or it can you deal with that without dealing with the political aspect? >> we need politics to stop the killing. that is why you need both. >> how many lives are at stake right now? >> we know there are 2.5 million syrians that are effectively cut off from health. we know their lives are at stake. we know there are 120,000 dead. we're not careful, i will be back in 2014 and the number will be 200,000. the number of kids not getting education will be 6 million.
that is the kind of change that will be on the way. it is not just the scale. it is a country in the middle of the most dangerous region in the world and it is on fire. we have to care about that. >> $6 billion in the great scheme of things seems to me a small number. >> you are right. that is what i said. cash for the u.n. is the easy bit. >> you have to go to the u.n.? >> this is about will, not -- >> why do you have to go to the united nations? >> to be fair, they organize relief. they do not spend the money themselves. >> ok, fine.
but if you had $6 billion, would you go to united nations or take your own organization? >> mine, with others. >> i don't understand why it is so necessary why so much is so urgent at the moment and you've got to get -- the u.n. are alleging an appeal today based on what is needed. they're not saying they don't want to spend the money. they're saying, get the money there before we sort the politics. there is an imperative now and it needs to be recognized. >> you don't seem to have, as no one else i know, you look at what has happened on the ground in the last six months. it seems to be -- the idea of solving this, one way or the other, seems further apart than it seemed a year ago.
>> we are further away from either side winning or either side being reconciled them we were a year ago. in the and the only way this will be resolved if it is clear what the political and security arrangements that will underpin syria when it makes a transition from the current situation. >> on syria, what are the points that we ought to know about other humanitarian crisis on a large scale? is central africa an issue? >> the three burning issues are one, the most deadly country in the last 10 years has been afghanistan. when the western forces pull out year, we need to search in of the humanitarian effort. we're in 3000 afghan villages. for a fraction what the military spends, we can make a big
difference. secondly, they are not in the headlines generally, but the protracted religious crises in central africa are severe. there compounded by climate crisis. thirdly, you have had a lot of people on the show talking about the remarkable change in burma in the last year or two. opportunities are amends. on the western side, the border of bangladesh, 800,000 refugees. on the thai side, long-term conflict across the border. there is plenty of work to do. the new leave you with this thought -- we were created by albert einstein in 1933. 80 years later, there are fewer wars between states than ever before. it is a peaceful. of human history when it comes to war between states. there are more refugees.
45 million refugees. conflict within plus climate. civil wars that recur plus resources. it is creating the largest supply of displaced people the world has ever seen. we are a growth industry, and we do not want to be. that is why the world needs to respond. ask thank you for coming. david miliband. back in a moment. ♪
i want to begin just by understanding the following thing. 50,000 members of the nypd. a budget of about 4.6-$5 billion. everyone knows you have dramatically reduced crime. people know you of them what you've done about terrorism and how you can innovative in that. they know about the controversy, which we will talk about. what is it they don't know about ray kelly in 12 years as head of the nypd? >> i don't think it is so much ray kelly. it is a team effort. something that has been overlooked is the fact we have
six thousand fewer police officers. uniform police officers than we had 12 years ago as a result of budget cuts. in this, the most diverse city in the world, we have the most diverse police department in the world. we have police officers born in 106 countries. >> minorities are the majority of the police. >> that gives us tremendous language skills, the ability to interact with -- i think that is something that is not mentioned and i think it is an important factor. >> are you satisfied? some people have criticized you, but i remember when the mayor first came to office there was a significant effort to reach out
to minorities. has the relationship with the minority communities been -- do you leave it where you hoped it would be? between the police and the minority communities? >> it is strong. how do we know that? if you look at polls and polling data, police department polls 60%-70% as far as satisfaction with the job we are doing. certain things were said in a political campaign. that there was a great schism between the police and the community. these polls show that is not the case. we understand the game. i accept the game. you run for office and you say certain things.
now that that is over, that issue can be put to rest. >> i want to stay with that for a second. the stop and frisk for example, was a political issue for the man who was the incumbent mayor. he used that as an issue effectively, it is said, in terms of people who analyze that election. it gave him a distinction. you two had a phone conversation. what was the nature of that conversation as has to do of the issue we are talking about? >> we had a conversation about we have had many conversations on the phone. he was and still is the public advocate of the city. we had a professional relationship. we do not speak specifically about that. >> since he has been mayor, you've had no conversations -- >> yes. no. well, he came in and we had an in-depth briefing on counterterrorism issues. we need, in my judgment, we need that terrorism overlay that is provided as a city.
we want to augment. we want to supplement what the federal government does. new york is the number one target in this country. that is the consensus of the intelligence community. >> i asked the mayor this very question and i'm asking you the same question -- where have you failed in your judgment? for all of your successes, where have you failed? >> i don't think we have failed. there are always things you would do differently as far as small things. every day, you do something different. in terms of the big issues, i think the mayor has done a terrific job and i think the police department has also done a very good job. after 9/11, after mayor bloomberg had taken office, all sorts of gloom and doom in the environment.
newspapers, media were saying that the city it that city is going to go to hell in a handbasket. crime was going up, but how much? when we came into office, we created this rubric of three c's succeding rudy giuliani. we set up to operate under the label of the three c's --crime suppression, community relations, and counterterrorism. all three of those had major success. in terms of community relations, contrary to the things you may have heard during the campaign, it is simply not sustained by the polls. we had positive poll numbers in communities of color. we reflect the city we serve
more than ever before. >> people do you and bill bratton as two of the most innovative police chiefs. do you see the world -- do the two of you see the world of police work the same? or, do you have a different mindset about what the imperatives are for large cities and combating crime? >> i can only speak for mine. my imperative. it is to save lives. that is precisely what has happened as far as crime fighting is concerned. we have 9200 fewer murders than we did in the 12 previous years. that, in my mind, is a remarkable number.
the lives saved for the most part are the lives of young people of color. that is an important goal, an important mantra. we are in the life-saving business. we have to do it constitutionally. we believe that is precisely what we have done. i know the was a lawsuit here, but that decision has now been brought into question because the judge herself has been taken off the case. the second circuit found that there were indications of partiality on the part of the judge in some for comments prior to the trial. an appeal is hopefully going forward and we will see what the ramifications are of that. in terms of what you want your police department to do, you want to address the issue of violence and ultimately that
translates to saving lives. look at the numbers here. we are at record lows for murders in the city. laster we had record lows. we are at 20% below that now. in the 1990s, we averaged -- last week, we had one murder the whole week. with a million fewer people living in the city. >> granted that, what did you do to make that a reality? >> smarter policing. use of technology and tactics. work at the real-time crime sensor that does not really exist anywhere else. we have operation crewcut, as we call it, that addresses young groups of boys who are shooting each other. we found these crews or gangs
are responsible for about 30% of our shootings. >> what is the right balance between security and individual rights, privacy? have you had to address that same issue and rethink that issue? >> we have to address it every day. we have a cadre of lawyers that look at our activities. we look at terror operations, we have some the called a -- decree, which was an agreement put in place and adjusted in 2003 to help ufurther address terrorism.
that controls, to a large extent, what we do. lawyers are looking at what we do, i can assure you, on a daily basis. >> did it go too far? >> i don't think so. >> surveillance, or the -- or whatever the issue might be. >> this is the most litigious environment in the world. i literally get sued every day. people will sue and bring legal action. it doesn't mean necessarily that we are violating any law or people's rights because an action is brought. the lawsuit that went forward hopefully, the appeal will continue to go forward.
>> did you, because of all the attention focused on this, change anything about what is called a stop and frisk? >> we did put in an ongoing training program where lawyers and ask areas police officers train people in this everyday. it is a constant flow of officers who are being trained in how to do this. it has a lot of nuances that the public does not necessarily appreciate. by the way, this is the practice that goes on in law enforcement, certainly for america. it is authorized or validated by a supreme court decision, terry v. ohio. this is across law enforcement. >> during the 12 years you were
here, that the nature of the terrorist threat change and the tactics of the terrorist threat? >> i think we are more concerned now about a lone wolf. we'll we have also seen is the radicalization process in many ways shift to the internet. >> would be lone wolf be what happened in boston? >> shortly, yes. we still don't know everything about the brothers. one brother went to dagestan. something happened there, and we are not fully aware of what happened there. they became radicalized in some way, shape, or form. they were shown how to make pressure cooker bombs. they are very rudimentary and the concern is that they are so simple to make. that would be an example of a loan will. >> is that the thing you for the most, now?
because it comes from places you don't know, even though there was some surveillance of them, although the dots not might have been connected? >> we have to have a 360 degree perimeter. we cannot close out any threat or lessen the danger. we saw in nairobi, we saw four shooters involved in nairobi with rudimentary weapons, ak- 47s, go and kill at least 67 people, maybe more. the full count is not really in. you have to cover the waterfront, so to speak. >> how you do it and why have you been successful? is it because you have very good intelligence, i.e. you contact so many groups and your surveillance, for whatever reason, and the capacity now because of going across
institutions and different police bodies and institutions, you know more than you knew before? or is it because someone informs on somebody? [laughter] >> we have a lot more information about them we did in the past. we are working closely with the federal government. most of our information is coming to the federal resources. everyone is working together more cooperatively in the past. it is not always perfect, but we are much closer. you can't declare victory here. something could happen today or tomorrow that wasn't or isn't on our radar. someone 2010 found a parking spot in times square with a bomb in his car. no one knew anything about him. >> what are you going to do now?
>> i will be looking at a series of things. i'm signing up as a speaker with the greater talent network -- >> what we be doing for speeches? >> some of the things we are talking about here -- terrorism, policing, threats that are emerging in the world, cyber crime, that sort of thing. that is one aspect of what i am doing. to be continued. >> is it more likely to be in the private or public sector? >> i'm ready to go to the private sector. >> some international organization could come and say, look, you have one thing you have to do. circumstances are so difficult, it is one more claim on your patriotism. >> i don't know of any international organization that would do that, but never say never. >> people that have been in
public service as much as you have say it is hard to resist. i thought it was over, i thought i had done my part, and then they come back. >> i did. it was a tremendous pull for me after 9/11. i had feelings of helplessness and mayor bloomberg asked me to join him and it was a good decision for me. >> has he supported you on every controversy? >> yes. >> there has been no light between the two of you in important issues? >> we discussed a lot of important issues, but no. i will not going to the specifics on conversations with the mayor, but all the issues have been there. he has been very vocal. >> bill bratton if the new opel
police commissioner. one thing he believes is that delegating down. authority is when you can have capacity within a very small group of people to thin out what is necessary to do and to send it down the line. >> the most important thing to do is to get the job done. there are all sorts of different national styles and ways to do thing. if you get the job done, that is what counts. >> what did you different about in law enforcement's? or is the technology and technique so advanced that they are commonly accepted principles? >> it really has to do what we're talking about here. there is a lot more technology available, a lot more information available. the challenge is to get that information up into the hands of the troops on the ground.
>> you have to be sad about this. >> everyone has to leave it sometime. >> i have been public service for 50 years. it is time to leave and i would not use the word sad at all. i am ready to go. >> ready to go? likes absolutely. >> nothing you didn't want to do that you didn't get to do? >> 12 years is a long time. again, you are measured by metrics. the metrics are all going in the right direction. >> are you going to write a book? >> that is a strong possibility. >> what would you want to tell us?
>> we will see. i have a lot to tell you. >> when you look around at other cities, have a copy what new york is doing? they don't necessarily have the same terrorism challenge that you had, although los angeles has a real challenge as we have seen and boston didn't necessarily know, but faced a challenge and seems to have dealt with it in terms of a city coming back out world series champs. >> law enforcement organizations, and look at what we have done. they take some things and see what we have done for them. it is difficult to compare cities. the culture is different, the political structure, the organizational chart of the department is different. it is hard to compare.
we do have a lot of people coming and looking at what we are doing. a cadre of officers from the boston police department came down right after the marathon bombing to see what we were doing. we were happy to share. it does not necessarily mean that people are going to copy what we do. as you say, the terrorist threat is not the same across the country. >> when you go to these voices like mumbai or when you go to london, or kenya, what are you looking for? what are the guys in the anti- terrorism team trying to find out? >> they're trying to get any information as quickly as possible that will help us better protect new york city. the people we send to the cities are funded by a police foundation.
we are grateful for that. we want to know, in nairobi or mumbai, could it happen here? what can be learned from the events here that we can translate there. in mumbai, it started out initially as a hostage situation or it we were concerned that if we had a similar situation in multiple locations throughout the city, it would use a lot of resources to take away from the city, we were concerned that we did not have enough heavy weapons, so we trained and other 250 of them and our organized crime bureau in the event of a protracted situation. we also found out that the police that respondent knew nothing about the hotels that were affected. what we did was go in and video the entrances of hotels at key locations and we use that to orient our police officers who, even though they might be working at precinct that has a hotel, they may never go in there or have reason to go in there.
that is the type of thing that we learned in mumbai and nairobi. we know that command and control and coordination is absolutely the key. the army responding, and the police are responding, there were coordination problems. we take it back and try to translate it into understandable language for the police officers for our patrol force. >> i watched "60 minutes" last night. they talk about snowden and some of the issues facing them in terms of the surveillance issues. he raised the point about, perhaps they had not done an
effective job of communicating what they do. that seems to be something that you suggested. >> yeah. i think that we probably could have done a better job of getting out some of these things that we do in terms of .that we do in terms of protecting the city from a terrorist attack and the whole issue of stopped, questioned, and sometimes frisk. it is not easy to get good news or neutral news out. at the media world changes and print media contracts and you have a lot more outlets on the internet, media is not only looking for good news or giving anyone the ability to do sort of an explanation piece. i think newspapers is a long explanation as to what we're doing and protecting people's rights.
they will serve papers on a newspaper and the department. we don't even have a chance to read the lawsuit until they are in the paper. that is the world we live in. getting out information about what we do, the nuances, the complexity of this work is not always easy >> thank you for coming. congratulations on 12 years of service. good luck in the future. ♪
>> live from pier 3 in san francisco, welcome to the late edition of "bloomberg west," where we cover the global technology and media companies that are reshaping our world. i'm emily chang. our focus is on innovation, technology, and the future of business. let's get straight to the rundown. derek schmidt, marissa mayer, and other execs sit down with barack obama to discuss surveillance and what wrong with healthcare.gov. facebook is rolling out video ads in some newsfeeds as part of an effort to convince advertisers that the social network be