tv Charlie Rose PBS April 6, 2016 12:00am-1:01am PDT
. >> rose: welcome to the program, we begin this evening with a conversation with the united states secretary of state, john kerry. >> so what is our present attitude towards president assad, bashar al-assad? you and i both have been to syria when he was viewed as kind of a possible reformer. >> well, he lost the opportunity. as -- as was said to me on occasion, he made mistakes and i think it is clear that assad made enormous, gigantic mistakes in not recognizing what was happening throughout his region and when his young people demonstrated, he met them with thug i are rather than with dialogue, and the result is that parents came out and he made
sure they were met with bullets and violence and the result really was the beginning of the tearing apart of syria. so i don't know how he puts it. this is important. i don't see how, even if the united states or someone else said, oh, go ahead. you know, you try and make a government and we will support that idea, which we don't, you couldn't make it happen. there is no way for assad to be the person who puts the pieces back together again. >> rose: and we conclude this evening with tina brown, talking about her seventh women in the world summit. >> it is actually about seeing the world through the eyes of women, these are the women who live behind the lines, you read the headlines and read the reports but don't really feel like what it is like to be a woman in syria, a woman in -- can't get any education for a kid in pakistan or a woman desperately trying to get some inclusion in saudi, you don't really read about it much or
people don't really pay attention much unless it is in -- people don't really pay attention, so to bring these women who are so vibrant and have these amazing personal stories to the stage was really the concept. >> rose: john kerry, and tina brown when we >> 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. >> rose: john kerry is here. he is the 68th secretary of state of the united states. after 28 years in the senate he succeeded hillary clinton in
2013. last year he broke a landmark nuclear deal with iran and also played a key role in the latest round of syrian peace negotiations. according to the new yorkers david remnicke remnick kerry's s and critics alike describe him in similar terms, tireless optimistic, if he can just get the relevant parties in the room he can make a deal. i am pleased to have john kerry on this program. welcome. does that sound true to you? >> no. [laughter.] >> rose: getting them in the room is not necessarily in the end going to be a deal? >> no. no. >> rose: what have you learned -- >> obviously it is more complicated than that, and i guess like everything in public life, people try to simplify it and put it in a bottle, and we find in very limited terms, charlie, it is much more complex. >> rose: you were the senate
major leader and you know foreign policy. what surprises you about the execution of foreign policy? >> we are living in a completely different world from the world that i grew up in and the world that i was in in the senate, most of my life. most of the last century was defined by state actors acting out for territory, for dominion, empire, whatever. and that changed when the berlin wall fell and with the demise of the soviet union. and i think with the exception of president putin's adventure in crimea/ukraine, most of this century is already being defined by nonstate actors, and
principally radical religious extremism. you also are seeing a massive squeezing, if you will, of the universe into a smaller ball because of technology. because of trade and the massive amount of interconnectedness of all of our economies today. and the result is, many, many people are running around with smart phones, but no education, no opportunity, no jobs. no rights within their country, and the consequence of that is a disgruntlement, a clash of culture, of aspirations, with the absence of opportunity, with the corruption, and it explodes, and it exploded with the food vendors who lit himself on fire and ignited the whole northern bart of africa, the horn, and the middle east. >> rose: what we now call the
-- >> that's what we are dealing with. that's what we are with dealing with, and beyond there now, it is in south-central asia, it is in asia, it is wherever government -- and unfortunately one of the things i have discovered is the breadth of bad governance which feeds that. and corruption is an enormous problem on a global basis, just whole states that are seeing their future robbed by so-called leaders and by the way with the, you know, aid and abetment of legitimate banks and other entities around the world that harbor their money, hide them and so forth. >> rose: you were almost a successful presidential candidate, you were chairman of the senate foreign relations committee. >> but for a certain state. >> rose: called ohio. >> called ohio. >> rose: when you look at the world today, you can see it
being defined by nonstate actors, does that make isis our largest and toughest and most challenging national security issue? it is the most immediate security challenge because they are out to kill people, they have declared we are the enemy, they have targeted us, they are targeting our allies and our friends, and they are creating severe disruption in the region where we have significant interests for stability and peace. and they are feeding the frenzy of a potential secretaryian divide that can grow even more dangerous. we are not there yet but it has the makings of that. >> rose: if we are not winning we are losing. are we losing? >> no. we are essentially not. that i believe very deeply. we are -- we are aggressively making progress with respect with to isil--- they haven't
gained any territory since last may, at least, they are losing their leadership at the top level, perhaps one every three days. they have lost 40 percent of the territory they held in syria, in iraq. they lost 20 participant of the territory they held in syria. we are increasingly moving now, the russians, together with assad, took back palmyra and we have liberated ka about a any and liberated sintar and liberated other communities. >> rose: when will we liberate mosul? >> i hope soon. >> rose: during the obama administration? >> the process has already begun, charlie. this is an operation where certain things are being done now to lay the groundwork for it yavment tell you when the sort of main event will be engaged. that is up to the military folks and the iraqi government and so
for but that is an effort and we will succeed. >> rose: are you getting what you need from the iraqi government? >> the prime minister has enormous pressures and the answer is, for the most part, he is really working unbelievably hard to deliver. he has a very difficult hand. there are shy a, shia militia there that put enormous pressures and hurdles in the way, the politics is complicated. the old ex-prime minister continues to maneuver behind the scenes and make life difficult. and of course there is a relationship with iran, between some of the folks there. so it is, guess, it is complicated, but he is working very, very hard to deliver. he has made very tough decisions and they are decisions that have turned out well. he has -- was key to helping liberate ramadi and now focused on heath, moving up into anbar, and i have confidence that
providing he can get his government pulled back together now, which is his biggest challenge, on military side and security side i think we are on the right track. >> you don't think iraq will end up in partition? >> i think that is too easy of a bromide to just throw out there and say divide it up. i don't know quite how that works anymore than some of the other difficulties of uniting it. i think we are not for that. we believe that a united iraq, a united syria are the way forward, and we are working very hard to try to hold that possibility together. >> rose: so who is, how is our present attitude towards president assad, bashar al-assad? >> you and i both have been to syria when he was viewed as a kind of possible reformer. >> well, he lost the opportunity. as was said to me on occasion,
he made mistakes, and i think it is clear that assad made enormous, gigantic mistakes in not recognizing what was happening throughout his region and when his young people demonstrated, he met them with thug i are rather than with, thug i are rather than dialogue and the result is the parents came out .. and he made sure they were met with bullets and violence and the result really was the beginning of the tearing apart of syria. so i don't know how he puts it -- this is important. i don't see how, even if the united states or someone else said, oh, go ahead. you know, you try and me a government and we will support that idea, which we don't. you couldn't make it happen. there is no way for assad to be the person who puts the pieces back together again. >> rose: but is there a role for him in any way -- >> only in transition. in transition. he can help an orderly
transition. >> rose: how long does he have? >> well, i mean, again, that has been a negotiating process as to how long he has. >> rose: the russians say what? >> the russians say they are not wedded to assad. what they want, but they want stability, they want a whole united syria. they want the institutions of the government to be able to a hold together. they worry that a sudden departure of assad could satter, shatter the country and .. we would have the problems with the military and problems with others and we don't happen to agree with that view but that is their worry. now, the problem is that assad has gassed his own people that's against the wars of law. he has tortured his own people. that's against the rules of life and war. he has staived his people as a tactic of war. that is war crime. he has -- >> rose: he is a war criminal?
>> i think there is strong evidence to that effect and one day there could be a reckoning with respect to that, but whether it is dropping barrel bombs on civilians indiscriminately or gassing your people and putting 12 million of them into displaced person status, either refugees or in the country, when you have done that, how do you turn around and say, hey, i am the guy to unite you? i am going to put your country together? it is not going to happen. what is more, the threats of the saudis who are the principals supportsers of members of the opposition will not stop supporting a, an opposition that will not stop fighting so if you are serious about ending the war you have absolutely no choice but to find a way to have face saving in certain quarters and see assad exit in an orderly, structured way. >> rose: those are important words, orderly and structured. >> sure. >> rose: you have got to have something that succeeds him. >> that is exactly what we are
working on in geneva. that is the principle around which the geneva talks are organized, that there will be a transition by neutral, mutual consent and both parties 0 compromise to put people in place who manage the affairs of state until there is a new constitution and then an election. and ultimately the people of syria ratify their new leadership and constitution through a referendum. >> rose: do we have candidates to succeed him? >> it is not up to -- >> rose: the syrian people -- >> there are very qualified people who i think could earn the respect of all parties. >> rose: vladimir putin, what does he want? >> he wants -- he wants a syria that is whole, secular, united, that has the -- >> rose: that's exactly what we want. >> that's exactly why we came together. >> that's exactly what we took note of and, therefore, organized the conferences in
vienna and new york and munich in order to push the cessation of hostilities and try to get to the transition because their goal and iran's goal, iran at least is openly avowed goal is to have a united syria that is not sectarian, that is status quo, effectively, with leadership that can unite the country and stabilize it and move forward. and iran actually put a plan on the table. iran said, we are willing to have a unity government, we are willing to have a new constitution, we are willing to have an election. >> rose: and we are willing to pull his ebola out? >> ultimately that is a part of the negotiation, they obviously have to get out and -- >> rose: have they been helpful in tobacco have the iranians been coming helpful in signing a nuclear deal?
>> iran signed on to both communiques in vienna, which em .. embraced the very principles i articulated and in addition to that they have supported the munich meeting and declaration which reaffirmed our desire to have a transition and move forward. so iran effectively had a similar plan. there was a difference of opinion about what the transition, what defines the transition and who actually had to do, has to do what but in principle they have embraced. >> rose: and been helpful? >> the solution. well it remains to see whether they will be helpful. they have embraced that solution that didn't stop us from being able to get consensus within the two weeks in vienna. >> would that have been possible without the iran nuclear deal? >> no. >> rose: because of the deal you are able to talk to them, even though they are still doing things in terms of behavior that you don't like? >> we have a channel today to be able to communicate directly
which we didn't have a few years ago. >> rose: -- the foreign minister and so you -- as when the votes were captured. >> that is correct. >> rose: pick up the phone and say there is a problem, let's fix it, wouldn't have done that before? >> we wouldn't have done -- we wouldn't have done the call before. >> rose:. >> well we would have known who to try to reach but but -- >> rose: they are saying iran and russia and the united states are communicating in a way and they understand and they have shared goals -- >> in syria, we have shared goals and we have real differences, and the challenge is to try to mapping those. i will give you an example. when i first came in, in 2013, we ran into the challenge of chemical weapons use in syria. >> rose: right. >> through a conversation between president putin and president obama, that talked about what other options might
be or whether or not there was a way to get the weapons out, through conversations between lab i don't have and myself, we ultimately shaped .. an agreement. >> rose: for the removal of the chemical weapons in exchange for -- >> all of the chemicals weapons. >> rose: the deal was you remove the chemical weapons and we don't attack. >> and we with dade that. even although we were in controversies with almost every other issue. >> rose: by crossing the red line yet you got a deal to get the chemical weapons out but as a symbolic act it sent a message to putin, it sent a message to the iranians, it sent a message to others that you could cross the red line without consequences, and all of those countries communicated that to you rather quickly. >> they did, but i disagreed with them rather quickly too. because the fact is the president of the united states barack obama made his decision and made it public. it was never an issue of the
president deciding he wasn't going to bomb. the president decided particularly after david cameron went to the parliament and they lost the vote only two days previously that as we listen to congressmen and senators on the telephone as we were briefing them they said well you have to come to us, aren't you? >> rose: there were advisors to him that said you have to go to congress. >> there were some, absolutely. >> there were some who said you have no need to go to congress. just do what you have to do. but the president felt that it was important, particularly in the wake of what happened in great britain with the parliament's vote that he the president of the united states was going to honor our constitutional process and go to congress and we thought, genuinely thought we would have very quick approval. >> rose: and you discovered? >> and we were surprised that it wasn't quick approval. on the contrary, it dragged out. but in the meantime, charlie, in the meantime, i floated publicly in london the idea, when asked a
question, is there anyway that assad could avoid an attack? yes, get the chemical weapons out of syria and within a week or go, we had a deal to get all of the cmicals weapons out. >> rose: you remember i said tto assad at the time if the united states was willing not to bomb, would you be willing to take action like limiting the chemical weapons? and he said i have to think about it. clearly -- >> i think russians helped him think about it. >> rose: they did. >> and so when you look at that, the president said she proud of that decision are you proud of that decision? >> yes. >> rose: do you think it was the right decision? >> the president achieved more than what we would have achieved if we had go bombed. if we had bombed, it would have been as everybody knew, because everybody was discussing it in the context of our visits to the hill, a day, two days, at which point assad would have sat there and said now i know why i have to have these weapons. and today, some of those weapons might be in the hands of dash,
"sid. so i think the, isil. >> so i think the president made a very important decision that wound up getting a better result. and he never decided, never backed off of the notion that he was prepared to bomb. >> rose: you recommended that action? >> which? >> not to bomb if you -- you have to go to congress to get approval? >> . i think the it is well-known public record i got a call from the president on friday and informed me, we met as a national security team and the president told us what he was thinking. >> rose: as you know -- >> i supported that and said we need to now communicate to congress and get congress to support what we are doing. >> rose: as you know there is a famous article in the atlantic magazine by jeffrey goldberg talking about the obama doctrine. one of the things it suggests is that you have been advocating a more aggressive action in syria and in the middle east than the
president is prepared to take. can you clear that up for me? have you recommended more military use, more engagement? >> i think it is entirely inappropriate for me or other people to be talking about the advice we are giving a president while we are still serving and giving the president advice. and i think that the president has a right to know that the conversations we have remain within us, the memos we write remain between us and i honor that. >> rose: okay. but you can talk about philosophically when you look at the middle east, that article point out that the president really fears getting engaged and he -- >> the president doesn't fear. >> rose: okay. fair enough. use your own words. >> well, i didn't support -- the president is very -- is a very tough decision maker. demanding. he asks really good and really tough questions. and i have been very impressed by that and he goes right at the knob of the
issue and tries to figure out, you know, how -- what the consequences and the effects are going to be of any obvious decision that he makes. i think that at times we have not put to the president the full breadth of some of these options that might be available. >> rose: what do you mean we have not gout the president the options -- >> there are times, charlie, in the process where the president is clear about what he is trying to achieve and it takes a direction. i think ultimately the president has had every option put in front of him that is possible with respect to this. but you can have a ditches of opinion as to, you know, one particular piece of action or something but i have never had a difference .. about the fundamental direction the president has taken. he decided on day one we are going to declare war against isis. he initiated bombing
immediately. i believe he saved iraq at that moment and made a difference for baghdad and then he began to demand from everybody what are the options as to how we are going to fight this war? >> rose: from day one he declared against osama bin laden. >> yes. and i think we have all learned as the process has gone on refinements in the way in which we can fight dash. for instance let me give you an example, the foreign fighters, it is a new phenomenon, and so we have had to work unbelievably hard. >> rose: foreign fighter fightes those that go to syria and come back to their country. >> go to syria to fight with isil and they have left australia and germany, and i think the trick, the challenge was how do we diminish that flow of people in both directions?
>> right. >> and so we have worked extremely hard with our european friends, with friends in the region about airports, names, passenger lists, scrutiny, the border of turkey, this has been an enormous challenge. >> rose: is erdogan finally doing what he can to help the flow from syria to turkey? >> we think there is more that can be done and we hope there is a meeting taking place this week that we hope -- >> rose: between? >> between the united states and our turkish allies and we will be talking with them about how we can with do more on the border to try to deal with isil. >> rose: here you have palmyra, the regime retaking palmyra. the assad regime. >> yes. >> rose: how strong is assad now because russia came in and propped him up and used -- >> he is clearly stronger than he was. >> rose: and in a negotiating position i assume. >> not necessarily, charlie,
because it doesn't change the fundamental dynamic. if you are going to end the war, you cann'you cann't do it with d there. so if russia wants to end the war, if you want to end the war. >> rose: you can't do it request him. so before you end the war he has to be gone? >> the war will not come to a complete ending if assad against the wishes of the opposition, unless there is some agreement that i am not aware of that gets reached with the opposition somewhere in time, you can't end the war. because the opposition will not fight, will not end fighting because of what he is deemed to have done to their people, to the people of his country, and the opposition is a determined opposition and has survived even the russian bombing and even the toughest onslaught of assad for five years, they are not going to suddenly disappear. so even if assad is in a
stronger position, if russia wants to end the war, the strength of that position doesn't change anything. assad is still going to have to transition. >> rose: you spent four hours with putin. give me your take on what he wants. he wants russia to be relevant. he has achieved that because of what he did in part in syria. he wants russia to be respected. what else does he want? >> well, i don't claim to be, you know -- >> rose: you talked hours and hours to labarov, hours and days and days probably longer, you spent four hours with putin. >> i would say more than that. i have spent a lot of time with utin. >> rose: what do you think? >> each of those meetings have been fairly lengthy but i think he is intelligent. >> rose: what does he want? >> i think he is strategic and tactical, sometimes more tactical that strategic but there is certainly strategic vision. i think he wants his point of
view acknowledged and to a certain degree his interests reciprocated, met, to a certain degree. now, there are limits, obviously, crimea, we are not moving, i mean that is just not in the cards. >> rose: but most people think the crimean government is not going to change you think there is reason to believe that crimea can be taken back from the russians? >> i think there is reason to believe that over a long period of time that, depending on how the crimian feel about it .. they with may want some resolution whether they are a part of ukraine, uh cranes will not give up -- it is not going to give away. ukraine is not going to say go ahead and keep it and take it. so that is not in the cards and i think ultimately -- but that is down the road. right now, the fight is over ukraine. i think president putin feels that the united states abused
the process in libya, that we -- >> rose: he clearly says that. he reminds you every moment. >> you know the history. there is a litany a long list of things. and the -- what we need to do is find a way for president putin to have an opportunity to meet, the demands of the united nations security council, live up to his obligations under the -- agreement. >> rose: you said that's what he wants to do. >> well, charlie, that's what you butt to test. my job in diplomacy is to try and take what someone says and test whether it is real and particularly if you are looking for an outcome that is in fact structured and peaceful and productive, you -- you will have to find some road that is not perfect, but that finds a way to
get there. and in the case of president putin, he says that he is prepared to be part of the solution with respect to syria. now, everybody doubted whether russia would play any constructive role whatsoever with respect to the cecileation, cessation of hostilities and we got a cessation of hostilities because they played a positive role. >> rose: you and the president said -- >> if they hasn't done that, and played a constructive role we would not have had an agreement with iran. >> rose: right. >> if they hadn't played a constructive role we would not have gotten the chemical weapons out of syria and be in the hands of isil today and if they hadn't played a constructive role, we would not have gotten the cessation of hostilities or everybody at the table in geneva so i won't sit here -- the job is not done, it is a very, very difficult road ahead and this can crumble very easily, because the opposition may decide they are not serious about a transition and they go back to
fighting. or any number of different variations. >> rose: iran, let's assume it works and it continues to hold the nuclear deal. would that be the crowning achievement of john kerry, secretary of state ship? >> i have no way of -- i mean -- others will have to judge that down the road, charlie. i have gone at this with the notion that every day that i am there is an opportunity to try to get something done. and we began as you know working very hard to try to push the middle east peace process forward. we have worked -- we are working now in so many different areas. we are working on sudan, we are working on yemen, we are working on libya, we are working on dprk and above all, still afghanistan. >> rose: right. >> and soable. >> rose: afghanistan, where does afghanistan stand? are the taliban continuing to make gains in afghanistan? >> they have made. >> rose: territory. >> they have made some gains i
think it is fair to say the afghan army has also indicated a great capacity to stand its ground and fight. they are learning. and getting better. >> rose: turning quickly to china, the president of china was in washington about nuclear. one of the great fears is, talking about nuclear issues, including how to protect nuclear weapons by countries and hold them like pakistan and what what happens in ne north korea. are the chinese prepared to help us with respect to north korea? >> they have helped recently in the u.n. security council resolution where we had a standoff for a period of time. i think china evaluated it very, very carefully, they moved quite significantly and so we with have a much tougher resolution than we have ever had before. now, the trick is to make sure that it is fully implemented. and we are working on the implementation. i believe there is possibly still more china could. do i think president obama feels that also. china is the key.
china has the lifeline financial relationship through its banks to north korea, the line line geographical, the lifeline food security relationship, the lifeline on fuel. >> rose: so the question is, what are they prepared to do? >> that is the question. >> rose: american politics proceed without you being involved. and you have been involved at every level. what is it that people say to you, leaders of other countries when they look at americans politics? >> well, they are very concerned, charlie. there is a great -- there is a great disquiet and anxiety right now. >> rose: what are they anxious about? >> they are anxious that the certainty that they have had about united states policy -- i will give you an example. i mean, i will say one thing about a policy issue that a candidate has said, when donald trump talked about korea and japan going out and getting their own nuclear weapons, i
can't think of anything that would be more volatile, more contrary to peace and stability of the region, more contrary to the fundamental commitment of every president since world war ii to try to minimize the risk of nuclear weapons and minimize the number of people who have them and here is a guy who is running for president who said let them get them, themselves. >> rose: like japan? >> yes. and it is beyond provocative and that absence of continuity and stability with american tradition, with american foreign policy and with risk assessment, with calculated strategy is a profound challenge to our relationships we have. >> rose: donald trump somehow should become the nominee -- >> i am not going to go down that road at this point. i think suffice it to say that there is great anxiety everywhere i go, people say what has happened in the united states? what has happened to your politics. >> rose: but it is happening in europe too.
sure. >> rose: we see a move to the right because of the refugee situation. >> but you see it move to the right, but you don't -- you don't see people recommending that other countries get nuclear weapons and go out and fend for themselves, you don't see an assault on nato, which is engaged with us in afghanistan, engaged with us in iraq, very important now to the effort to hold the migration at bay and so i think those are the things that -- there is -- when people see a potential, potential nominee of a party, when you talk that way they get nervous. >> your relationship with the president, there have been great secretary of state presidential relationships i would suggest jim baker and president bush 41 would be the best you could hope for. kissinger and richard nixon and gerald formed -- >> gerald ford.
>> does policy start at the state department or the white house. >> it is always a combination, charlie, and i always -- you know, as a former chair of the foreign relations committee and 20 years on the committee watching the different relationships d different national security advisors and secretaries, i was new -- i always knew one of the first moves is, you know, don't -- don't get into terse squabbles and don't start fighting. you are there to serve the president, both the national security vis sorry and the secretary. and i serve at the pleasure of the ahe president -- at the president. so it just makes sense to be a team. and we are a good team. i believe that. >> rose: when you and the -- >> between the whole team. the entire team. the security team, everybody, works together as a team. and i think the president and, you know, it is too early for retrospectives, but i will tell you that he has given me enormous latitude. he had trusted me. he has given me enormous scope to go out and try something, and
put him at risk too in the doing of it. and i have huge respect for the president's strength with respect with to letting someone else go do something and he has been there every step of the way, believe me. he was deeply involved in the details of the iran agreement. he knew exactly what he could tolerate politically and otherwise. he made the final cut and we are willing to go with this or not. and i think he deserves the credit for that. >> rose: and 2004, four years before he got the nomination of his party, there was a senator from massachusetts who was having a nominating convention. >> yes department quite turn out the way i intended but -- >> rose: but the man he chose and gave national prominence to, a, the keynote speech made him a national -- >> and by the way,. >> rose: and thought i was looking at a future president. >> i thought all of the potential -- absolutely the borne to be a future president. i just didn't think that i would
wind up working for him as president. >> rose: quite a strain. >> , no it has been terrific. >> rose:. >> i have no complaints. >> rose: you love the job? >> it is -- i have always believed this is the best job in the government. i really think that. best job. >> rose: better than president? >> better than president. >> rose: you don't mean that for a second. >> i don't have to go out and raise unbelievable amounts of money and i am serious. >> rose: we agreed to 30 minutes and i have gone a little over. let me ask one last question. having to do with a thing you spent a lot of your time on, which is the israelly balance palestinian issue. i mean you really went all out .. even with more enthusiasm for success than the president had. he wanted to see what you could do, a lot of people doubted you could do anything, in the end you didn't do it. have you given up hope? >> no. >> that before you leave this office you can somehow pull a rabbit out of a hat.
>> well, i don't see the time to, obviously, negotiate out of the final agreement, but i do think it is possible to get something started, get something moving in which you could lay out a vision for where you going and perhaps get the parties together and have some understanding, some confidence building measures. you could have some efforts, for instance, in the west bank, on area c, which is an area controlled by israel in its entirety, and begin to build up palestinian capacity. i think you could do more on security. i think you could do some things with the arab -- >> rose: economic development. >> more on economic development and build a horizon where there are some expectations fo for wht has to be achieved that begin to quiet things down and give people some confidence or hope that there is within that framework the kernels of
possible negotiations. i don't think you can plunk down and start to negotiate tomorrow but there are definitive steps that can be taken and we have what, nine, ten more months that i think president obama will always welcome something that is real. the president's view of this is actually, i think, sadly misinterpreted. the president. >> rose: by the israelis? >> by a lot of people, but, you know, he would love to see something happen, but the president doesn't have the conviction at this point in time that people are really serious and prepared to move, in any direction. >> rose: but he hasn't had that a for a while, has he? >> well, i think with when things began to come apart in our efforts two years ago, since then the president has been appropriately skeptical about whether people are serious. so, you know, but the president will always be prepared to embrace something that is real. and needless to say cares about
this enormously, because it was vital to security of an ally, israel, vital too the region, vital to us, and frankly, you know, without it being solved at some point in time, it leaves great uncertainty about the capacity for stability and peace in the region. >> rose: what do you worry about the most? >> i worry about -- i worry about the gap between the massive numbers of young people in various parts of the world and particularly in the middle east and north of africa and south-central asia where they know what the rest of the world has, they don't have it and they know they don't have it. >> rose: and they have access to knowing it because of social media? >> exactly. and they see the connectedness and they are not connected to anything. and they are ripe for the picking of some kind of
radicalization, and for the moment that has become a very, very dangerous, you know, extreme element of islamic distortion that is putting many, many people at risk. and what i worry about is, charlie, that there are hundreds of millions of kids in africa and the region who need to be educated, not ten years from now, tomorrow, and if you leave them without opportunity. >> rose: to believe they have a future. >> bad government, corruption surrounding them and the only thing coming at them is a drum beat of a distortion of religious belief, that can be dangerous for everybody, and i think that is the greatest challenge we face in terms of security today. when someone can be built into a killing machine who thinks
somehow it is better to go be dead than to be alive and they are prepared to take a lot of people with them, that can be a dangerous world. and so i think we with have to rise even more to the challenge of preventing that, of inoculating against it. >> rose: can we do that? >> it is very old practice and engagement with countries to help them provide the governance necessary to build the capacity necessary, to deliver the services, that are wanted and to be able to provide an education system and to transform their economies. now, it is not all doom and gloom, believe me. hundreds of millions of people in india, in china, in other countries have been brought into the middle class, there is a huge amount of growth out there. and i mean, if you get away from the headlines and the violence, and it is hard to do that, but if you did there is actually less violence and less numbers of people being killed than there were in the last century.
so, you know, you have to measure this. there are diseases being cured, there are opportunities being created that some people never thought would exist, so there is a really positive side to all of this and there is a really dangerous side. >> rose: here is the question then on that and i think i am going to mention, are we using, are we using all of the tools that we have in terms of economic development, in terms of all kinds of assistance we might be able to lend in terms of our own technology in order to have an influence in the world far beyond our military power? >> we are using -- we are using everyone that we have been able to put together with serious budget limitations. >> rose: serious budget limitations. >> yes, sir. >> rose: you could do a lot more -- >> we could do a tremor with more resources but we are dealing with a budget deal that the congress insisted on and limitation that have been placed on our ability to do some of
these things and i think that is a very important subject that needs to be discuss discussed. >> rose: you will come back? >> i will come back. >> rose: pleasure to have you here. >> suppose secretary clinton is elected and saying you are doing such a hell of a job you should stay. >> my plan right now is to finish out. >> rose: and write a book? >> i don't know what i am going to do, charlie, obviously a book is one option, i have to think about it. >> thank you for coming. >> thanks. good to be with you. >> rose: thank you. >> thank you. >> rose: secretary john kerry, we will be right back, stay with us. >> rose: tina brown is here. he is a founding ceo of tina brown live media, and in 2010 she launched women in the world summit, it gathers leaders from around the world for thoughtful discussions of timely issues, women from around the world. the seventh annual summit takes place this week in new york city, participants include the actor nine difficult kail first
lady of afghanistan, and imf managing director, lagarde, today, tin tina brown range the closing bell at the new york stock exchange, i am pleased to have her back at this table. so what are you doing ringing the bell at the new york stock exchange? >> i was offered to do it and it was the most awesome moment in my entire new york life. i was so jazzed, you know, and all of these great ladies i brought in for the summit, a cuban singer and iranian blogger and it was great. >> rose: what, honoring women in the world. >> yes. honoring women in the world, absolutely. i felt we arrived. it was very exciting and all of these lays diswho came in, they thought we would be spectators and -- >> rose: capitalism, there you are. >> exactly right. it was a big buzz, i can tell you. >> rose: this is the seventh women's world summit. >> it is. >> when you set out what were you intending to do? >> well, women in the world began as sort of a love play on my part. i had been work ago lot with vital voice swiss an ngo which mentors in emerging countries and i kept meeting these incredible fiery feisty awesome
and formidable women. >> rose: right. >> who nobody ever heard from in this country, and they kind of got me so excited again about being a woman taking on huge challenges, almost feminism in america felt dormant and these women were kind of making me feel for the, feminism for the first time in some way and how great it would be to bring them to new york and give them their own plat form. >> the burden of proof is to empower women and to celebration women, the purpose is to, isn't it amazing what women are doing around the world? >> it is amazing. is that and it is alsold. actually about seeing the world through the eyes of women. you know, it is like these are the women who live behind the lines of the news, we hear, we see the headlines, you read th the repos but you don't really feel what it is like to be a woman in syria, a woman in, you know, who can't get any education for her kid in pakistan, a woman who is trying desperately to get some kind of inclusion in saudi, you
just don't really read about it much. and, or people don't really pay attention that much, unless it is long foreign policy script people don't really pay attention so to bring these whom are so vibrant and have these amazing personal stories to the stage was tremendously concept, to use narrative and to use these women to really open our eyes about the world. >> and you, both famous and not so famous. >> absolutely it is important to have that conversation because people won't come if it is a host of names they don't know and also for women who came from the very beginning, i will say hillary clinton and meryl streep were in year one and have come back every year, actually, but they wanted to bring that, and it was a kind of solidarity that women began to feel at a certain point in their careers where they feel, here is where all of these other women out there -- >> rose: they probably journeyed in some ways the same road. >> exactly, they concern their path here to what it must be like a woman in a woman with absolutely zero inclusion in any kind and the frustration. >> rose: and society against
them in many cases. >> that's right, the culture is so much against them in many ways, it is very scary, what is interesting about this year's summit is a paradox in the world, on the one hand, you know, you have for instance in india, you know, women marching on the republican day, parade women arm units, big tech was announced to create women entrepreneurs and at the same time, marital rates in indianess in fact gets pushed back every time it gets brought in the discussion and it is almost a man's privilege and right to rape his wife or sexually abuse his wife anyway he wants because it is against the law. you have the paradox, you have these great things that are happening to women and on the other hand you can't -- >> rose: and women -- >> exactly right and it happens again and again. >> and in afghanistan -- >> in afghanistan we have actually the first lady of afghanistan coming to the summit and we actually opened the summit with an afghan rapper, a young girl who was destined to
be a child bride, that she got away and now she is a rapper. >> rose: one of the things which there are many of isis and isil, is the stories we now know of having women from other religions raped and the belief on the part of these people that it is okay. >> well, i mean -- that they have the religious right to do it. >> they absolutely. it is so painful and, you know, in so many places that true, is that women have, you know, they are treated like dogs in some countries, it is very distressing. >> rose: and punished by their families. >> punished by with their families, i mean in pakistan they are still trying to get a bill passed to outlaw the fact that men have committed honor killings can actually be for given by the community and walk free. in kurdistan, you get three months for an honor killing so you kill your daughter for marrying someone you don't like you walk out of prison in three months if you are a father who did it, these are the kind of facts when you hear them they
blow your mind and, you know, when i was reading about it at the stock exchange, the wonderful iranian feisty iranian blogger who invented a platform about taking the h hi jab a off and she said, cuban women allowed to situate sing on their own? yes, we sing on their own, in iran a man has to sing over her if a woman sings there, that doesn't say volumes hookers search this woman trying to express herself and guess what? she has got some muskie figure and singing over her, she can't even sing, it felt hike a really wonderful, that's the kind of little exchange that happens at women in the world that i just love. it is like this march plows kind of cross cultural culmination between you and woodstock, all of these women, discovering things about each other and it is extremely exciting. >> rose: mindy kaley what is she doing. eaks of such a greatuse she situation, a subversive way of looking at tv and entertainment we like to have that kind of
voice on the stage. we also have kerry washington actually joining us to talk about anita hill. >> rose: he is playing her. >> he is playing her in a film and very interesting actually to think about anita hill in the middle of this new supreme court moment to think about how much time has passed since that particular controversial and painful moment when, the whole anita hill case came up and what came about the laws of sexual harassment in the end i think she will be a celebrated figure because quietly she didn't want to testify, she went back into complete silence afterwards and didn't ask to be a cable tv host, a reality show person, a writing books, nothing, she just had to tell the truth about what it felt like to be sexually harassed and she paid a huge, it was a huge thing for american women. >> rose: but you are doing something about criminal justice system. >> yes, three years ago, i launched the american justice summit with tina brown live media and that was conceived because i felt, began by my
mounting fury and outrage of what was happening in likers island, i just felt so upset, mostly about the amount of mentally ill people who are abused in the criminal justice system, there are 40 percent .. of the people in correctional facility in pennsylvania i learned when i went around it who are mentally ill and we treat persons as a kind of garbage pail for the mentally ill and so deeply upsetting and of course as the police brutality cases began to come up, the videotapes that were revealing this thing that young black men are so singled out and profiled and abused, it made us feel we need to do a meeting about this because the unsung voices of women these voices are unsung. >> rose: and great interest to the president. >> he has such a huge interest. it is a real sort of topic a and we are growing that very substantially because i feel that it is a vital matter to
keep that spotlight up. >> rose: is this now, tina brown we will see the tina brown the entrepreneur, the tina brown who has some understanding rather than editing magazines he and whatever she needs to edit she ought to be doing this, she ought to be a simulator and a creator? >> these are certainly the things that turn me on at this moment in my career. i do see the summits we are doing as experiential publishing and in fact i program it very much as a magazine. to me, the excitement of our summit is to be able to go from a conversation with mindy to a conversation about how turkey is sliding back into, you know,. >> rose: thornism. >> thorn terronism through the views of women, it is the mix i bring to magazines i have edited i bring to these live events and building a strong digital presence and i feel more and more our platform is going to be a very strong digital platform as we go forward because we have developed this amazing network of these people .. over seven
years there is hardly a woman that i can't locate when the news blows up. >> tina brown, a great champion of women, women's world summit, the seventh in new york, thank you for joining us. see you next time. visit us online at pbs.org for previous episodes and charlierose.com. captioning sponsored by rose communications captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org
this is "nightly business report" with tyler mathisen and sue herera. >> thrown into question, the government issues tough new task rules that threatens pzizer's tame off. for rent. why apartments may be cooling off. some odd ball deductions that could save you money. all that and more on "nightly business report" for tuesday, ap good evening. i'm sue herera. tyler mathisen with join us with a report from seattle in a few moments. we begin in washington where the government is getting tough on tax