Charlie Rose Science Series
Click here to watch previous episodes of the Charlie Rose Science Series
05/01/2008
Fareed Zakaria
A conversation with Fareed Zakaria
Keywords:
An hour with Fareed Zakaria, Editor of Newsweek International about his book The Post-American World.
DVD
Charlie Rose DVDs on Amazon.
Charlie Rose DVDs on Amazon.
Audio
Audio available through Audible.com.
Audio available through Audible.com.
Transcripts
Transcripts available through Voxant.
Transcripts available through Voxant.
I've read a lot of the comments here, some naive, some wildly misinformed, and some fascinating. However, what I haven't seen and what I would like to ask Dr. Zakaria, is the issue that Michael made about the problems with Free Trade WITHIN nations. While I would very much like to discuss Brazil with Dr. Zakaria as well for its growing anti-democratic cities like Sao Paulo, I really would like to speak about countries like Jamacia. There, Free Trade has been unfairly imposed on the native population through the World Bank and the IMF. The result has been that these countries have collapsed because they have to compete on a Free Trade level with countries that give subsides to their businesses, formerly-secure markets that have been opened to their detriment, and structural policies through the IMF loans that not only put their country and citizens in massive foreign debt, but also impede economic progress and the building of infrastructure. I think it really comes back to Dr. Zarakia's dichotomy of creating "broad rules and institutions" vs. "protecting a small set of national interests." I've been part of the Fair Trade movement for a while and it seems that while some the economics of the movement is sketchy, the process of it is really the model we should be striving for. In foreign countries, multi-nationals can make huge profits off of poor work forces that have a low standard of living and the problem is that while they do this, the bureaucratic structure saps and prevents any benefit that the workers could've gained from such employment. The large profits the companies make are funneled out of the country, while all of the loan money ties the hands of the government by forcing them to use it in the form of high interest loans to poor farmers and businessmen that could not possibly make the money back instead of using it for, say, building a water system, a power grid, or providing health and sanitation services. The West is expecting these countries to grow when all of the dirt is being swept away. Since these problems were created largely by the United States looking at its sole interest, how do we create a system of broad, universally applicable rules that both capitalize on the wealth generation of free markets, but at the same time allow space for significant differences among policies set by these institutions? How do we convince the American, or any population that they not dwell on the ills caused Free Trade, the foremost being the loss of manufacturing and agriculture, and instead focus on the requirements of competing in this new economy: guaranteed higher education, health care, and sustainable business processes (like Ford's Rouge River Plant)?
One of the best interviews i have seen in a long time. Fareed is smart and realistic. Didn't pay much attention when he was totuted as a future secretary of state. I now sincerely hope he will be one, cos we definitely need more like him.
Regarding US setting the globalization through Marshall Plan comment by TABS. If you bought it I have a bridge to sell you. Lets see marshall plan was about western europe and that also meant propping up colonies of france in vietnam and algeria. Christopher hitchens wrote brilliantly on this topic. If you look today the growth is happening b/c of 2 reasons only. 1) Cultures that valued knowledge, US, Europe, Japan india, china, with Brazil catching up. In each of those countries its a sub culture that leads that trend, In US there is an anti intellect movement(in both sides of liberal/conservative dichotomy). 2) Natural Resource country It happens if the country sitting on some resource which it can leverage(middle east, with spectacular results in building but not the inhabitants of UAE is an eg) much of South America is an example.
I find that people who are against free trade tend to have a misconception about what it is. Free trade is NOT a win-lose transaction. In vertualy every case it is win-win between the countries. It is WITHIN the countries that you get win-lose situations. Here is a link that has 13 half hour videos on the basics of trade. I ask that you please take time out of your day to watch them. This way we can stop wasting time on the alleged evils of free trade and spend more time talking about the real problem of what to do about the win-lose situations within the individual countries. Simply click on the "VoD" in the little box next to each episode to view them. They should probably be watched in order. http://www.learner.org/resources/series86.html
These comments amply illustrate what a rich and revelaing conversation this was. Zakaria is brilliant but also wise, a much rarer quality.
Now we have to subsidize clean energy in India & China?? How about we decide not to buy their products until they clean up their act. I agree with Zakaria, Obama is delusional if he thinks he can stop jobs from leaving the U.S. and tax corporations who now think of themselves of global corporations and go to tax friendlier countries. We also need to start drilling for oil off our coasts. I am happy to see Obama is reading his book, maybe it will wake him up. I am tired of hearing him complain about our economy, it's not that bad. Taxing corporations and punishing success doesn't work.
Gondi, I second that.
What's new?
decades not days- I also think our great universities are not prioritizing American students and have made our scholastic life unbelievably stressful. Tuition must be free, as in Europe. Higher education should not be a privilege but a requirement.
I agree with Chris. While Fareed is bright, he's not at all impressive. Nothing that he says is original and unexpected, anyone who was not aware of our shifting world must be mad or absolutely idiotic. On the other hand, he exaggerates India and China's growth and worth- India and China have grown because they've learned to emulate Americans and work like dogs, which earns them a reputation of being hard workers. In truth, they are cheaters and have relatively low standards- something I witnessed during college, the Indian group cheating on exams, helping each other out. People stereotype Indians and the Chinese as smart or somehow smarter although this is not true all the time, which leads to investment etc. There are Indians who eat out of garbage bins in India and the Chinese cannot be trusted with anything. Americans are extremely self-critical and thus spurn anti-Americanism and encourage the enormously envious Europeans to indulge in this fantasy that American will dwindle and Europe/Indian/China will prosper, yet the latter three have essentially done nothing but imitate America during the past few days. In other words, without our model, they would not have advanced. It is true that America is at a very difficult place at the moment- the education system is in shambles, that is, public education, healthcare is problematic, we seem to be under some kind of curse perhaps brought on by Bush's prayers, and we have WASTING all of our money on a useless war, while others are investing theirs and suing us as in Europe's case. Americans made many mistakes: American Idol, helping Europeans during WWII, being much too generous with their models and assistance etc. but then, the world is not nearly as frank about their situation as we are. Americans must look to their puritan past and once again lead, because they have indulged in waste for far too long and have been quite naive.
Makes you wonder why someone like him is not Sec State....How much better would we be..
One of the most informative interviews I have ever watched. 54 minutes of gold.
This conversation was thrilling! Zakaria has a sophisticated mind and watching him make his way around the world is fascinating and instructive. We need more programs like this to help us understand the world we are in. I'm going to buy his book right now.
I feel I should take a moment to refute the numerous comments I see on these boards about Mr. Rose interrupting his guests. Many people say that he should let the guets say what they want to say. However, I would argue this is not the best way at getting to new insight, which is why Mr. Rose shines. He claims to want to have a "conversation" with his guests, and real conversation includes occasional interruption to maintain a consensual direction. In doing so, Mr. Rose provokes his guests to think differently and re-position their otherwise pre-thought positions in a way that fills his shows with genuine insight. I must applaud him for his intellectual prowess at being able to truly converse with such a broad spectrum of individuals. I've heard Mr. Zakaria as a guest in the past and he really designed for 24-hr news channels. He doesn't really give opinions, it seems to be, but just reads his speeches which no doubt are derived from whatever book he is plugging at the moment. If the archives are available, compare his interview w/ CNN (Blizter, I believe) on 5/15/08 with his appearance on Charlie Rose, the first one minutes are word-for-word verbadem. Take from that what you will.
GREAT SHOW. ONE THING I MISSED WAS A COMMENT ON WILL WE EVER REPLY TO THEIR BIG REPLY TO THAT BIG QUESTION, "WHY DO THEY HATE US"?
A few days ago, my roommate brought up an interesting point, and it involved what will happen to the world 20-30 years from now. We engaged in lengthy conversation over that. I walk to work today, and there was a Newsweek magazine that was titled The Post-American World. I read the article, and it touched on much of the topics that my friend and I talked about. I agree with much of Fareed's comments, and I bought the book instantly. I would like to see his perspective on what we will become in the future. It's apparent that our nation is changing--for better or worse. We can't deny that. As a Latin-American, I'm in the minority to even apply for a job at Google, Yahoo!, or Microsoft. What I have gotten out of this is that the Latin-American and African-American have to open his/her eyes in this changing world. I admire the Indian or the Asian person who moves to the United States and reaps the benefit of what the United States has to offer. I have Indian and Asian friends, and I see how hard they work. I wish to emulate their audacity. They don't succeed through inspiration, but perspiration. My hope is that the LA and AA learn from this. I don't want to see my fellow Latin-Americans or African-Americans lag, and I don't want to be in that category. Fareed Zakaria said it right, we are a competitive World, and many Indian-Americans and Asian-Americans have learned how to work with it. I don't want to generalize every fellow Asian and Indian, but I don't have to mention it, we see it already! It's a changing World, my friends, and to get by in this economically changing world, we need study and not watch American Idol.
Lost in Translation: Mr. Zakaria made a crucial point when he said that the widespread use of English in Asia means that â??â?¦ they can swim in our sea and theirs too â?¦ we can only swim in ours.â?? If we are to fully engage with and attempt to understand other cultures, more of us have to learn their languages. Also, as long as the communication is a one way street, then they canâ??t fully engage with or understand us. In this situation both sides rely on cultural clichés that continue to inform/misinform our relationships because they are on a very superficial level. If you can communicate in their language (swim in their sea) you are absorbing cultural understanding. If not, we Americans will remain the exotic animal that is kept in a cage, although a very nice one and one we are in by our own choice. This allows us to be studied and even admired, but keeps us from actually engaging. As an American expatriate of six years who has studied my host language, Iâ??ve learned how much one sided the communication is, even among the best informed and most proficient of English speakers. The glimpses of understanding that Iâ??ve gotten have been due to my beginning to understand the language differences and through that cultural differences. Charlieâ??s response to Mr. Zakariaâ??s point, was that this is no problem because American companies hire local people who speak English. I have heard this response from corporate executives of all levels. Corporate people spend too much time in the same â??imperial bubbleâ?? with diplomats to use another point which Mr. Zakariaâ??s made. Sure in the short term, hiring local people who speak English facilitates business and keeps profit margins higher. But in the long term and maybe not so long a term, little meaningful cultural exchange takes place, only some commercial interests are met. Eventually, even business will suffer for this lack of mutual understanding. Thanks Charlie for having the only show that explores issues in depth. Iâ??m hoping you pursue this point a little further. Mr. Zakariaâ??s interviews and articles are always thought provoking and informative.
Fareed Zakaria seems to have great clarity on our predicament in the world now. However, where was this clarity when it really counted â?? before we attacked Iraq? He of all people should have seen the folly in that debacle. Was his silence because his wisdom would not have been well received by a public that was clamoring for war? We look to our talking heads to tell us what we sometimes donâ??t want to hear. If they donâ??t hand out the bitter medicine, what is their value? It is no surprise that Fareed was so quick to condemn President Carterâ??s principles as being naïve. Perhaps he should learn from President Carter. This country does not need another Karl Rove. We need leaders with courage and a consistent moral compass.
I listened to this conversation unsure as to how I would feel about it. I cam away enthralled, enlightened, and uplifted. I didn't agree with everything but it was a joy to listen to someone reason through the issues we face and the world we are moving into. Bravo Charlie!
Peace & Harmony all over the world! As a human being respects others Plaese! Stop the War, USA!!!
cripes - I actually DO know how to spell Zakaria. Sorry!
Chuck Pell - I totally agree. More to the point, Zackaria was on the show with his Harvard professor, Stanley Hoffmann, before the invasion and there was no way anybody with intelligence could deny Hoffmann's superior reasoning. (I suggest a viewing of that show to everyone who wants to see the Iraq debate between two intelligent people.) I listen to Fareed with the knowledge that he writes to sell.
Buy the pie in the sky from Mr. Zakaria. He suggests that the Muslim people(s) came the conclusion that Islamist ideologies was tried out and found wanting. This is the desired end game on the part of the West. We know that very well. But, he offered next to nothing by way of evidence to support his premise. My hunch is that every single Muslim who really believes in God and in Muhammad as his messenger still thinks that the caliphate can and will be established regardless of the cost. I believe you will find more than a billion people who fit this category. The truth remains, Muslims are multiplying and gaining territory. More Westerners embrace Islam than the other way around.
Mr. Zakaria is an intelligent journalist/political pundit, and he has so much good to say about promoting Democracy and speaking on behalf of many of the Islamic nations vis-Ã -vis the role the US is playing. I am sure his new book is just as resourceful as he appears to be on talk shows. However, I doubt his understanding on the Darfur crisis, and his criticism of the African nations is not fair. The countries around Sudan have been trying to solve the issue except the US State Department African sub-committee is butting in and making it impossible for solution to come about. Just about a year ago Eritrea and Libya formed a new communication channel between Sudan-Chad-Darfur rebels. Unfortunately, as the process was going smooth, the US requested to be part of that communication, when the countries let the US sit in as an observer, the first thing they said on a conference was that they would like to have some of the Sudanese politicians to be extradited to the international court for charges like genocide. How can you say that on the first moment you have been given a chance to sit in a closed door meeting? Sudan immediately withdrew from the conference, they purposely to torpedoed the peace process that took over six months for the Eritreans to bring all the Darfur rebels under one umbrella to speak in one voice. The fact is this administration enjoys creating turmoil and managing the chaos to their liking much like Somalia, in case there a point or two political advantage to be taken from. The Funny thing is they communicated all the Darfur rebels and told them to abstain from the meeting, today they are using the Darfur civilians as point to cry on China. US's intention was to continue to raise public descent on China at the expense of Darfur civilians. The Darfur issue could have been resolved long time ago if it was not for US States Department African sub-committee. In fact, they went as far as threatened Eritrea and Libya as the two countries transporting weapons to Darfur to make more trouble. Imagine, the Sudanese authorities did not accuse the two countries of creating trouble, yet the US speaking without the consent of the Sudanese regime accused the two countries, just because solution for the Darfur was on the way without America's leadership. The Eritreans realizing this made sure no one would be invited when they presided the meeting between the East Sudanese and the regime to find lasting solution. The US wants to exploit the Darfur situation to hold China's hydrocarbon energy quench as a political point by making it impossible for China to make a deal with Sudan/Darfur. Now even the Darfur rebels understood the game that their people are being used as a political punch bag by the State Department, they are abducting and killing any blue helmet they find on their way. State Department tries to spin the abduction and killing of UN soldiers as "desperately seeking for attention." The Darfur crisis is being used by the State Department as political fulcrum lift China from one side of their bottom so they can never sit comfortably on the ground and explore for more energy. That is the hard and solid fact.
This is reasoned, intelligent discourse at its best. Wherever you come out on any of these issues, you have to marvel at Fareed's ability to make you think and learn. Those are the two reasons I come to Charlie Rose and this hour is one of the very best examples.
Great interview with Fareed Zakariaâ?¦truly one of the great moderates of our time. I read the excerpt of his new book in â??Foreign Affairsâ?? and was really engaged with his essay. I love how he used Britainâ??s history as a back-drop for how America can survive the â??rise of the restâ?? and such. This interview makes such a great point about Iraq. His statement about leaving a 30k troop level with a close to 2/3 votes in Iraqâ??s parliament is an excellent idea. If they donâ??t, hereâ??s the time-table for our withdrawal. We do have a moral obligation to Iraq but they have to be able to overcome some of these secretarian problemsâ?¦especially the oil-sharing revenue. I also agree with his assessment of Obamaâ??s perspective on Iraq. Pressure on the government is most important, with timetables a thing to assess at the actual negotiation table and not something of â??stay the courseâ?? written in stone. I agree when Fareed said Iraq has to become a â??strategic assetsâ?? to the United States. I also donâ??t think he ever ran from his support in this interview of the initial invasion. But he has been a critic of the execution early on. Had voices like Fareed Zakaria been heeded then, there might have never been the 2005-2006 violence and chaos we had then or the stalemate we have now.
I was a little surprised to see you take the positon that since the world is "standardizing" on English it's not important for Americans, especially multinational executives, to understand key languages, such as Mandarin Chinese. I can tell you that the CEO/founder of one of America's largest software companies would have given almost anything to have had that knowledge. I was staying at the Pennisula Hotel in Hong Kong, when he returned from Beijing and I discussed his miserable trip with him. (You know him better than I do.) Charlie, I have a hunch you're fluent in French. How many clues about the French culture and how they view the world have you gained by your understanding of their language? Would you really want to delegate that?
Zakaria sounded very good up until the time that Charlie asked him about his support for invading Iraq. I just gag when I hear anyone fall back on "If we knew then what we know now." Gary Trudeau had the essence of the Iraq situation in the 10/19/02 Doonsbury. Mark and Roland are among the journalists at the Ari Fleischer news briefing. Mark says "Ari, could you go over it one more time? Why war with Saddam, exactly? I mean, there's no real Al Qaeda link, he doesn't have nukes, his army's been decimated and he hasn't even been able to shoot down a single U.S jet! Isn't there SOME kind of provocation you can point to? Anything at all?" Ari answers "No, we don't need one." Roland: Maybe our guys should fly slower." Mark: "Hey, Yeah! They could like, cut their engines." Ari concludes with "That's it for today." This is a remarkable summary of the situation that led to our "preemptive action."
Zakaria sounded very good up until the time that Charlie asked him about his support for invading Iraq. I just gag when I hear anyone fall back on "If we knew then what we know now." Gary Trudeau had the essence of the Iraq situation in the 10/19/02 Doonsbury. Mark and Roland are among the journalists at the Ari Fleischer news briefing. Mark says "Ari, could you go over it one more time? Why war with Saddam, exactly? I mean, there's no real Al Qaeda link, he doesn't have nukes, his army's been decimated and he hasn't even been able to shoot down a single U.S jet! Isn't there SOME kind of provocation you can point to? Anything at all?" Ari answers "No, we don't need one." Roland: Maybe our guys should fly slower." Mark: "Hey, Yeah! They could like, cut their engines." Ari concludes with "That's it for today." This is a remarkable summary of the situation that led to our "preemptive action."
What a pleasure to listen to Fareed discuss the world! He has "beautiful mind." I agreed with lots, disagreed with som but learnt from all.
At 7:30 Zakaria states that "close to a million Iraqis seem to have been killed or injured" in the last 5 to 6 years. That is an astonishing statement that goes unchallenged by Rose. The last figure most Americans heard on the number of dead Iraqis was the 30,000 figure President Bush gave us in December 2005. Unfortunately, Zakaria doesn't give us an estimate on the number of dead Iraqis. But if his figure on "killed or injured" is correct, Bush's 30,000 figure has likely been dwarfed in the past two and a half years.
Fareed Zakaria is always a pleasure to listen to.
Brilliant and blunt, Fareed Zakaria is a pleasure to listen to. It is rare to hear such thoughtful and knowledgable commentary. Now, if only politicians everywhere would hear him.
I didn't find Zakaria credible. Countries like India are restricting the export of rice because of concerns over adequate food, while he's spewing out drivel about economic growth? Further the US is very aware of the global economy, in fact many US companies are thriving in it. Perhaps he's not very familiar with the US but these companies have a huge influence politically. In Iraq Basra has transitioned to government control, a very important development that other Arab states clearly recognized. Yet Zakaria's simplistic solution was to let Iraq devolve into a series of local civil wars - with perhaps the biggest oil reserves in the world? Without an effective Iraqi state backed by the US, neighboring countries will move very quickly to divide up those reserves among them. Syria and Turkey I believe already claim part of the Kurdish region.
An instant classic - Zakaria always has great insight into the world and a great focus on the long-term!
I think Dr Zadaria was fascinating in puting the global economic and geopolitical in an understandable framework that provides a basis for sound, enlightened foriegn policy. I am amazed, reading viewers comments, how many one issue, hot button, "wack-a-doodles" watch your show. Frank
A class act -- sophisticated, intelligent, crackling with insights. Thanks Charlie for giving it an hour. Can we have another?
Outstanding show with highly intelligent and informed guest. A world tour. Major message is Zakaria believes the U.S. must adjust to the world where there are other large rising economic and political forces. Zakaria wants the U.S. to open its eyes, understand it cannot dictate to the world, but must try to assume a leadership role wisely. Zakaria points to China, India, Brazil, South Africa and says that with them one hundred countries have had GDP growth over four percent per annum in the last few years. Zakaria who initially supported the U.S. operation in Iraq is highly critical of the performaznce. He says U.S. has done well in Afghanistan where 2.5 million refugees returned home, and poorly in Iraq where 2.5 million refugees have been created. He says that the best policy for U.S. is probably a reduceed , thirty- thousand troops or so, long- term presence. In his tour of the world Zakaria makes some claims I am a bit suspicious of. He does not show much sympathy for Darfur ( Only two- hundred fifty thousand killed ) and says the lack of pan- African power is one reason for the ongoing genocide. He does not seem to want to push China hard on its support for the Sudanese government here. Zakaria is too in my opinion overly optimistic about two other phenomena. He downplays the danger of Radical Islam. He seems to feel Iran is going to get nuclear weapons and that they will be deterred the way the Chinese and Russians have been. He does not take into account their radical Islamic Messianic theology. They may be reasonable and they may not be. Zakaria too I believe is optimistic about the value of talking to 'Hamas' He finds elements in them willing for peace with Israel. I think he is wrong about this. I do appreciate however his recognizing the falsity of the moral equivalence between Palestinians who aim at killing Israeli civilians in any way they can, and Israelis who engage in military operations to defend their own people which may regrettably cause civilian casualties. Zakaria does not place much importance on pushing for human rights in China. Trade and money , prosperity for all , a world in which all are prospering seems to be his goal. In this regard I believe his analysis a bit one- tracked. But again this was an outstanding program. Zakaria is articulate and above all broadly and deeply informed on many issues.
Cabinet position for Zakaria! Regardless of who is the next president, America needs this man.
Not left, not right just smart as hell. An amazing performance. One of the best shows ever!
Excellent interview. Although I don't agree with all his positions, I was impressed by Fareed Zakaria's breadth of knowledge and his constructive ideas for moving forward. What is especially encouraging is that he does not fall into any conventional box of "left" or "right".
I completely agree especially that jerk from Texas. I have friends from Texas who are so smart I dont know where the heck this one came from???
This is a compelling program. The presidential candidates should be required to listen and repsond.
Yeah Only Americans are Civilized right? Take time to travel and try to understand people and dont just stay in your shitty village in pennsylvania. Foreigners will continue to come here and achieve more and speak more sense than you can ever be capable of achieving.You will still clinge to your guns and use religion as an excuse for everything even when religion directly contradicts it. It just baffles me sometimes as to how arrogant and how out of touch some poeple in this country are. He is Asain he knows about how the politics in that part of the world works and he is sharing remarkable insight into it so just shut up and listen. If the fool Bush had known half of what he saying right now this country will not be in this situation.
Dear Fareed, I saw you on the Charlie Rose show. I had never heard of you before. You are well informed. I would like to ask you why you did not point out the following when talking to Charlie about Iran, Israel and the Middle East. It's absurd the pretense that Israel stands as the pathetic guardian against the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the ME.All countries have the right to defend themselves,especially against aggressive, bellligerent, apartheid Israel, especially Iran. Iran is no danger to the US. It is Israel that refuses to sign the NPT which Iran has done. It is Israel that refuses to allow IAEA inspections of their nuke facilites which Iran has done,and Israel refuses to comply with any, any, UN resolutions. Let's investigate why Israel insists on having secret nuclear weapons facilities with no inspections or cooperation with the United Nations or the IAEA, and no interest in signing the NonProliferation Treaty shall we? Now that would be interesting. America's silence about Israelis nuclear weapons with the latter's lack of membership to the NPT while maintaining such harsh rhetoric with regard to Iran's nuclear program, which is legally allowed to enrich uranium as a NPT member, is an example of the kind of outright double standard that the United States has been following in its foreign policy. As you are supposed to be an 'expert' in Foreign Policy you could have pointed this out and at least instigated some discussion about it. Also, why were you talking about Israel security without mentioning Palestinian security? Why were you talking about countries recognizing Israel's right to exist without mentioning that the US and Israel must also recognize the existence of a Palestinian state. The one sided victim rhetoric for Israel is ending. They are not victims and with you being a 'world traveller' and all it was appalling that you were so one sided. You sounded like a mouthpiece for AIPAC and you should be ashamed of yourself for that. While the American government has repeatedly portrayed the image that it is in support of peace in the Middle East, it has been the biggest single force in blocking peace and the creation of a democratic Palestine side-by-side with Israel for over thirty years. Israel 's rejectionism, in collusion with the US, has been the greatest deterrent to peace over the last 40 years. Good news? There will be when Israel and the US recognize a two-state solution, a separation between their country and this one, the United States . As Mr Carter said in 2006, "Now, can we recall any broadcast that mentions that Israeli officials do not recognize the right of Palestine to exist? This is quite an omission because Israel 's attitude towards Palestine is at the core of all the problems of the Middle East". Finally, Hamas is the democratically elected representatives of the Palestinian people and the only reason Israel and their supporters refuse to deal with Hamas is because they will not sell out the Palestinian people. Even Colin Powell has added his voice to the chorus of foreign policy grownups advocating the option. â??Theyâ??re not going to go away,â?? Powell said of Hamas on National Public Radio last year. â??And we have to remember that they enjoy considerable support among the Palestinian people. They won an election that we insisted on having.â?? I hope someone on you staff gives this to you and you are not stuck in an 'imperial bubble' as you commented on the show. The Israeli/Palestinian debate is changing but I did not see a reflection of that in your comments. Get out into the 'real world'... !
[Report Success\ Who will "own" it? Zakaria gives the nod. And he is still a young man! Charlie is at his best too.
This is the first time since Buckminster Fuller in the 80's, that I've heard sense spoken about life on space ship earth. Thank you so much. What's so elite about intelligence, and compassion anyway?
I am, admittedly, new to the discussion of our "world politics". I can not joust with the apparently experienced minds that have commented before me. But, my ignorance aside, I have recently become more interested in the politics and economics that have impacted my finances and daily world. I can no longer ignore what the world has been up to. I'm ashamed to admit, that I have not had a viewpoint. Perhaps, now it is the pressure of "staying alive" in this economy, that has influenced my need to become informed. In any case, I was riveted to the disscussion with (Dr?)Zakaria. I didn't even see the beginning. But at 12:30 AM in North Carolina, I was engrossed. I can't even keep up with most political/economic "experts". Maybe some will sneer, and say that it is because I am naive. So be it. But we all have to start somewhere. I would love to have had a professor in college that had the ability to explain such complex issues. Dr. Zakaria "reached" me. I don't connect with economics very well, and I usually tune-out. I learned something from that discussion. I thank you for producing it. Perhaps more people, like me, would become better citizens of the world, if we had a teacher like Dr. Zakaria to explain it to us. New
Zakaria may at times appear to be pontificating like most opinion-journalists and think tank analysts (armchair pundits with little hands on experience in real politics or diplomacy), but the candor and factual reasoning in his arguments is quite compeling. A few dismissive and derisive comments here would suggest that his views have evidently hurt bloated egos and twisted mindset of the neocon types who live out 'American supremacy now and forever' fantasies or think of the world almost exclusively as some 'us versus them' football rivalry. Zakaria is a master at explaining complexities in an array of current and historical affairs - both foreign and domestic, and perhaps quite right on his take on most issues. Smart money will be on those who will listen to him with open mind and then win by adapting American strategies and game plan (on wars, world order, trade, immigration, education, et al) to the changing realities and needs. If America over reacts and back tracks, it will suffer increasing irrelevance and even real decline in economic and political influence. Those who are either betting on perpetuating 'hub and spoke' world with America as sole dominant power broker at the hub (McBush types) or longing to build protectionist-isolationist walls on trade to somehow secure American prosperity (ClintObama types) have got some real surprise awaiting when the alarm rings. As Zakaria points out, whether or not these delusional fools swallow the obvious facts about rapid ongoing leveling of the technological, economic and geopolitical world, the rest will keep on rising, with or without America. The most sensible voice this political season on what the US role ought to be internationally and domestically has been that of US Congressman Ron Paul. But obviously not many cared to listen.
Perhaps President Obama can borrow Zakaria as a consultant.
"leadership" usually precludes consensus. The example he gave of a successful model, Bosnia and Kosovo, ignores the fact that but for US action in the face of a feckless UN and International Community, there would have been far greater tragedy and loss of life. So far as the rise of 'the other', including '30 countries in Africa', and their new found pride and desire for voice, this in nothing new at all. It has occurred time immemorial, most recently evidenced in world history by the creation of the UN. This guy plays well in Charlie's den and in the salons of New York and Washington; however, that is about it.
Whether viewers agree or disagree with Fareed's speculative outcomes of various world scenarios, no one should deny the facts he presented regarding a number of global crisises. If nothing else pay attention to the points he presents on global economics, impacts that will severely accelerate global climate change and the shift of financial power from U.S. dominance. PARTICULARLY ALARMING was the fact that in the next FOUR YEARS India and China will bring online 850 mega coal-fired power plants whose carbon footprint and contribution to green house gases will totally NEGATE every current attempt by developed nations to reduce our atmospheric impacts. Forget all the wind mills, solar panels, hybrid cars, separating your recyclables. A total DROP in the bucket if these power plants come online. By 2020, 12 years from now, climatic changes will dominate the entire planet's attention and things such as border skirmishes, nuclear weapons races, and our current $9 Trillion dollar debt will be insignificant. One thing I will say, as I retire this year, at least I am now free to "roll with the global punches" and travel/move/live where ever the least strife seems to be. Good luck to all you youngsters out there inheriting this global mess. You got the ball.
Seems like he is more worried about the 2.5 billion peoples out come then America's. America should just worry about educating it's people properly , getting energy independent and try to be a honest broker in the world , not try to be it's sacrificial lamb where the rest of the world prospers on the back of American's. Ask the America worker, who works harder, longer then any other Westerner country that not only is China and India taking some of your jobs but your tax money will go to making them energy efficient and to do this Americans will have to change their life styles because we will double the taxes they pay on gas and anything else that needs energy to make , move or grow mean while Europeans are rioting not to give up their 35 hour work week and their jobs for life.
It's fascinating how progressive and modern GE is when it comes to their overseas operations, while at the same time, run one of the most dumb-downed and regressive news organizations in the country. Unless the people are able to get serious news on a regular basis, they won't be willing to embrace the internationalist agenda, that presumably GE would like to see.
He's too much of a apologist for the world, nothing gets done unless America leads, but then America has to take everyones opinion into consideration and bend over backwards to make sure their all happy, and the Burma example was ridiculous if millions of people in Saudi Arabia were protesting their government peacefully (not some extreme Islamic faction to over throw the government) and getting slaughtered for it, America would get involved, just as it has in Lebanon and and every other part of the world there has been peaceful revolutions. What Fared doesn't want to say is India and China don't want to shed an once of blood or treasury for any other society but their own and what he doesn't acknowledge is that the world wants America to lead because it doesn't want to spend the capital or the blood to ever solve the world conflicts or problems, even in Afghanistan the NATO allies are only there if their soldiers don't take any casualties, so America must do the heavily lifting and then go around the world and kiss everyones a** When China, Europe, India, Russia never do anything unless it benefits them and sometimes they even play contrary roles just to make it more difficult for America to keep peace and stability in the world, China's role in Sudan and with every other dictator in Africa Russia's role with supporting Iran's nuclear ambitions, the Europeans signing gas deals with the Iranians and the Russians, the Arabs keeping the Palestine and Israeli conflict going so that they can deflect their populations resentments towards America and Israel instead at their own governments failures, and how Arabic countries never wish that another Arabic country is doing better then them. When he said no one wants to live in a China world it was his most insightful observation because the world knows that the Chinese would not be the suckers that the Americans have been. What America should do is play everyone's fear and hatred of each other as a buffer to world order, Europeans against Russia, India against China, Japan against China, then no one dominates and in the end all of then trust America more then the other.
I was not so impressed with this guest as the majority of these commentors. I think he suckered them. I found his arguments simplistic and his assumptions questionable. He assumes that the US can or must be reponsible for the well being of other countries in the world because he argues it is in everybody's self-interest. He confuses democracy with majority rule independent of the mediating necessity of the development of a civil society and a rule of law. He assumes that the economic well being of a nation will automatically eliminate past grievances. He assumes long standing religious and political conflicts will just wither away under the pressure of globalization. He is rightly compared to Thomas Friedman who is equally simplistic and naive. Morever he arrogantly dismisses even the enlightened views of men like President Jimmy Carter who has practiced his principles in his life by working with the poor and putting his energy, time, an effort into helping establish world peace and human rights. What has he done by comparison but write books which he admits he wants us to purchase even if we don't read them? Shame on you, Charlie, for having such a shallow, pseudo-intellectual to peddle his wares on your program.
Fareed Zakaria gives marvelous answers, but Charlie fails to acknowledge the new, fresh answer he provides, needing to instantly go onto the next question. Charlie thus misses the point. This is one of the best shows I have seen. It's because Fareed has a completely fresh view that America misses. Even Charlie doesnâ??t fully appreciate it. It's the prejudice of the European mind against Asian thought, culture, etc. Itâ??s the Euro-Arrogance that the US shares and Charlie too often demonstartes. They donâ??t appreciate the Asian mind. It is a complete blind spot of the West.
I felt as though I was in a great college course. The sweep of history, the command of facts, the depth of insights. This guy is is a league of his own.
Charlie, this was probably the best of your conversations I have seen yet. Dr. Zakaria is brilliant and comprehensive, and has a way of putting complex realities into understandable language. I agree with others who have commented here--have him on again, regularly! And thanks for not interrupting him too much.
I'd like to see Fareed Zakaria as Secretary of State. Let him sharpen up the President.
Fareed Zakaria is like the Middle East Thomas Freidman. GREAT show! How about guesting Phil Donahue and Body Of War.
I must say I was put off by the way the most moving portion of Jimmy Carterâ??s speech (aired Monday) was used on this program. I have been displeased with this show for two nights in a row and not because of guests. When has fair dialogue excluded the person being critiqued a right to defend himself on a format built around the very dignified concept of traditional, respectful conversation? To take that speech out of context seemed inappropriate. The â??Man From Plainsâ?? has a gift of reaching people on a broad scale, and he should be respected for his tireless fight in the present. Words that transcend all barriers will win the hearts of many, not reasoning that may spin people off course into a world of argumentation and confusion, which often breeds resentment. Who are our most recognized unifiers? Earnest speakers who also take action, like JFK, Martin Luther King, Mahatma Gandhi, and for my generation, Jimmy Carter, Barack Obama, Muhammad Yunus, Jan Egeland, Wangari Maathai, and many others, precisely because they have a humble yearning to communicate and help beyond lines of an ever present political and social hierarchy. Such an individual is much needed in our current presidential campaign. I am sure Jimmy Carter, who won a Nobel Peace Prize in 2002, understands shortcomings hiding behind a seemingly impossible dream, quixotic mostly to those who refuse to strive for peace and understanding, but such argumentation should not be used to abandon a mission. To help the whole, people must cooperate in roles best suited for their individual strengths, since itâ??s impossible for one man to solve immensely complex global problems. Oftentimes, those who resist the most have a hidden agenda.
Oh God! There must be real scarcity of Intellegence in US to devote one hour discussion with such an incompetent opportunist! This show is an insult to your audiences' intelligence Mr. Charlie Rose, to say the least.
Bravo, bravo, bravo.
Is Jihad, referring to the defeat of all non-believers, as opposed to the struggle with ones own personal demons, mainstream or really just the domain of a fanatical fringe element, as Fareed Zakaria would have us believe? You have to wonder when a manual, in English, urging Muslims to kill the non-believers, who are characterized as â??the enemyâ??, is freely sold along with Halal groceries in a store in Virginia. I didnâ??t expect to see this in the mainstream press. I found the article in one established, but small circulation newspaper. http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/2862 Something to think about.
Great interview with a man who always holds my attention. And I stayed up to watch, even though my local PBS station has been running a special each night that doesnt end until 1 AM. ~Beth
The best interview about the world we are living in that I have heard. Just a treat!!
Best interview to date: relevant, lucid, nonpartisan, progresive, above all expresses the need for the realization of human potential as a global leadership agenda.
Charlie Rose, I think, tries to tease out answers for the audience. It may seem like he is out of touch, but he only tries to be representative of the largely out of touch audience. [I hope I am right\
Both Dr Zakaria and Tom Freidman are 34 years late to this party. Way back in 1974 Dr Jorge Nef was talking at the University of California about the rise of the Multi-national corporation and the relative decline of the nation state as the global economy developed. As the investment of capital in those foreign lands came to fruition the rest of the world has risen to make the world flat. Politically the United States is the old man of the world who is stuck in his thinking and his ways of doing business in that world. It is difficult for the United States to realize that it is not the only game in town, that it has competition to be king of the hill. Dr Zakaria should also recognize that it was the United States that set all this into motion by design with the Marshall Plan in the late 1940's. The design was that by fostering capitalism and free trade in the world one could beat the forces of communism by creating an economic juggernaut that would improve the well being of people in the world. At the time the US saw it as a security issue, but from there corporations invested capital in foreign lands and the ending of the Cold War has allowed that capital to bloom as never before. Dr Zakaria also should realize that if you don't know where you have been how do you know where your at or where your going, because you have no point of reference. In other words the world didn't begin the day you were hatched, and your not the first person to invent the wheel. Other than that Dr Zakaria is one sharp cookie and deserves to be listened to. Maybe he can teach an old dog some new tricks.
FAREED ZAKARIA: One of the best persons you've interviewed. Sharp, alert, realistic, humane, aware, holistic perspective, makes illuminating comparisons with historic examples from around the world. Mr. Z should be a presidential adviser, our world would be the better for it. Has the unique gift of simplifying complications. His intelligence is breathtaking - we are fortunate it is not being wasted. I noticed that even spontaneous you, were so entranced, that you restrained your questions. PLEASE HAVE HIM ON YOUR FRIDAY WEEKLY WRAP-UP's. Our world needs his voice.
This was a fantastic tour of the world!! Fareed has one of those rare "beautiful minds." What a pleasure that we got to sit in on this conversation. If only more people would listen to Fareed, especially in Washington.
One of the most fascinating and informative conversations that I have listened to in a long long time. Much food for thought. Fareed is impressive in his knowledge of what is going on in this world. Kudos!
Charlie are you acting dumb or don't you really get it. The 'what will happen if we leave' will happen no matter WHEN we leave. Unless you are arguing for staying there for eternity, something we can't afford, what exactly do you think we are buying by staying other than time? Charlie, what we are witnessing is the biggest highway robbery of all time. It's a MASSIVE TRANSFER OF WEALTH. We are staying there because TAXPAYER MONEY is moving to HALIBURTON and CONTRACTORS. We have literally RAPED the oldest civilization in the world while bleeding the american public dry, morally and financially. Iraq today has less electricity, water, health care, education hours, sanitation service and anything else you can think of than they had under Saddam. How can you with a straight face talk as if there was any question of how much WORSE OFF Iraq and America are. Can you be that stupid? The Zionists, Oil and Defense industries have gotten together and are raping america of her assets. Unless we elect Obama, our Social Security will be next. Hillary is just a puppet of the neocons, just check out who is backing her financially. Even Murdoch threw a fundraiser. Democrat? My arse.
Mr Rose PLEASE read Treacherous Alliance, by Trita Parsi,Mr Rose please read Naomi Klien's Shock Doctrine. I cannot believe some of the things you say. You are not stupid, you must be uninformed, or maybe you have allowed yourself or maybe "allowed" isn't correct, you are one of the elite journalists completely out of touch with reality.Mr Rose talk to some ordinary Americans,you are out of touch with reality.
Fareed's one swift dude. Loved the way he sized up Negreponte as a pandered-to functionary with no real validity to his outlook, which is deadly to a diplomat. Laid bare that he was naive enough to believe his narrow personal experiences rather than reading and sensing the 'real' world. Any fool (I know) knows we have lost respect around the world. Arrogance that refuses to accept that merely helps spread that disrespect. About par for the course of late.
Having the world move on and relegate us to just another world citizen could be one of the best things to happen to our very survival. If we are no longer so threatening, nor enviable even our enemies will decide we're inconsequential. Plus most of all we ourselves will lose our sence of superiority and become more deferential and even (gasp) humble. We may even give up torture, quantanamo etc. that has helped diminish us to just another world neighbor. No longer idealized, lionized.
This was an amazing interview. Zakaria is not just smart as hell, he is truly wise -- which is much rarer. He was able to step back from the hurly burly of the moment and paint a brilliant picture of the kind of world we're moving into and what America needs to do to thrive in it. It was an enlightening and uplifting conversation. I've been watching Charlie for years. This is one of the very best programs he's had. Bravo!
I have never known an Indian-American, nor indeed many immigrants to this country, who have not been rabid free-traders and this guy seems no different. The problem is that America is no longer on the winning end of free-trade. I think he knows this but can't find any way out of it, much as he'd like to. Prior to the Depression the US followed a mercantilist model of export similar to Japan's and now China's (the Depression itself being caused by this in conjunction with WWI,) but after WWII was forced to look primarily to the home mkt, and then also become the buyer for most emerging countries because of the conflict with the Soviets. Even though we have through our military, political and monetary position been able force our trading partners to pick-up some of the losses from this situation, it has proved unsustainable, much like the British Empire, not only for us, but also for those countries not industrialising. That is, it is unsustainable if we wish to retain any identity as nation, or any resemblance to a republican form of govt. Free-trade advocates have always assumed virtue, but free-trade ultimately replaces nations with corporations, the middle-class, with the wealthy and their servants, and poses a serious threat to virtue, and therefore to peace, the environment and population control. I do not see any way out of this conundrum execept, as McCain said derisively some time ago, "to be like the Europeans."
The assertion that Iraqi's would allow the US to maintain 30 to 50,000 troops in Iraq for decades is fatuous and naive. They on balance have to be so disenchanted with our arrogance they would not countenance a small force for a NY minute. Plus they ultimately will want no hegemony or semblance of hegemony over their oil.
Seemed like he had a very sensible, sober and nuanced approach to all of the topics discussed on tonight's show. I learned a lot. Gondi, what did you find lacking in his positions?
Fareed Zakaria, one of our resident Asian sell-out pseudo-experts. Hearin this man utter the phrase "civilized world" is positively comical.