Charlie Rose

GOOGLE1984GMAILKGB  10/06/2009 08:44 PM Report

FAREED ZAKARIA: CNN GPS :: NEWSWEEK EDITOR

Why you fear mongering Trilateral inplaced douchebag. Thats quite a cover story you did on Newsweek. Nuclear detonation. Since when did news become yellow journalism? Since you were inplaced, out of thin air nobody, into frontseat of Newsweek. Check on his own website, he proudly boasts membership on the Trilateral commission. Check on the Trilateral commissions own website, there is Fareed Z. on the member list. Watching the newsweek cover stories you have been inplaced for is like watching YELLOW JOURNALISM at its worst. SInce when did Newsweek become the NationalEnquirer? Since the Trilateral commission took a nodbody called Fareed Zakaria and made him editor and chief. Truly astoundingly reckless 'journalism'. Why you fear mongering douche bag. You belong on the national enquirer not on credible responsible journalism. One more brand bites the dust. Goodbye Newsweek.

mohammad reza parsa  10/26/2008 12:56 PM Report

how I can find your last aricles?

Cameron L. Stewart  07/13/2008 10:55 PM Report

Fareed Zakaria is certainly knowledgeable about his topic. I agree with him on the following points: 1) China and India's use of coal will overshadow any savings in carbon emissions by the U.S. China is currently building two (not one) coal fired power plants every week. 2) We have abdicated our leadership role in the world under the current Bush administration. 3) Media coverage of the public policy debate during the current presidential elections is a national disgrace, considering the problems the U.S. currently faces. However, I think that Zakaria is overly idealistic on the issue of free trade and misses a number of crucial points. Zakaria criticizes John Negroponte for living in a diplomatic bubble but Zakaria is also clearly living in an elitist bubble. He does not recognize that most of the benefit of U.S. economic growth over the past 30 years has been reaped by large corporations, the wealthy and upper middle class, not by the general population. The divide between rich and poor in the United States is worse now than it was in 1929. Barack Obama has got it right when he says our economy is in a shambles and large segments of our population are losing ground economically, partly because of free trade. Our current trade system grew out of America's pursuit of world empire for the last 60 years. As is the fate of all empires, we are now nearing the brink of economic collapse. Specific crucial points missed by Zakaria in this conversation include the following: 1) The United States State Department began planning the current world order 60 years ago, before its entry in WWII. It was based on the assumption that after the war was over the U.S. would be the only major power left standing. The smoking gun to this planning - as Chomsky and others have pointed out - is NSC68, authored by George Kennan during his brief tenure in the State Department 2) In 1947, Harry Dexter of the U.S. and John Maynard Keynes of Great Britten put together the Bretton Wood's International Exchange Agreements, making the U.S. dollar the world's reserve currency. It was a horrible policy blunder that had long term ramifications to this day. Ultimately, it has worked for U.S. banking interests and the U.S. government, but it has worked against U.S. public interest by keeping the value of the dollar artificially high. Along with unequal labor and environmental standards this state of affairs has led to the export of manufacturing jobs from the U.S. U.S. global military containment policy also encouraged the export of jobs because it led third world countries down the path of capitalism instead of communism. 3) When the Bretton Woods agreement became unsustainable (exchanging gold for dollars at $32 per ounce) Nixon came up with a quick fix by allowing the dollar to float but also forcing the trade of all oil in U.S. dollars, via a military security agreement with Saudi Arabia. Hence our presence in the Middle East, even though most of our oil comes from Mexico, Canada, Venezuela, and Nigeria with only 10% from Saudi Arabia. The U.S. doesn't benefit so much, directly from oil in the Middle East, the petroleum, banking, construction and defense industry interests primarily benefit. Our presence in the Middle East also gives the U.S. a certain amount of control in international affairs via our control of oil. However, the arrangement continues to make the dollar artificially strong, weakening our trade competitiveness and further encouraging the export of manufacturing away from the U.S. 4) Current Free Trade agreements are intended to benefit the large transnational corporations that write them and then force them through Congress with little or no study or debate. These trade agreement do not benefit the local populations in the trading countries and do not benefit the environment. 5) The current system is not sustainable economically or environmentally. Further, none of the emerging countries like China can possibly hope to consume all the manufactured goods they make so there is a dependency cycle between first world consuming nations and second/third world producing nations that needs to be broken. 6) From an energy consumption, carbon footprint, and environmental standpoint, manufacturing goods and shipping them half way around the world is insane. Our current free trade system neglects all the hidden costs associated with these transactions. If China's goods were given a huge carbon tax to reflect the problem of climate change people would be encouraged to buy locally produced goods and China would also be forced to adopt a cleaner energy policy. 7) Since the U.S. MUST provide Global leadership, candidates like Barack Obama must connect the dots and revise public policy to make a more sustainable system. That includes changing both domestic and international policy issues in a coherent way. It is not Barack Obama who is naive about this: It is Fareed Zakaria who does not get it. There is an urgent need to create a sustainable world system based on the example of the United States. Zakaria also needs to realize, the current system is a 60 year LINEAR extrapolation from the outcome of World War II that can not continue on its present path. It is time we created a new one, one that will work for everyone and the environment, not just the transnational corporations or the complicit government officials. 8) Jimmy Carter's suggestion is very straight forward, simple, correct, and to the point. I would add to the presidents speech, our intent to renounce the pursuit of world empire. Further, we will get our own transnational corporations, and institutions such as the World Bank and the IMF under proper control so they do not further plunder the world. National and World Security issues will be redefined to include sustainability and the environment. 9) If we do not do this soon the entire world system will collapse by 2050 with severe consequences occurring as soon as 2020. We don't even have the water resources to allow things to continues beyond 2020, never mind the supplies of oil. 4% growth every year for the rest of this century with the present system? I don't think so.

David Greve  07/02/2008 07:41 PM Report

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)?

JD  06/22/2008 03:32 AM Report

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.

desidude  06/20/2008 09:42 PM Report

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.

Li Bingxian  06/20/2008 09:32 PM Report

Peace & Harmony all over the world! As a human being respects others Plaese! Stop the War, USA!!!

Michael Andrew Thompson  06/18/2008 10:27 PM Report

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

Sara  06/18/2008 10:01 AM Report

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.

Jack Jones  06/12/2008 10:17 AM Report

These comments amply illustrate what a rich and revelaing conversation this was. Zakaria is brilliant but also wise, a much rarer quality.

smc341  06/11/2008 04:09 AM Report

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.

Hupp  06/10/2008 02:52 AM Report

Gondi, I second that.

Simon  06/10/2008 02:32 AM Report

What's new?

Sara  06/09/2008 07:01 AM Report

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.

Sam Saqfalhait  05/30/2008 07:51 PM Report

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.

tylerhaz  05/26/2008 06:03 AM Report

Makes you wonder why someone like him is not Sec State....How much better would we be..

RL  05/25/2008 10:27 PM Report

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.

MACBAGS  05/24/2008 11:06 PM Report

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"?

Philip  05/18/2008 12:58 PM Report

One of the most informative interviews I have ever watched. 54 minutes of gold.

Jennifer Jones  05/16/2008 06:15 AM Report

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.

Ari  05/13/2008 01:04 PM Report

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.

Brenda Colaizzi  05/07/2008 08:45 PM Report

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.

Allan Ramesh  05/06/2008 07:57 PM Report

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.

Larry Thomas  05/06/2008 12:00 PM Report

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!

Irish gets pink slipped  05/05/2008 09:53 PM Report

cripes - I actually DO know how to spell Zakaria. Sorry!

Irish  05/05/2008 09:23 PM Report

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.

Shaft  05/05/2008 08:24 PM Report

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-à-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.

Fan from LA  05/05/2008 06:48 PM Report

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.

Ryan Gibbs  05/05/2008 04:40 PM Report

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.

Frank Duncan  05/05/2008 01:07 PM Report

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?

Chuck Pell  05/05/2008 11:23 AM Report

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."

Chuck Pell  05/05/2008 11:22 AM Report

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."

Robert Watson  05/05/2008 06:55 AM Report

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.

Jorge  05/05/2008 05:22 AM Report

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.

Mike Canada  05/05/2008 04:07 AM Report

Fareed Zakaria is always a pleasure to listen to.

Carol Storoz  05/05/2008 01:10 AM Report

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.

Chris Baker  05/04/2008 11:17 PM Report

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.

Rachel  05/04/2008 06:20 PM Report

An instant classic - Zakaria always has great insight into the world and a great focus on the long-term!

Frank Duncan  05/04/2008 02:34 PM Report

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

JWright  05/04/2008 02:33 PM Report

A class act -- sophisticated, intelligent, crackling with insights. Thanks Charlie for giving it an hour. Can we have another?

Kwabena  05/04/2008 12:18 PM Report

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.

Shalom Freedman  05/04/2008 02:32 AM Report

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.

andrew  05/03/2008 11:55 PM Report

Cabinet position for Zakaria!

Regardless of who is the next president, America needs this man.

JJMiller  05/03/2008 07:02 PM Report

Not left, not right just smart as hell. An amazing performance. One of the best shows ever!

ARD  05/03/2008 06:37 PM Report

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".

kWABENA  05/03/2008 05:27 PM Report

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???

robert carlton  05/03/2008 04:51 PM Report

This is a compelling program. The presidential candidates should be required to listen and repsond.

betz  05/03/2008 04:15 PM Report

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'... !

Joe  05/03/2008 02:45 PM Report

[Report Success\

Who will "own" it? Zakaria gives the nod. And he is still a young man! Charlie is at his best too.

old lady Mara Cary  05/03/2008 01:34 PM Report

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?