♪ >> from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." americans, tonight, i want to speak to you about

what the united states will do with our friends and allies to degrade and ultimately destroy the terrorist group known as isil. as commander-in-chief, my highest priority is the security of the american people. over the last several years, we have consistently taken the fight to terrorists who threaten our country. laden -- wea bin got osama bin laden. topecently eliminated the commander and its affiliate in somalia. we have done so while bringing 430,000 troops back from iraq. thanks to our military and counterterrorism professionals, america is safer. still, we continue to face a terrorist threat. we can't erase every trace of evil from the world and small groups of killers have the capacity to do great harm.

that was the case before 9/11 and that remains true today. that is why we must remain vigilant. greatestoment, the threats come from the middle east and north africa where radical groups exploit grievances for their own gain. one of those groups is iso-. -- is isil. it calls itself the islamic state. but make two things clear. isil is not islamic. no religion condones the killing of innocents. the majority of its victims have been muslim. and isil is not a state. it started in iraq and has taken advantage of civil strife and syria's civil war. it is recognized by no government nor by the people it subjugates. isil is a terrorist organization, pure and simple.

it has no vision other than the slaughter of those who stand in its way. in a region that has known so much bloodshed come of these terrorists are unique in their brutality. they capture prisoners, killed children, and slave, rape, and forced women into marriage. they threateneded a religious minority with genocide. and in acts of barbarism, they took the lives of vida buell american journalists, tim foley and stephen sotloff. if left unchecked, they pose a growing threat beyond that region am a including to the united states. affectedhave not yet specific plotting against our homeland, isil leaders have threaten america and our allies.

until this community believes that thousands of foreigners come including europeans and some americans, have joined them in syria and iraq, trained and atul hardened, these fighters could -- trained and battle hardened, these fighters could return to their home countries. i want you to know that the united states of america is meeting them with strength and resolve. last month, i ordered our military to take targeted action against isil to stop its advances. since then, we have conducted more than 150 successful airstrikes in iraq. these strikes have protected american personnel facilities, killed isil fighters, destroyed weapons, and given space for iraqi and kurdish forces to reclaim key territory. these strikes have also helped save the lives of thousands of innocent men, women, and children. but this is not our fight alone.

american power can make a decisive difference, but we cannot do for iraqis what they must do for themselves. nor can we take the place of arab partners in securing their region. that is why i have insisted that additional u.s. action depended government creating a more inclusive government which they have done tonight. following consultation with allies at home and congress at home, i can announce that america will lead a broad coalition to roll back this terrorist threat. our objective is clear. we will degrade and ultimately destroy isil. through a comprehensive and sustained counterterrorism strategy. first, we will conduct a systematic campaign of airstrikes against these terrorists. working with the iraqi government, we will expand our efforts beyond protecting our own people and humanitarian

missions so that we are hitting isil targets as iraqi forces go on offense. moreover, we've made it clear that we will hunt down terrorists wherever they are. that means i will not take -- i will not hesitate to take action against isil in syria. this is the core principle of my presidency. if you threaten america, you will find no safe haven. second, we will increase our support for forces fighting these terrorists on the ground. in june, i deployed several hundred american service members to iraq to find out how best we can best support iraqis security forces. now that those teams have competed the work and iraq has formed a government, we will send an additional 475 service members to iraq. as i said, these american forces will not have a combat mission. they will not get ragan to another ground war in iraq. but they are needed to support iraqi and kurdish forces with

training, intelligence, and equipment. we will also support iraq's efforts to help sunni communities secure their own freedom from isil's control. , wess the border in syria have ramped up our military assistance to the syrian opposite ocean -- opposition. tonight, i have called on congress to give us additional resources and authorities to train and equip these forces. in the fight against iso-, we cannotagainst isil, we rely on the assad regime. third, we will continue to draw on our substantial counterterrorism capabilities isilprevent iso-attacks --

attacks. along with our partners, we will strengthen our defenses, counter its warped ideology and stem the flow of foreign fighters into and out of the middle east. i will chair as, meeting of the un security council to further mobilize the international community around this effort. fourth, we will continue to provide humanitarian assistance for innocent civilians who have been this faced by this terrorist organization. these include shia and muslim citizens who are in great danger, including christians and other loses minorities. this is -- and other religious minorities. core strategy. america will be joined by a broad coalition of partners. already, allies are flying planes with us over iraq, sending arms and assistance to

iraqi security forces and to the syrian opposition, pouring billions of dollars in humanitarian aid. secretary kerry was in iraq today meeting with the new government and supporting their efforts to promote unity. in the coming days, he will travel across the middle east and europe and list more partners in this fight, especially arab nations who can help mobilize sunni communities in iraq and syria to drive these terrorists from their lands. this is american leadership at its best. we stand with people who fight for their own freedom and we rally other nations on behalf of our common security and common humanity. my administration has also secured bipartisan support here at home. i have the authority to address the threat from isil. but i believe we are strong as does nation when the president and congress work together. i welcome congressional support for this effort in order to show the world that americans are

united in confronting this danger. it will take time to eradicate the cancer like isil. anytime we take military action, there are risks involved, especially to the servicemen and women who carry out these missions. i want the american people to understand how this effort will be different from the wars in iraq and afghanistan. they will not involve american combat troops fighting on foreign soil. this counterterrorism campaign will be waged through a steady, relentless effort to take out isil wherever they exist using our air power and our support for harder forces on the ground. strategy of taking out terrorists who threaten us while supporting partners on the front line is one that we successfully pursued in yemen and somalia for years and is consistent with the approach i outlined earlier this year.

to mobilize partners wherever partner. americans, we live in a time of great change. tomorrow marks 13 years since our country was attacked. next week marks six years since our economy suffered its worst setback since the great depression. yet despite these shocks, through the pain we felt and the grueling work required to bounce back, america is better positioned today to feed the future then at any other time. unmatched.ogy is our manufacturing and auto industries are thriving. energy independence is closer than it has been in decades. for all the work that remains, our businesses are in the longest, uninterrupted stretch of job creation in our history. despite all of the divisions and the discord within our democracy, i see the grit and

determination and the common goodness of the american people every single day. that makes me more confident than ever about our country's future. a broad american leadership is the one constant in an uncertain world. it is america that has the capacity and the will to mobilize the world against terrorists. it is america that has rallied the world against russian aggression and in support of the ukrainian people's right to determine their own destiny. , our scientists, doctors, our know-how that can help contain an sure the outbreak of ebola. it is america that helped remove serious -- syria's chemical weapons. and it is america that is helping muslim communities around the world, not just in the fight against terrorists, but in the fight for opportunity and tolerance and a more hopeful future.

, our endless blessings the stowe an enduring burden. -- from europe to asia, from the far reaches of africa to war-torn capitals in the middle east, we stand for freedom, for justice, for dignity. these are values that have guided our nation since its founding. tonight, i ask for your support in carrying that leadership forward. i do so as a commander-in-chief who could not be prouder of our men and women in uniform. pilots who bravely fly in the face of danger above the middle east and service members who support our partners on the ground. the we help prevent massacre of civilians on a distant mountain, this is what one of them said. we owe our american friends our lives.

our children will always remember that there was someone who felt our struggle and made a long journey to protect innocent people. that is the difference we make in the world. our own safety come our own security depends upon our willingness to do what it takes to defend this nation and uphold ,he values that we stand for timeless ideals that will endure long after those who are out for only hate and destruction have been vanquished from the earth. may god bless our troops. and may god bless the united states of america. ♪

>> henry kissinger is here. he is the depomed, nobel peace prize recipient, and also served as secretary of state and military adviser for presidents nixon and ford. his new book is called "world order: reflections on the character of nations and the course of history."

youngistan's democracy is on the verge of collapse. the relationship with china divided. the concept of order that is underpinned the modern era is over. >-please to have henry kissinger back at this table. welcome. >> started on a very positive note. [laughter] >> this idea of order has , public, your academic post public life? thats been this concept you seem to be at the core of how you see the world. >> i see that my concern is the achievement of peace. some systemquires of order that has two elements.

it has to have enough of a balance of power that no single component can optimistically dominated. and it has to have some agreement on values which what is that [indiscernible] system is accepted by most of its participants, they -- there will be constant outbreaks of war. this is the concept of order i am interested in. it doesn't mean order against isn'tsm, because idealism a central component of it. at it does mean that power is central component. >> how far back do you look in terms of to see the creation of nationstates and balance of power between them? nationstates is a peculiarly

western evolution. rome certainly had order. it dominated most of the known world and it failed peace within its boundaries. china certainly had a system of order. but almost all previous orders and all the ones i know were variations of empires, with one dominating group or elements in it. the special character of the west is that it divided itself into a series of nations in the 17th century and then developed a concept of order based on balance of power and to some extent legitimacy. sometimes the balance of power

was the dominant element. sometimes the legitimacy that all nations agreed on the nature of a just arrangement. but the system broke down and the western system spread around the world in the 19th century as a result of western imperialism in the colonies, as they emerged, emerged as nationstates. but the concept of order based on the nationstate is a special western invention. >> why did you decide to write this book now? conversation. a was --conversation actually, i thought of writing out a book of key personalities.

and i discussed that with a right about the problem that must be occupied you at the moment and has preoccupied you all your life and see if you can synthesize that. actually, that got me started. implicit in what i have been writing, as you say. but this is a way of summing it up. >> is there an absence of order when you look around the world. are we in transition? >> this is one of the most chaotic periods that i know about. every part of the world -- almost every part of the world is in the process of redefining itself. some internally to some extent like china. some externally. has beenuropean system

abandoned in europe. and the united states is moving into a new period where the dominance it enjoyed in the immediate postwar economically is no longer there. but on the other hand, we are still the essential element in creating a new order. simulation.erful participation, it is very difficult to see how a new system can emerge in most parts of the world. >> but new systems do emerge when there is a vacuum. >> we know what happens when there's a vacuum. example.hanistan, for countries threaten and then there is some sort of a

contest. out of the sometimes a new order emerges. >> some people talk about the fact that during the bush 43 era, we moved to fort one direction. and then, in the obama era, we have moved too far in the other direction and we haven't found the balance between the two. >> he is facing a next -- bush was facing an extremely difficult problem. >> 9/11. >> we were attacked. we had to reestablish our credibility in the region from which we were attacked. respect.ablish the we were bound to unleash a

number of latent forces in each of these countries. bush 43 chose the road of [indiscernible] ad he chose to bring about democratic system on the western ofel in a very brief period time by means of military occupation. -- i think you believe that is not a smart thing to do. >> it was a noble thing to try, but it went beyond the capacity it involvedm and corals between sunnis and shia and all the contending forces in the region. bush, hisrness to alternatives once he was in a

rack, it wasn't so what i thought we should do, let some government emerge and then not make ourselves the arbiter of the evolution of iraq. i understood what he was attempting to do. great respect for him. obama went too far in the other direction. he seemed to think that confessions of american killed would gain so much public that this could for the military effort that his processor had made. the long-term outcome

is in between these two positions. >> articulate with the middle is and what it ought to be. >> that is extremely difficult to define. ourselves theake major factor in the domestic evolution in every country, especially by the use of military power, on the other hand, if we take no interest, then we have a situation that we or if we appear to take no interest, then we have a situation that we see developing now. if you look at the crisis in the we hadeast, [indiscernible] it was clear that he was coming

to the end of his ability to manage affairs. hadas not obvious that we ofbe the is a whole agent his [indiscernible] >> what would have been an alternative? evolution. gradual one proposed and embodied in one american concept, which was in -- was abandoned under the pressure of events. i am am not saying that outlining a solution for every country in the world. i'm saying that the united states has to find a balance between what it must do militarily and what it must do ideologically. and to understand that some countries have a totally different perception of order

and peace than we do. so we cannot always act like schoolmasters that give the impression that we know all the answers and the appropriateness of apology of other countries is measured to the degree to which they follow our prescriptions. >>. about putin specifically. what is his intent and what should be the american response? >> fit is beyond now. i have thought and to some extent still think -- but i have putin wanted what above all was an understanding

with united states that recognizes the vulnerability of russia [indiscernible] that was not forthcoming. afterward. a period ofidered humiliation during the olympics, which i cannot testify on the basis of the analysis that i have made. the does not have the right to annex the part of another country because his historical views have not been a true -- appropriately treated i had hoped that there would be a

-- on thel discussion highest level -- between the white house and the kremlin in which the long-term future of russia westernization's and thereby the future of at least eurasia would be discussed. now we have been drawn into a number of decisions step-by-step applets emphasis on the military outcome on the russian side. and we cannot accept the proposition that russia can do orderede outcome of its nations by the constant use of military hair. >> what should we do now? >> we should open the

possibility of a fundamental negotiation with russia. but we should also make -- >> you say we. >> i am talking about the united states. the europeans have made it very engage,t they will not run any risk of war. but at the same time, we should also make their that the continuation of military fundamentalade its relationship with the united states, not just in sanctions but in what may be a long -- >> do you think putting that at risk will influence putin? '>> yes. >> do you think sanctions will influence him? >> not the way they are being conducted. >> a stop about this president and how he is perceived and if putin is motivated by what he

perceives to be a weak president. motivated bytin is a perception that he cannot get administration. offering solutions to a whole set of problem and he is trying to talk about the overall situation. >> you seem to suggest that putin is more interested in the diplomaticesult, a strategic result and that he is much more of a deeper thinker about these things than the united states. russians play chess, we play poker. they have lived in a very threatened environment and

therefore they have had to think ofut the relationship societies to each other. we have lived in a relatively secure environment. any disturbance of that environment we believe has some practical solution that can be implemented in a short period of time. let me take serious as an example. -- syria take ser as an example. the concern is that streams groups have a more fertile field inside russia even than as a threat to the west. in quotationon marks. conditions --

could produce lybian conditions. best approach would be to begin with an agreement on the nature of the outcome in syria rather than the personality of an individual. and i am mentioning this only as an example. i am not saying that what i have suggested would have worked. have.eve it might the challenge that we have now, which may not be fulfill a bull, is can there be a russian state that works cooperatively with the west but in special -- butties are respected whose special necessities are respected?

all famouster dissidents. thatky used to proclaim ukraine is part of russia. i think ukraine should be an independent state within its existing borders. they should be free to conduct their affairs internationally, -- some of ithey should be based on core ration between the west and russia. can it be done in any short-term negotiation? i don't know. >> do you think it is acceptable to putin? >> i think it is very late in the game. has exceeded beyond what could have been his expectations when this crisis started. to "worldto come

order: reflections on the character of nations and the course of history." some have said that it is our history, part lecture, part memoir. some say it does not pay enough attention to nonstate actors. -- some say you do not came do not pay enough attention to south america and africa. we now have a crisis created partly by the disarray in syria among early by a capacity of a gettate or her -- actor to both financed and funding and create an organizational structure and motivated to try to create a kind of islamic state. what has to be the response and what is essential for the united to say and doope at this moment? that is what the president has

on his plate right now. knowing that he has to do things he wished he did not have redo. clark's the book covers nonstate actors. issue.on't get into that --t we have in the mayfield in the middle east now is a confluence of a series of revolutions that are partly overlapping and partly competitive. it is an evolution against a state authority within the which the uprising against the barrick is an example -- against mo mubarak is an example.

the shia-sunni conflict within the iraqi state is an example. there is the collapse of the state borders that were drawn in the 1920's by written and france as an expression of the european balance of power which did not reflect the actual divisions and realities. so all of these issues are coming together. the administration attempted to first restore and then to rely on the secular, democratic evolution most similar to that of the west and therefore to the position it took. and expected to do the same thing in syria.

it is important to accentuate all the internal issues in a country in which there is not one cohesive national thought. in order to have the democratic system operating, you need the one minority that can become a majority. movement that is attempting to resurrect the [indiscernible] which is the uniform government of all of the islamic people are under one roof. and they proceed with extreme brutality in order to demonstrate its defiance of the ofld and the impotence countries, especially the united states. i mention there are three levels of strategic understanding united states needs.

what actions does it take to prevent, even if it has to do so unilaterally? secondly, what actions can we do only together with allies? third, what actions should not be on the table at all? the isis issue reflects two of those. when the throat of americans is cut in the national ,elevision and then decapitated innocent bystanders who are in , the united states fundamental values are insulted. have someust

retaliation. and for that, we do not need allies. that we can do on our own with not necessarily solving the problem. >> with airstrikes. >> i would have thought with airstrikes. >> but not troops on the ground. >> this is not a final solution of the isis problem. >> this is to retaliate for what happened. -- it is a heavy price to be paid in seeking to humiliate america. >> but isn't that what the president is doing? >> i think he is doing it not as retaliation. as a kind ofo it prevent isis from moving more and more closer to baghdad

accompanied with more limitations. the resident will move very close to that position with a very different rationale. difficult toery express unilateral american action. the other is how can one overcome isis? that requires some strategic assessment. chosen is toave strengthen the baghdad government and then appeal to the sunnis and to speak of a united iraq but while we are arming the kurds, there are ethical consequences that they will move out of the iraqi in a de facto way and then if a shia army is created and goes into

sunni areas of this will present the problems that led to the that it is a strategy that makes sense but it will take some time. >> people say you need boots on the ground. >> not ours. >> you have to find those boots somewhere. you got them from the kurds and middleqi army and some issue groups. >> middle issue groups that we return to create in sierra that we never quite -- in syria that we never were quite able to do.

in syria, if the president borders are considered the permanent borders of the region. at any rate, for the immediate future, this would be the most fruitful employment or use of .he moderate element >> free syrian army. and i would think that 70's and even qataris would understand its strategic purpose. the emiratess and and the jordanians will support that, will they not? >> yes. having done this, however, i

believe after, we have to remember, we are dealing with 20,000 fanatics. but it is a relatively small group which has had astonishing successes because of the week of the opposition. but if we put together these various elements that we have discussed here am a i think they should be -- we should be able to fragment them into terrorist groups which one should then defeat with intelligence operations. but the fundamental problems in the region am of the sunni and tehrana represented by and salaries or cairo will continue. to create is possible

an order in that region, that will be the next challenge. i think that alone destroying isis will not be the only issue. wille end of november, we be facing the deadline for the nuclear negotiations of iran. in that outcome will determine the relative position of many of the countries during >> what do you think that outcome will be. itit depends whether represented a significant entry -- interaction of the iranian new year program or legitimize it.ith a little delay and i would prefer a successful negotiation that leads to iran joining the international system. but i don't see how that can be is significantre

impairment of the nuclear military capability of iraq. >> you think the supreme leaders are prepared to accept that? >> i think that is what they are debating in tehran right now. but you have an interesting phrase about iran. it has to decide whether it wants to be a nationstate or a movement. to be ao decide nationstate and participate in the community of nations or it wants to be theocratic. >> iran has been a nationstate. it has been a great empire. and it has been the leader of a jihadist movement. for recent decades, it has tried to merge the empire and the jihadists. if they decide to become a nationstate, they can have a major in art and the

consolidation. >> we have talked about russia and the middle east and isis and china. jinping hasthat xi a clear sense of china's lace that is different than has built whatever has gone on in the past and they seem to want china to be more aggressive. i don't think that's true. >> now? you also seem to believe that china can be accommodated. >> i think the fundamental effort of xi jinping at the in the reform of chinese society. corruption.nvoked which means that many people in threatenedc is

simultaneously either because of the intestines or because the potential collection -- nationalisming your is a kind of unifying element. i think that she feels that what -- when something is perceived either by him or by the above, that he must take a very strong stand but i don't leave that there is the same casese as they would any of prudence, of having to demonstrate to his people that he is the protector of historical patrimony.

and therefore, it is not a question so much of accommodating. he has said that a relationship with the united states and china should set a new example for the relationship between potential adversaries. president obama had said the same thing. the only thing that has been lacking in some complete program is toress it and that which we should pay attention. i think 15 years from now, when china has reached the level of a large middle class, how it will then proceed the international situation. i am not predicting. itm saying, if we are lucky, could be that, at the end of that period, we have fallen into it at her and that we have found

in our interest to continue. but i also think that a military conflict between potential superpowers will destroy the world. we have seen what happened in world war i. it's not just the physical destruction. it is the choosing of sides on a global basis during it would be very hard to repair your that is my concern. beyou worry that there will -- that there could be a conflict between china and the united states in which people would be forced to choose sides. certainly, one of the is july 1, 1914, nobody draft of going to war. then a number of people to decisions that sounded reasonable, sound and prudent,

and within the space of a week they suddenly found themselves with mobilization schedules and those kinds of things. should try to avoid gradual escalations if we can. and we should above all understand the nature of the challenge. when well of this, happen to speak about order, i start with the united states and i look at it from the point of what environment is most conducive to our values and our security. had ansaid that obama imbalance between introspective and how we should address the rest of the world. >> we are not part of a

ndagmatic solution that will e in history. in 1990, a book is written called the end of history. it achieved a lot of attention at the time and justifiably so. we won't see the end of history. we will be part of a process of what we are seeing around the world. we will continue to go along. , one,uld be in a position of protecting our security and, secondly, one of the world in preservedvalues are to the greatest extent and in which there are not upheavals of the nature that we put everything at risk. that is a big order. >> the book is called "world

order," henry kissinger. thank you for being with us. good night.

>> from pier three in san francisco, will come to a special edition of "bloomberg west, the alibaba story." if we fight in the ocean, we will lose. but if we fight in the river, we will win. over the next half hour, we take you inside the ali baba group to find out how this company founded by 18 people in jack must tidy apartment has grown company that has grown bigger than amazon and ebay combined.