>> from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." >> the united nations general assembly brings many had to stay to new york. we begin a series of

conversations this week with the president of turkey, recep tayyip erdogan. it brings turkey into renewed focus this weekend. order six diplomats were released from isis captivity in iraq and had been held for over 100 days. turkey says no ransom was paid. it is adding to the 1.3 million refugees in turkey. 130,000 syrian kurds had entered turkey in the last three days. turkey is part of the coalition against isis but so far has made no military commitment. i spoke to the president earlier today at his hotel. here is our conversation. >> thank you for joining us. your hostages have been released. can you tell me if you had to give up anything, make any promises to isis to get them home?

>> first of all, the fact the hostages are home is a very important development to our country and a very important issue for us. and our national intelligence service worked very hard with their ability to conduct the operation very important. i have to say very clearly that these hostages were kept in captivity for 102 days. there has really been a very successful intelligence effort to get them released. there is what we might call a diplomatic operation, a political operation. all of these aspects have been

very important securing the release of these 49 hostages. there are many speculations but i can say very clearly that there has been no issue of paying any ransom. there is no money paid. everyone should know that. this is completely a diplomatic and political discussion. the result is of political and diplomatic negotiations. it does not include any concessions vis-a-vis our country and our government. >> isis got nothing in return for releasing those hostages? >> well, isis is playing for a number of things in the region. perhaps they do not want to increase the number of enemies that they have because turkey would have remained patient only up to a certain point.

and other steps would've had to be taken. as you know, there was a meeting which the united states participated in and other countries participated in as well. our foreign minister was there and the coalition building effort. after those meetings, i told him when he came to visit me that we would be part of a humanitarian effort. but because we had the 49 hostages, we would not be in a position to take other steps. we have actually taken significant steps in terms of humanitarian support.

for example, we are hosting about 60,000 that have arrived in turkey in a very short time. we are hosting about 60,000 in our territory. they are staying in our school buildings and tents. as of this morning, 125,000 syrian kurds are in turkey and are being hosted in turkey. and we have, at the moment, a total of 1.5 million refugees in turkey. we are hosting these 1.5 million people. but as we do that, the rest of the world is hosting 120,000 -- 130,000. so there is a big difference.

we have invested $3.5 billion in this effort. there are also wounded people coming from palestine, gaza, and 130 of them have arrived in turkey so far. some have been treated already and others are in the process of being treated. turkey is fulfilling this humanitarian effort. >> described to me the condition in the refugee camps. so that the world understands what the challenge is for you. >> there are four tribes of refugee camps that we have at the moment. we have some tents, camps we had to set up quickly and urgently.

and we set up some container cities. container cities were set up. there are others that have their own financial needs that could be settled in some of the cities. and we have opened up our school buildings to house these refugees. >> do they, in some cases, if they are syrian kurds, represent a security threat to turkey? >> well the security threat wouldn't come from syrian kurds. of the people arriving, many need help. there are some that may pose a threat. we have to take necessary measures. it's something we have to be careful about.

our national intelligence agency and forces are looking into this. we tell our friends, especially the u.s., that it is important to set up a no-fly zone on the syrian side. if we can declare and support that zone, we can establish a safe zone whereby help would be provided and this would remove a security threat. in 1991, we opened our doors to kurds then, and there were 1 million kurds that crossed to turkey. we provided food, shelter, and they were escaping the persecution of saddam.

they went back to northern iraq. a similar thing is happening in iraq and syria. we keep an open-door policy. we will see how far this can go, that's the question mark. >> the ppk has been in opposition and fighting against isis. >> this is not an issue for pkk. the area isis came in and is chasing the kurds there. 20 to 30 villages are occupied by isis as a result. this is similar to what happened

in mossul. it is happening now in the kobani area. the villages around it are being occupied by isis and the kurds living in those villages are fleeing to turkey and they are now housed in turkey. >> my understanding is what you want is a no-fly zone away from the border that will pull those able away from the border because they will seek the safety of a no-fly zone? >> that is correct. the moment there is a no-fly zone, there will be a safe zone in that area. and other humanitarian needs would be provided to that region. these people could settle in that area and live in that area for a time being.

>> another question is that some people believe and argue and say it is a fact that many of the people joining isis in syria and then in iraq, are coming through turkey, and that you need to do a better job of closing your borders to those radicals that want to come and fight for isis. >> these are not sincere. we discussed this at the summit. italy and the u.k., they talked about going to this region. we have identified 6000 of them. we have detained some of them, we have deported some of them. we have been working on this. there are some whose entry is banned. they are very keen on this. >> coming in turkey and going

through syria? >> if you look at syria and iraq, if you look at our border, it is 1200 kilometers including the border with syria and the border with iraq. we're looking at a very long border were you have the customs entry and exit points and you have the rest of the border. it is not possible to control every single segment of it. >> now that the hostages are home and safe, what of the commitment of turkey for the fight against isis? what are you prepared to do? >> the struggle against al qaeda

and the struggle against isis will continue to be the case. the view in regard to terrorist organizations, the region is one in the same. for 32 years, we have been fighting against pkk terrorism. we know what the consequences are. 40,000 people lost their lives as a result of the struggle. the economic consequences also been huge. isis is not a terrorist organization that emerged today. it was in iraq and it went to syria. the environment provided it with a room for development and it started growing.

the countries sensitive to terrorism have a responsibility countering the threat. >> that is my question. what is your responsibility and what are you prepared to do? would you do that? they can engage isis in syria. >> whatever is required in this effort is what needs to be done. turkey will do what it needs to do on its own experience. we have been sending out warnings for a long time. in syria, we sounded the alarm with the u.s. and syria. the issue isn't just iraq, it's iraq and syria. airstrikes.

if you only consider airstrikes, it means you're not fully involved in this struggle. it is only one dimension. there are things that would need to be done from the air, from the ground, from a humanitarian perspective. these all have to be taken into consideration and we have to look at this as a whole. if we don't have this kind of comprehensive approach, the job will be half done. that is where you leave it. what about the social ramifications? what about the political ramifications? so, all of these factors have to be taken into consideration. >> the united states does not want to be seen as sending its

troops to fight again, muslims in the middle east. they would like to provide the support that they can to stop isis. they are prepared to use advisors and air power, but they need ground troops to come from the region. where are they going to come from? can you take the free syrian army and make it into a fighting force, that with air power, can stop isis? >> fighting against terrorism isn't a regional issue. it's an international issue. and since it's an international issue, we have to consider an international approach. why would a meeting be held? minded did this process began 12 years ago? and why was the situation in syria considered the way it was considered?

we have to discuss these on an international level and there has to be an international consensus. if they are taking place in this location today, it's very possible they would happen in other countries tomorrow. in the u.k., france, germany, and the u.s. as has happened with the twin towers. so, it can happen anywhere. >> but, mr. president, you know they are taking ground in syria and iraq. they occupy and take hostages that are turkish hostages. they have to be stopped there now. and you need an effort that involves a coalition and the united states and others saying, where is turkey? >> these are not things to say on a television program like this -- our units have discussions with american counterparts. they are having those discussions and based on the

outcome of those discussions, there are certain phases where we would be involved. we are in the region. the fire is burning in our region. we have 1.5 million that are not in germany or france, they are in my country. i am already there and we are -- my country is hosting and defending them. we are saving those people from those bombs and those events across the border. these are very important because they constitute the humanitarian aspect of what is happening. planes fly. france and the u.s., they send planes and they bomb certain areas. this is very positive. is it sufficient?

no. while they are bombing one area, isis is still moving forward with tanks and artillery that they have. where did the tanks and artillery come from? i think we have to really assess the situation fully. those tanks and artillery are weapons the u.s. had provided to the iraqi army in the past. when the army left, they were left to isis. and what did isis do with them? they began their effort in the region. we have to contemplate all the steps that we would need to take in the region. and depending on that outlook, we would do what we have to do. all the countries in the region not to be doing it. people like maliki were, for four years, kept there. what will happen now?

maliki will become the vice president. and we keep saying this person should not be vice president again. >> but isn't that progress because the united states made clear that it would not be engaged in less there is a change in the baghdad government? >> it is not possible to accept that the sunnis have a more influential position in the new government because it is the shiite that has the dominant position still. but the uncertainty that was there is no longer there. iraq did not have a president and now it has a president. the speaker of the parliament has been determined and the prime minister is now someone else. at least the iraqi people are free of maliki. we have a border of 320 kilometers with iraq and we hope

that our relations with iraq will be healthier or better. in iraq, we have, with the administration, the arabs, the sunnis, the shia, we have contacts with all of these groups. we do not have negative relations with any of these groups. we were in touch with maliki as well. but his approach was different. he did not establish a national army. he established a shiite army. about 98% of the army was made up of the shiites. that cannot be a national army.

it led to internal clashes and lead to problems in iraq. i hope now that his government -- this government is aware of these factors and have worked swiftly to establish an army. >> he said the biggest problem is not iraq, it's syria. >> as i said to president obama, one cannot only look at iraq. that would be wrong. iraq and syria both at the bk can into consideration when determining what to do. obama did address that situation. i think this was a correct observation, a correct assessment. i think that we have to do whatever is necessary based on this overall assessment. so if we take that kind of approach, we will be more

successful. >> how do you assess what the americans have done so far? positive, negative? >> more recently, if we are talking about the most recent steps, they are positive. delayed, but positive. >> would it be better if the president decided to support the free syrian army two years ago notwithstanding his worry that weapons would fall into the hands of groups like isis?

>> well, i should say that two years, it's not even two years. it's three years ago. things should have been dealt with three years ago in syria. the same with iraq. maliki's approach was unfortunately never positive. maliki put a lot of pressure on

his people. i said this to president obama and when i was talking to vice president biden about this. we told them about the situation in the region and unfortunately, the steps were not taken to deal with it. people in our country are able to go back home. >> do you think your effort to overthrow and see assad leave as head of government in syria allowed you to overlook the threat of the radical jihadist in syria? you were so intent of seeing assad overthrown that your support went to the wrong groups? >> well, let me say very clearly that regarding these terrorist organizations, we have to think of how they happened. how they came about to these terrorist organizations. were they there when assad was there or was isis there or was al qaeda there? i was prime minister for 11 years and i kept going to syria.

i visited regularly and those organizations did not exist at the time. the issues always came back to assad himself. i kept telling him that he should move more quickly to democracy and it would not be sufficient to just have one party. the political parties, we worked together and provided a lot of support. he kept telling us that he believed in these ideas but his

inner voice must have told him that his political life would come to an end if he were allow democracy. that is why he used the tanks. so did al qaeda and others. unfortunately, it was only turkey and qatar that works -- to worked to gather --her together to support the free syrian army. and our collaboration, we try to continue to support the moderate opposition groups.

but assad left space for these terrorist organizations. >> you are suggesting that assad allowed isis to become a threat? it was in his interest to do that? >> do you have any doubt? he was the one who prepared the ground for this. he even supported isis and he supported isis against groups opposing him and established his own reign by using isis and others. so whoever was not against him was his friend because he thought that the enemy of his enemy was his friend. irrespective of who they were or what terrorist organization they were. >> what role should iran play in the battle against isis? >> iran so far, unfortunately, has not played the role they have been expected to play. we have discussed this with the iranians a number of times. whenever we wanted to work with them, they shied away from it.

and in syria, too, they were always part of the difficulties because their role was that of defending assad regime like russia did. that is the role they played. it's a fact we all saw. >> they supported the maliki government and supported syria. hezbollah came in and supported assad. the question is, are they opposed to isis? secretary kerry says we should look for ways that iran should be part and all nations should be part of an effort to stop isis.

>> i think we have to evaluate what happened previously as well. taking the steps regarding the regime, we see today that iran is not taking a step against syria. hezbollah is standing with the syrian regime. >> is it more important to stand against isis than it is to overthrow assad at this moment? >> at this moment, we can't really say this is more important than the other. i think we have to analyze this situation. we have to make sure that we dry out the swamp. one part is in syria. the extension is in iraq.

we have to make sure all of the swamp is no longer there. what can the u.s. do? or lebanon or qatar? we work on these matters. we have to end this. >> is it doable? how long will it take? >> i can't tell you how long. but we do have to make a decision. then we can move forward. >> do you believe the split in islam between shia and sunni is as it is today? >> there is significant sectarianism. i don't accept the split between sunni and shia.

i am sad to see that some support this split and i have always told them so. others have not been happy with what i've said in the past. to us, what is important is islam, not whether you are a sunni or shia. this means peace in arabic. islam is a religion of peace and to characterize islam is something that we will not accept. in this respect, they must take part in this effort for peace. they should not adopt a

sectarian approach. in the same way, the sunnis must also work for peace and they, too, should not believe in sectarianism, and they have to say so and they have to show it in their actions. we work with religious affairs and the international islamic scholars. turkish scholars are also working in this area as well.

>> but you know that isis or isil, they invoke their mission in the name of islam. they take the religion as a rallying cry for their political objectives. they claim it is in the name of islam, and that is how they recruit as well. >> it is impossible for us to accept this approach of isis. what they are doing has nothing whatsoever to do with islam. we are people who are knowledgeable on the issue of religion. our directors of religious affairs have carried out a number of activities and made some statements. this cannot be. the muslim world, the religion of islam cannot be accepted.

what the religion does not accept, what the scholars do not accept, it cannot be how you characterize the religion on the word of isis, which is a terrorist organization. they capture an american or british person and they behead them. they don't have that right. ♪

>> i want to take you to the recent conflict between israel

and hamas. what was the result of that conflict? >> we have to remember that israel has the infrastructure, the defense, the ammunition and atomic bomb. it is a powerful country. does gaza have any of those capabilities? no. neither does palestine. now, what happened in this process that began with the west bank was extended to gaza and about 2300 people were killed, between 7000 to 8000 were injured. the question i ask is, could there be a humanitarian aspect to this? they are introducing new settlements there, and despite that fact, they are still being built. if it had died in some other

-- does israel own this territory? 15 journalists died there. if they had died in some other place, all hell would break loose. in our country, there was the event with a lot of people attacking turkey. there were no journalists that died or were killed. it it was as if all hell broke loose. there is still no warning made or statements made against the people in palestine or gaza that live in a place like an open-air prison.

they cannot get the food, the medication, the materials they need to survive. many buildings have been destroyed. how will hospitals be rebuilt? u.n. buildings have been hit. they have been destroyed. how will those buildings be rebuilt? we do not talk about israel and its policies. 2300 gazans died. how many israelis died? they say hamas fires missiles. hamas fires missiles. how many people died as a result? how many buildings demolished? >> you said israelis have no conscience, no honor, no pride. those that condemn hitler day and night have surpassed hitler in barbarism. clearly, you didn't mean that. >> what i said had to do with the israeli government, not with the people or the jewish people. on this subject, the jewish people in turkey.

look at our history. in our history, we have had a special relationship with the jewish people. much more so than other country. when they were expelled, we opened our doors as a country to them. 500,000 jews at that time arrived at the ottoman territory. so i think we have to see the facts for what they are. what hitler did, we condemn that holocaust. i was a prime minister that declared anti-semitism as a

crime against humanity when i first became prime minister. those who tried to characterize me in the opposite direction are doing so for their own reasons. hitler was engaged in the holocaust and now, unfortunately the same is being done by the israeli administration to the arabs in palestine. >> you believe what happened in gaza is comparable to the holocaust? >> yes, of course. do you have any doubt? do you have any doubt? the israeli government, the administration is carrying out genocide at the moment. it is genocide of the arab people, the palestinians. it is not others being killed. it is the palestinians dying there. how can we not see this fact? who is being killed?

>> the israelis would argue that they were fired upon and every nation has to respond and they responded in order to stop -- that is the explanation. but clearly that is different from genocide, the holocaust in which 6 million jews were gassed. >> they may have been killed in gas chambers, yes. i say that is a crime against humanity. what is happening here, millions of palestinians are in exile. they have had to leave their homes and also tens of thousands of palestinians who are subject to conventional arms and are being killed by the israeli administration. how can we turn a blind eye to this? >> this is what we are against.

>> let me ask you in respect to where israel is today and the relationship with turkey. you said to me that you were hopeful in a matter of weeks that there relationship had been established and you thought it would make it's way to full recognition. has it done that? >> my hopes were in vain unfortunately because of mr. netanyahu.

because he had made an apology regarding the ship and support with president obama and there was an agreement to be paid. there was also some discussion ongoing about the lifting of the blockade. at which point, bombs started dropping in gaza. how can we, at that point, come back to normalization? unfortunately, they demolished it at that point. this is very positive. there is a cease-fire at this moment. but i want to render the cease-fire permanent so that we can establish a new world in the region. since the presidency of mr. bush, we have been supporting a two state solution and that is what we should achieve now. israel and palestine. if we say it will only be israel, it doesn't work. colin powell was tasked with resolving this issue and i said to president obama that we are ready to do whatever we can.

we did convince hamas on this point and they, too, arrived at this positive point. the goal should be to stop these killings. if that happens, we are certainly ready for normalization. as these events are ongoing, not a single jewish person suffered any harm. those are the kinds of things that need to be appreciated as well. >> do you consider them as bad as isis? when you look at them, do they propose the same threat isis does? >> the alternative to terrorism isn't terrorism.

if an action can be defined as terrorism it doesn't matter which organization is perpetrating that. >> you are now president of your country. with new responsibilities. in every conversation we have had about turkey and the european union, you expressed your hope that one of the ways that participation in the european union would be positive is that turkey could be a bridge to the islamic world. where do you stand on that? what is necessary between the west and the islamic world and somehow stop the kind of conflict we are seeing now take place?

>> the islamic world, especially turkey's desire to be part of europe stems from this fact because of turkey becomes part of the european union, this would have meant that relations between the eu and the islamic world would be carried out in a much better way. we have seen this expectation on part of the islamic countries whenever we have spoken with them. unfortunately, the eu is still engaged in delay tactics and this is sad to see for us. our expectations are on the rise now and i'm hoping that efforts on the part of the presidencies of the eu and on the part of friends of turkey would be important trying to ensure that the channels for negotiation

are opened and closed in the coming year so that turkey becomes a member of the eu and has the same responsibility of bridging the gap between the islamic world and the european union. >> i didn't mean to raise a question of membership in the eu so much as the role in the region that turkey can play today. because there is great conflict in the region today. and what it is that you see and hope turkey can do. it is powerful, it has a strong military, it has influence in the islamic world.

>> political, military, social, diplomatic responsibilities that turkey may take upon itself are all very important. turkey has the capacity to conduct any of those tasks. we have the capacity to do this. and we have done so in the past and we continue to do so and we will continue to do it in the future. turkey has institutionalized itself in accordance with the eu institutions and mechanisms. and the work that we have carried out in turkey, we have achieved all of this. i hope that this process can go on much more swiftly and we achieve our goals. we have a role in the alliance of civilizations and our aim is to prevent the clash of civilizations and work with an alliance of civilizations and we would continue to do so. >> are we closer to the clash of civilizations today because of

what we are seeing happening in the region? >> unfortunately, we see members of the same civilization and we have to revisit this issue. and people living in the region and countries elsewhere should not be testing each other. they have to work together

towards peace and they have to talk about what they can do to ensure peace in the world. and if we can do that, we can ensure an alliance of civilizations. the ballot boxes, that is something we have to achieve. >> this reminds me of the theme you have talked about.

the dangers of sectarianism and the necessity of democracy. when you went to cairo. and that turkey should be the model. >> i had also emphasized secularism. the muslim brotherhood had a different approach. after my statement, they are understanding change because i said the state ought to be equidistant and it should provide assurances do all of the different groups and that is how i define secularism. it is very important. my political party at the time for the program. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. ♪

♪ >> live from pier three in san francisco, welcome to "bloomberg west," where we cover the global technology and media companies that are reshaping our world. a new report says apps are crashing in ios 8, more frequently than with ios 7. and another step forward for elon musk and spacex. the spacex dragon capsule has just docked at the international space station on its first