♪ >> from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." charlie: we begin with david petraeus talking about the rise of isis in iraq and syria and the lessons he learned there as commander in iraq and afghanistan. how bad is the situation on the ground in iraq and syria today? the impression is that isis is gaining ground and cities. david: it is worrisome.

the enemy gets a vote. that is what has happened in ramadi. iraqi forces lost the provincial headquarters and headquarters of the and bar operational command. this is an operational and strategic setback, a significant one. i think ramadi will be retaken. this is a moment at which use it back and say, what do we need to do in the military arena, what do we need to do in the political arena? you've got to make the gains on the battlefield, on the front rounds -- lines. isil is almost a conventional military force, but the center of gravity is in baghdad. we need to determine to we have the right structures, the military structure to complement the embassy the diplomatic structure, who is there to work with the ambassador, do we have the right people in the right organizations to enable those iraqi leaders who are inclusive and who will bring about the kind of political change that

brings sunni arabs back into the fabric of iraqi society? this is about having a new anbar awakening. that is what has to take place even as we take the fight to the enemy on the battlefield. charlie: is it a threat to the united states? david: isis clearly is a threat to the united states and our allies in the region. it is also into north africa, trying to recruit in afghanistan and pakistan. charlie: when you look at what is necessary to do, we need a new strategy. you say it is part military, part political. does it mean more american participation at any level? david: i think it does. i don't know that you need a whole new strategy. you need to look at what you have, figure out where you need to augment do we need to bring advisors down to brigade level, for example?

should there be teams of joint tactical air controllers on the ground? charlie: should there be? david: i think there should be. there is risk, but there's also risk of not winning this fight. it is a very important fight against a very threatening organization, an extremist organization of considerable magnitude that has stake in its name. this wants to control territory and that is what they are trying to do. charlie: can it happen if the iraqi troops have neither the will to fight or the ability to fight? david: we know they have the will to fight if and only if there is good leadership they can count on and they think someone has their back. the troops at ramadi fought for months and then came this moment where apparently there was some confidence that was shaken and they decided to retreat. they weren't completely defeated in that sense, they retreated to fight another day. that is not what you want to do.

we have got to look at this and ask what could have been done better, how can we help our partners better. and then what else can we do to help with the reconstitution of the forces, the train and equip efforts, getting the antit-tank weapons into their hands, but don't forget a dad. --baghdad. the complementary piece where our leadership and diplomatic leadership can help shore up prime minister ahmadi and help with the leaders who are going to be inclusive, who will get the sunni arabs back into the fold instead of feeling alienated as they came to feel in the years after we left. charlie: if push comes to shove, should we let iraqi militia with connections to iran participate in order to defeat isis? david: that is something we don't want to do. charlie: that we might have to do it. david: that would be a very last

resort. i think that's not in question. they will not get to the outskirts of baghdad. iraq has a lot of capability. what we need to do is look at what the concepts are that we have determine how we need to augment, refine, change them but in particular, focus not just on the military. you can't kill or capture your way out of an industrial-strength insurgency like this. that is what isil has come to be or you need the political component. without that -- charlie: the political component is support in baghdad that will enlist the support of arab tribes in iraq. david: that's right. charlie: propaganda war. isis is using social media like no one has seen before.

they are getting recruits from around the world that are replenishing their forces. what does the west or coalition have to do to bring to bear a combat in the world of ideas? david: a lot more. there is clearly a war of ideas being fought in social media and other places in cyberspace. we have to contest in that war of ideas. all of the coalition countries -- this is where those cooperation council studies come in so importantly. it is quite impressive that they are in this fight. huge coalition. charlie: should they put their own troops on the ground if necessary? david: no. you do not want neighboring forces inside iraq or syria. iraqis can handle it with the assistance we are providing, the intelligence, surveillance reconnaissance assets, planning and precision fires from the air.

charlie: has our combating them online and in social media been to insufficient by definition, because they are recruiting people from around the world? david: clearly. you have the numbers to prove that. there's no question about that. empirically, that war is not going well. charlie: are we winning or losing at this moment? charlie:david: if you are not winning, you're probably losing. it is arguable in iraq. we will win again in iraq. iraq can be handled. i think it can be kept intact. we have got to do more in syria. and we have do more in some of the other areas. charlie:this war has become longer

because of the advent of the islamic state. charlie: what if aleppo falls? david: you would have the biggest city before all the population went away -- in syria, thereof already been 225,000 syrians killed. millions are displaced outside the country, millions more in the country. the fall of aleppo would be an enormous victory for the islamic state. in this war of ideas, nothing succeeds like success. if you want to attract jihadis they want to go with the winner. we've got to show that isil is not a winner. charlie: all we can do is provide a battle of ideas, air support with americans on the ground have been directing air support, and also the arms for them to do it. david: in syria we have to help get that ground force going.

this is an effort that needs to be shot with steroids. the forces there are insignificant, and we have to figure out if there are other allies and partners we can enable on the ground in syria. as we saw in kobani when the syrian kurds made their stand against the islamic state, our air power hammered them despite the determination of the extremists. charlie: there are people in the political world who will say if the u.s. had left troops in iraq, we would not be watching the rise of isis. david: i supported leaving troops. charlie: [indiscernible] david: i would like to have tested the proposition, but it is by no means certain. there were other agreements made at the time with president obama support that were not consummated and require no boots on the ground, no uniforms, it

would've helped enormously. even those were not allowed to be brought to bear. i was involved in that, and there is no guarantee that having them on the ground would have changed everything. it would have given us better situational awareness, better infrastructure for what we are doing now, and a lot of other positive features. no one can guarantee that. ♪

charlie: for the past 50 years he has been a pivotal figure in french and european politics. he was president of france from 1974 to 1980 one, also one of the architects of the european union and presided over the convention on the future of the eu that drafted a constitution for europe. although the constitution was rejected in 2005, he continues to actively lobby for further european integration. i am pleased to have him back at this table. welcome, sir. let me talk about europe first. you have the crisis in the eurozone of the greek debt. guest: greece as a country is not very important in the eurozone. they should not have been a

member. we are 28 countries. europe is the most fragmented continent in the world. important country like sweden or the czech republic denmark -- charlie: why don't you think the greece issue is significant? do you worry what will be the consequences if greece leaves the eurozone? guest: there will be very little consequences. i support a solution which is not considered at this moment is to let greece have again a national currency. they can keep the euro for

international conduction they must pay their civil servant, social systems, with the local currency. why? greece needs to have a guarantee. they need to have it. the euro is strong. it is still a strong currency. it cannot be devaluing it. the solution would be the bank

of greece can issue a new currency. if everything goes well, you will come again. charlie: what about david cameron, who was just elected in a very strong way, to the surprise of many? valery: brilliant. not a surprise for me. charlie: you thought he would be doing that well? valery: i thought he would be elected by a significant margin. charlie: the constitution, he wants it to reform. it is in the mutual interest that great britain stays in the union. it is good for great britain, good for the open union, both.

both have interests to stay together. many of them could be satisfied. it supposes negotiation which has not started yet. france should support some of the british demands. the new opening by angela merkel two days ago -- normally there will be change in the open union, in the direction. charlie: you met with the

president of russia, who is engaged in one way or the other of supporting some insurgents in ukraine, in eastern ukraine. tell me what you think he is doing, and did he satisfied -- satisfactorily answer your questions? valery: yes, we had a long conversation, like here. open. he told me something you will repeat, which is very important that he accepts the external border. he is not asking for a change. you can easily problem by itself. it is. it is very badly governed in the last 10 years.

some of the groups are very russian. they speak russian, they are orthodox religion. some of them are near poland. for the moment, they are fighting each other. charlie: what is an acceptable political solution to vladimir putin? valery: very simple, working on it now, is to have a large decentralization system. charlie: what do you mean? valery: with the possibility of autonomous region. you have catalonia in spain scotland in great britain.

that is one party of ukraine that will destroy the other and support the idea of violent fighting in ukraine. the united states should be prudent there. charlie: what does that mean, prudent? valery: not giving the indication that they will support military action. charlie: the point is the military action is coming from those that russia supports in eastern ukraine, not only with arms, but also there has been a captured russian soldier. valery: of course, but you have a long border. if you see the figure, it is an empty country. you have the choice between two solutions.

the east cannot win. charlie: but they want to go to. valery: but they could if they had the russian support. the west is doing some military action into the east which creates community conflict. we have now troops. now on the line, they must be reinforced and they must publish to is doing something, which side.

and then finish the new negotiation. charlie: do you approve of what the russians did in crimea? valery: yes. charlie: you approve of what they did? valery: please, listen to me. crimea is russian. at the end of the war, when stalin convinced conference to finish the war, where did he convene it? in crimea. yalta is in crimea. kathryn the second, the famous potemkin, and the two kids.

there are points you can debate. it is where crimea was annexed by russia. it was organized by the people. the full majority of crimea in favor of russia. it is distinct from the ukraine question. charlie: you are suggesting if there is a country in which the people would like to vote to change their nature and their association, that is ok as long as the people vote for it? valery: yes.

charlie: but it is not ok if there is some element of force that is used? valery: yes. it must be done in a regular way, not improvisation. charlie: tell me about putin himself. what does he want is a question on the minds of most people in the west. valery: first is intelligent man. [inaudible] with a strong will. he has been very shocked by the dislocation. now it went down. charlie: he said the worst thing

that happened in his life was that. he will try to rebuild the russian influence. valery: yes. why not? the european do not support him with the public opinion. they want to have relationship with russia. charlie: does he consider it a european country? this prudent consider russia a european country -- does putin consider russia a european country? valery: absolutely. charlie: he talks about his relationship with asia. valery: he is speaking about developing a relationship with china because they have a long border. i told him it cannot be symmetrical of what you have to do with. the chinese are different from you.

they have another culture. they have another economy. they will be competitive for russian industries and products. he agreed. under pressure from the united states -- charlie: some believe that what he would like to do is develop a relationship with china in opposition to the united states in the same way that your friend henry kissinger developed a relationship with china in opposition to russia. valery: yes, but i have told him i do not think it is realistic. russia economically is more advanced than china. charlie: economically more

advanced than china? [indiscernible] charlie: the chinese economy is growing better faster and is not energy dependent like the russian economy. valery: the competition by the chinese will be very hard for the russians. here we have to compete with china and not to get the support on china. i'm convinced, you see the future of russia. charlie: in ukraine, the effort by the ukrainians to have a dialogue with europe that was part of the problem. valery: yes, they cannot be a member of the open union.

we have complications already buy some new members. we will not add new complication. charlie: the dream of jonbenet -- dream for europe, is it alive today, in your judgment? valery: in the public opinion, probably no. it was about refrigeration of europe. europe was split. charlie: exactly. valery: so you understand that the eurozone is in the line of monet's thinking. it is the same project, and it will succeed. valery: are the sanctions -- charlie: are the sanctions

against russia having an impact? do you favor them? valery: they are having an impact. i did not like the way they were -- their definition. [inaudible] it hurts the russian economy but it hurts hours also. we are both losers in this event. at this moment, that cannot be changed. i think at the end of this year coming at the end of 2015, we should end them. valery: end of 2015 should end

them. let me turn to french politics. charlie: what do you think of francois hollande? valery: i have a rule. i never comment on my successors. i think it's unfair. charlie: there have been interim people since he were president for goodness sakes. -- you were president, for goodness' sake. valery: i am in the line of degaulle. absurd that france is not in a good position. charlie: does the rise of lapen worry you? valery: not much. preoccupation, but it's not a very serious threat.

all over europe you have movement, movement of protests. some are on the right, some on the left. in spain it is the left. in france it is the right. in poland it is the right. about 15% of people disapprove of modern politics. usually they are people of simple life so they cannot be addressed to harshly,. charlie: can france have a modern economy as long as it has the level of statism? valery: no. we need to have a window of freedom. we need it. if we do it, very quickly

things will burgeon again. we have good people, good engineers. of course, the constraint of the administration the weight of the administration should be changed, must be changed. charlie: what is interesting is the french foreign policy. you are foreign minister in the p5 plus one and the irani and the irani in negotiations it appears is taking a tougher stand than secretary kerry. in other words, he has raised serious questions about the agreement. valery: there are complex problems. charlie: the does seem to be a

reasonably muscular french foreign policy at play. you saw what you did in libya. you saw what you did -- it is been continued by hollande. valery: [indiscernible] charlie: you would not say so? valery: no. in a more prudent way, in africa of the west, the sub-saharan region, but i think the french people are of a long and storied tradition. we put an end to our war culture, warrior. it is finished.

now i think that question should be addressed in a simple and responsible way. if we take the number of victims on the period this number is rather limited. even the legal points of freedom of expression, of private lives that must be taken into consideration. charlie: there were not that many deaths at charlie hebdo but it deeply shocked france. valery: first because we are an

emotional country. there were two elements. one was the freedom of speech and the other one was to kill journalists, because to come with war guns and shoot them shocked deeply the french people. charlie: do you worry about china and its ambitions? valery: no. i have much interested in china. i go there usually once or twice a year. i have studied the language, the culture. i know many people there.

i understand the historical trend, the behavior of the west and china in the 19th century is a scandal. it was made in a very harsh way for cynical reasons. they had their pasts, very difficult. they went through a change of regime. they had a civil war, japanese occupation. charlie: and now they have a young, vigorous leader, teaching ping -- xi jinping. valery: no one knows how to govern 500 million people.

election cannot be the solution. you can't have a campaign from one billion. charlie: one thing is clear, they have committed to the party. valery: yes, for the moment. it is a sort of bi-political system. it gives a broader base. the inquiries of the party, the arrests made by the party -- justice is behind.

they need to have a future organization in whose legal part -- charlie: a rule of law. you have spent many years on this earth. you have been president of your country. at one time you were president of the academy francais, a remarkable group of artists which just announced a new member from haiti. what worries you the most? what do you see happening? your friend henry kissinger talks about world order and disorder. and you think what is most troubling today? valery: four france or the world? charlie: the world. valery: it is a new sort of violence which is not war.

it doesn't exist in other parts. i hope they will be understanding of what the world really wants. so how to have a stable relationship with the muslims as we had in the past, with persia and turkey. in the western world there is no

serious danger. in the center of the world, they are short of irruption. american institutional's published that in 15 years of time, the number of muslims in the world will be over the number of christians. which means the change of balance in the world very important. charlie: what is also relevant is that it is the rise of nonstate actors. valery: yes, it's true. one, globalization as it has been made by the u.s. went too

fast. it should have been a slow process. if we are were organized -- secondment -- second element is the social network communication. it changes the postures of people. not of leisure's people. they think they can have a safe on everything. charlie: it's a pleasure to see you. back in a moment. ♪

charlie: richard reeves is an award-winning journalist and the author of more than a dozen books about politics and history. he is a senior lecturer at the university of southern california. i'm pleased to have him back at the table. welcome back.

let's talk about the book and a little bit about politics 2015. i'm always interested in what brings a good writer with a broad experience to a particular story. to read a book about it, not a magazine article. richard: i have always been fascinated by the story. i lived part of the time in california. if you are going skiing in mammoth and those areas, you just will buy the gatehouse -- g o by the gatehouse. people in the backseat would say, isn't that where they kept the japanese? it was. but the other part of it was, all the laws that made this possible are still on the books. we could round up the muslims, the border crossers, whoever tomorrow with the same laws and

probably with the same negative results. charlie: negative results means what? richard: i go back to the fact of what happened -- the camps were in a rock. -- like iraq. it was easy to get in, hard to get out. and hawaii we did not incarcerated population. we did in the mainland united states. when the time came we realized we had made a mistake in 1943 only 1200 kids, young men from the camps, enlisted. 20,000 and hawaii surrounded the recruiting office -- charlie: because they had not been interned. the japanese-americans were patriotic -- richard: the japanese-americans

were patriotic. they allow themselves to be put in what amounts to concentration camps because they thought that was their debt to the country. after three or four years of living in the wilderness in terrible places, yes some of them had turned against the united states. charlie: you say it is the best and worst of america. why is it the best of america? richard: it is the best of america because -- what is america about at its best, it is redemption. one result of what earl warren one of the great villains of this book -- the attorney general of california -- he was arguing the reason there was no japanese sabotage was because they were waiting for a big one and the instructions from tokyo. 15 years later you read his

works organizes legal segregation in america. it is because of this, i'm sure. the thing that makes me sure about it was california does these extensive oral histories of their governors. warren's was six days. on the sixth day, the interviewer said no, mr. chief justice, i would like to talk to you about the events of 1942. warren broke into tears and walked out of the room and never came back. he knew. charlie: you have said here that what has pushed america forward is not the values of the forefathers, what has pushed america forward from generation to generation is the blind faith

of each new wave of [indiscernible] richard: that is what i absolutely believe. even leaving aside slavery and the indians -- we've brought the chinese into building railroads northern europeans into farm in the north, midwest jews irish need not apply. in each case we treated these people as if they weren't us until they were us, and they are us now. the people in this book, the people who came aboard and ellis island, every place else, that is us. that is our greatest strength. charlie: they get enough here in and they have a political impact, that is what happens. richard: if you look at europe today, the problems they are having with that, we don't with

those problems. of all the people in a book like this who are at rifle point rounded up, now are some of the most important people in the country. charlie: like? richard: harvey at 10 oh, daniel in a way. charlie: who later received the medal of honor, didn't he? richard: he lost an arm and received a medal of honor in italy. japanese-americans were quite different than the others. there is one other thing. these places were in the middle of nowhere. temperatures ranged from 120 in the summer to -30 in the winter. in heart mountain, wyoming, a local scoutmaster -- there were scout troops.

the japanese-americans turned them into little america with boy scout troops and baseball leagues. the scoutmaster decides to bring his troops for what the scouts call a "camporee" at one of the internment camps. there's going to be an american and japanese american in each pup tent. the american was alan simpson. the japanese american was norman into. both later politicians. and friends for life. that friends for life is what made america work. charlie: sharing a pup tent will do that for you, won't it? there is also heroes and villains. cordell hall was a villain. richard: right. charlie: what was fdr? richard: a villain in this case,

a great man, one of the greatest of men. he had real flaws and impatience and stupidity and he believed in eugenics. he believed if you look at white house archives now in the internal debate that the japanese were aggressive because their skulls were shaped differently than caucasians goals, and that it would take 2000 years for them to reach the civilized level of people like you and me. that was ridiculous. a lot of people who grew up in the 1920's believed in that stuff but also, his advisers were from the smithsonian institution, who also believed -- i have looked at the part about roosevelt talking about castrating all the germans, and that would've taken a lot of

effort, but he had other things on his mind. charlie: that is what the nazis talked about it -- talked about before they talked about the holocaust. richard: in east tokyo and berlin -- this was not a big story in the united states -- it was a big story in berlin, and a big story in tokyo what are we doing that is different from the americans, putting all these people under machine guns and things and barbed wire? at the end, it is an american story on both sides of the barbed wire. in this case, we resolved it. charlie: that is one reason why john mccain was tortured. richard: on torture, right. ask a man who knows. charlie: who are the heroes? richard: the young attorneys at

the aclu who resigned when roger baldwin, the founder who was friends with roosevelt said they could not bring any cases that mentioned race. these young guys quit and represented these people for free for years including the latin americans, peruvians, and whatnot that we had kidnapped and put in the camps to trade for prisoners. when the war was over, we tried to deport them as illegal aliens. you never had papers when they were brought handcuffed -- they never had papers when they were brought handcuffed to america. then people stole their land, as they stole the land and money of the japanese-americans here. charlie: these are some books you have written in the kennedy years.

"president kennedy, profile of power," one of my favorites, and others. there's a real interest in presidential power. richard: i think i have run out of presidents. charlie: not until i ask you about this one. what is your sense of obama as he gets, as he says, into the last stretch? richard: i think obama is a terrific man. i don't want to get into the stephanopoulos brian williams thing. my daughter is a special assistant to the president. charlie: does she think he's a great president? richard: she does. his personnel policies are terrific. charlie: he knows bright women when he sees them. richard: he's on the right track in relations with other countries. he is not meant to be president.

he's too thoughtful to be president. presidents who survive historically are like harry truman, who operate from the gut. obviously obama operates from a very well honed mind. charlie: where did franklin roosevelt operate from? richard: gut. charlie: abraham lincoln? richard: gut. churchill and lincoln obviously were high iq guys. but that is not the major qualification for president. charlie: good to have you. richard reeves is one of my favorite journalists the book is called "the shocking story of the japanese-american internment in world war ii tilde -- world war ii." it is good to see you. thank you for joining us. see you next time. ♪

.

emily: she took ebay from a 30 person startup to a multibillion-dollar powerhouse. and then lost a race for governor. and now meg whitman faces her biggest challenge yet, turning around struggling giant hewlett-packard. the solution, to split the company in two. joining me, hp ceo meg whitman. thank you for joining me. meg: you are welcome. i am an admirer of your show.