john: hello, i am john mickelthwait. tony blair is the only leader to have won three consecutive general elections. he remains a controversial figure both in britain and the wider world. in an in depth interview, i asked him at his role, donald corbyn, and jeremy about brexit. tony: i think we will remain. of course it is a referendum. , if you look at the opinion polls, it is very close. you've got to be concerned about it.

john: most of the polls seem to show that the old seems to be the ones who are winning to come out and they are most likely to vote. tony: i think there will be a big turnout for this. i think people understand it is a decision with seismic economic consequences. i can't believe people will shuffle this one off. i think we will get a higher turnout than a general election. i may be wrong about that. john: it will be more similar to the scottish referendum in that way? tony: that's what i think. it's one of the situations where you would have to be pretty small minded not to understand its importance. on the assumption that people realize if you remain or leave has got consequences for the country and you as an individual. i would expect people to come looknd vote and probably at the nature of it.

there is some simplicity in the decision. i think you'll get a bigger turnout than a general election. john: are you surprised about the fervor? has it always been there? always do think it has been there but i think british people are coming to terms with what it's all about. they find it confusing. we should remember that when you look at the issues that dominated the last general election, it was only last year and europe is pretty far down the list. even though there was actually an exceptional difference, it made the difference in the conservatives getting in. i think there is a small, relatively small group of people who care absolutely passionately. now the debate has been joined. it concerns the whole country. john: what is your advice to david cameron? i remember in 2005 you went on

the masochism strategy. you let people attack you or ask you questions. do you think he has done enough like that? tony: i think he has fought the campaign you would expect from him and you would want from him. there is nothing more he could do as prime minister. he has put himself out there. he has put the arguments out there. he has taken a strong position . john: boris johnson, has he gone too far? is he somebody you think would be fit to be prime minister? tony: that is not dependent on this vote. i just find it hard to understand how someone who has been the mayor of london can seriously think it is not going to be economically damaging if britain leaves the european union. one of the things that i find strange is when people say i am not quite sure, but i have come down on the side of remain.

this is not one of those decisions. -- should only be for remain leave, rather, if you are absolutely clear. if you're not clear, then don't do it. if you look back on some of the things he has said in the past, it has indicated he thinks it would be wrong for britain to leave the european union. so now he is frankly the most out there campaigner of the leave campaign. i think it's a strange position to find yourself in. if you've been in government and in a sense being mayor of london, that is some situation of government, you know how big this decision is. if britain leaves, the day you will get the beginnings of what will be a serious economic shock to the country. you literally cannot dispute that. you will put them on the table. your entire relationship with the european union has been

over four decades of interlocking trade agreements and service agreements. all of that has got to be renegotiated or scrapped. given that half of our trade is with the european union, how can you not think you're going to suffer a years of economic uncertainty. that is why hard to think -- john: do you find it hard to picture him at number 10? tony: i might find it hard anyway. john: is that what is driving politics in the west, not just brexit. you've got donald trump. you have marine le pen. against the third way? to this extent, you and bill clinton took politics and you melded it with globalization with a cosmopolitan approach to things. now you have that sense of that

all being turned over. has something changed? tony: i think something has changed. the center ground has lost its , what i would call its traction on it's the political debate and we have got to get it back. when i am on both sides of the atlantic, there is a sense among people that they are frustrated with the system. they do not feel the system is responding to their anxieties and concerns. and they want almost, it is about rattling the cage. it is about saying you've got to , listen. what you find when you dig a little deeper on this, what is the consequences if you take a brexit vote or elect donald trump? people kind of almost say, that is the question i'm going to answer. it's about shaking up the system.

it is an insurgent movement of revolt and rebellion. now what happens today in the social -- in the world is social media gives in the ability to mount those movements with speed and at scale. when i was starting in politics, those movements take a long time and now they are very fast and they make an immediate impact. you get a sort of dismissive attitude toward people saying , these situations are very complex, the problem is very difficult, solutions take time. a revolt against that whole strain of political thinking. in the end by the way, if you take these actions, they do have consequences. the only country in the western world that has actually fought this pop -- bought this populism left and right and put it in government, the only country that has done that in the

developed world is greece. the consequences are very obvious. in the end, the leadership that came in split between those people who had come to terms with the reality and those people who just refuse to come to terms with reality. the country has lost several years. the bailout program is more severe than the bailout program they put out. three or four years later, i think in the end that is one response to this. but the other response has got to be from the center ground and you have got to get a radical centrist agenda. you've got to be the changemakers in society and not the guardians of the status quo. john: where do you think that radical center should push now? tony: i think it has got to poke -- push on where you've got to

make globalization work. it's not a policy of government. it's driven by people, the internet, migration. the freedom that people have to travel. it's driven by the way the world works today. the world is coming closer together. john: i also come from a position of defending globalization. it's difficult to explain to people who've lost their jobs or gone through things that they have to wait until things get better. it has a kind of cruel magic. you're bound to lose out. tony: if you just tell them you have to wait until it gets better, that's not a good response. if you say to them, look, there is a way through it. it's around education, infrastructure, making sure we reduce the cost of government through technology. but are able to spend money in different ways. it's about reshaping the way government works. if you say it's about making sure, for example, we as a country reform our public services in a way that allows

you to access better quality education, better quality pair -- care, you can make this argument work for people. what does not work is telling them it's very difficult and you have to trust us. that is not going to work. let's be very clear. the answers are not with the populists. right, they come together in this anti-globalization. it's not going to work. you know it's not going to work. the people who are unemployed and some of the seaside town in the u.k. is not the answer they are giving. the answer is better education and infrastructure and linking the country up in a better way. this is the answer. john: up next, more with tony blair. ♪

john: two things which always come up in this debate, one is immigration.

the other is the fact that some people have gotten very wealthy out of this. on the immigration side, you where the person who allowed people to come in back when poland and others joined the european union in 2004. do you regret that open door approach now? do you think that is something which is come back and bit us? think -- tony: i think you look back in hindsight and i understand the criticism. our economy in 2004 was booming. we had a requirement for people to come in. in any event, free movement is a principle of the european union. john: we could have put restrictions on it or staged it. tony: you could have staged it. where you are today, you would still be in the same position. however, what is important to realize is freedom of movement is a two way street. it's true from the enlargement

of the european union, you had more migration into the u.k. one of the things that has been missing from this debate is the advantage to having an enlarged european union. enlargement happened underneath but it was the policy of margaret thatcher, of john major. if you look at the world today and you look at the anxiety people in eastern europe have about resurgent russian nationalism, we should be glad that these countries are bound in the eu. compare poland today and the ukraine. who is in the better state? better for the polish people but for us in the u.k. in the end, these debates, it's important to get across to people that when these decisions are taken, they are not taken lightly. they are taken for major strategic reasons of our own national interest. john: it is also something to do

with the way the elite explain things. we thought it would only be 15,000 people a year. it's been hundreds of thousands. was there a fault in that? tony: the forecast was wrong because a lot of people came. people came because people here were employing them. if you took eastern european labor out of the national health service, you would have to replace about 100,000 people. some of the people come in on short-term contracts. for example, in the agricultural sector in the u.k., they are not taking somebody else's job. of course i understand the fears about immigration. in 2005, i fought my last election with immigration as the critical issue. i am completely sympathetic on this issue about how communities get changed by these waves of migration, but the answer is not to shut our borders down.

if you do that in the european single market, you're going to cause a huge amount of problems for this country. by the way, if you want back into the single market, for example norway is accessing single market, there is a demand that we allow people to have access. norway, they have got their free movement of people even though they are not in the eu. they don't have the ability to fashion its rules. if you look at these arguments rationally, they stack up very strongly. i understand, we have gotten to a somewhat absurd situation where someone is an expert, that's the worst insult you can level at somebody. if some institute produces a report that shows people coming into our country pay more in taxes than they receive in benefits by a long way and they experts,ssed as rational evidence is a good

thing to work on. john: you understood the politic gain in this country probably better than anyone else. when you look at what you handed over to gordon brown, do you recognize that today? tony: the fate has been transformed by this post financial crisis anger and angst. i also think social media is a revolutionary phenomenon. it is in itself a revolutionary phenomenon because it creates these waves of sentiment and emotion and movement. it is clear to me they can take over a political party. we are an example. it is not clear to me that they can take over a country, not a major successful, developed western nation. we will see. john: we will come back to america in a minute. there is an issue of the super wealthy. the immigration is one issue. the unfairness of it, people say people seem to get rich of regardless of what happened. do you understand that side of

it as well and do you think that is new or is that an old thing revisited? tony: there is that feeling for sure. when you look at the figures, those people at the very top of done much better. that is absolutely true. i'm not sure they haven't always done that, but nonetheless, the way wealth has been created and you can point to people with hedge funds. john: it is an inevitable part of globalization. if you have a global economy, the winners of the top going to be bigger winners than they were before. you once used david beckham as an example. he is able to make more money because the market is bigger. tony: again, it depends that people think it's worse if they make money in business and if they are a film star or a football star. there is a certain lack of rationality in that. i think that's an issue.

i think it is much more of an issue because people feel that as it were, that low middle class and working class, if you look back over these last years, the labor market is a lot more uncertain for people. again, my solution to that, because i think the labor market is going to carry on i think , we've got a new technological revolution around big data, perhaps around artificial intelligence. you will find the service sector is starting to get disrupted by providing services to people which are much more individualized. i think you are going to find a huge disruption and a greater economic insecurity. the issue is the answer to it. i know this makes people anxious. the answer is not to protect a world that is changing inevitably as a result.

governmentult not of but this is the way the world is changing. john: there is this question of what you do for people at the bottom of society. the other is the philip green argument, that some people at the top seem to be able to get away with a great deal and that causes enormous resentment. tony: you find people say people responsible for the financial crisis, there was no penalty paid by them. actually, if you look at most of the main banks in the u.k. i think you will find that all ceos are different. there were thousands of job losses in the finance sector. i think ultimately this is more about how people feel about their own circumstances and i think they feel that -- when i was growing up there was an escalator that you thought you got on by hard work and endeavor. if you carried on working hard, your children would probably get

that are opportunities than you, do better than you. i think there is a feeling on both sides of the atlantic that that has stopped. i think the answers to that are difficult. for sure they are not about , trying to stop the world changing because you can't. it's about equipping people for that era of change. that is a much more difficult argument to make. it's also the only one that works. john: one thing on green. do you think he should be stripped of that knighthood? tony: i don't think about that at all. you have also got to realize timeover a long period of there is in many jobs created in , the u.k. john: up next, tony blair on jeremy corbyn. ♪

john: tell us about your sense of purpose in the labour party. jeremy corbyn has talked about trying you for war crimes if you were found guilty of them in the report. you said he is a dangerous experiment. is the labour party in a worse state in terms of its unity and direction than it was under michael foot when you first started? that leave aside the fact i am accused of being a criminal for removing saddam hussein who by the way, was a war criminal. jeremy is seen as a progressive icon as we see the people of bombed and starved into submission and we do nothing. the issue to me is what is the best way you take the traditional values of the left and apply them to the modern world?

it's always been that. whether it's foreign policy or it is domestic policy, the question is how do we improve people's lives? look when we were in government, , we did improve people's lives. the minimum wage did an enormous amount to cure the evils of loki. if you take one example of foreign policy away the , international department of development that we started and that we funded, that helped millions of people around the world. it is probably regarded as the foremost development agency in the world. progressive politics is about being in power and finding modern solutions to the modern challenges of the world. it's not just about expressing your protest or anger about the people that are in power. john: it is not just an emotion.

it is about having some degree of purpose. tony: it's about understanding that unless you are prepared to take the responsibility of power there are two types of , politicians. there is a guy whose face is on. the placard. that's me. hate that guy. you are the person in power making difficult decisions. you become a figure of controversy and people protest against you. that's my type of politics. you are the face on the placard. jeremy is the guy with the placard. he is the guy holding it. one is the politics of power and the other is the politics of protest. if you want to change people's lives, you've got to be the politics of power. john: how well did you know jeremy? did you ever deal with him? tony: he has a good constituency

and i have nothing against him personally, but in the end, the leader of the labour party has to be an instrument of power because you cannot help people otherwise. if you are worried about those people who haven't got opportunities, who are in dead-end jobs, how are you going to help them if you are not in power? when we protest against the conservative cuts, cuts to what? things we introduced in government. john: on the other side, on david cameron, it seems that he is going through some of the same experiences that you did, not having unity. what advice do you give him? tony: do your best. this is politics. today, it's a more difficult profession than it has ever been , i think, even more difficult than when i left office.

the interaction between conventional media and social media -- john: is it a more difficult job? tony: the wall of noise around him as he makes decisions is larger and louder than anything before. this is probably a very politically incorrect statement. twitter and all these things, if you are not careful they create -- you read the stuff on twitter. it's 140 characters. they try to sum up foreign policy. believe it or not, you can't. people have these very strong opinions. if you are a politician and trying to lead a country, leadership is always calibrating in front of people. you don't want to be so far in front that you look behind you and no one is there.

john: isn't that what joins together both jeremy corbyn and donald trump? tony: it is the same phenomenon, left and [laughter] i have probably been indiscreet enough. john: what about how you persuade people to change away from that? what do you think happens david cameron post a random -- post-referendum? is a realink there opportunity for him because i think he has secured that, settle that. he is not standing in the next election, so -- john: should usurp all the way -- should hend serve all the way through the end? tony: he has a real opportunity and itide leadership

could do it domestic issues and national security, but as a whole, the issue is how you that meet whatns people conceive of as the need for radical change. what is making that change sensible and in tune with the modern world and not in contrast with it. if policies go against the grain, you end up in a cul-de-sac. john: we have looked at the different issues and the cruel reality of globalization. how you try toat make written -- make britain a more cosmopolitan place. those things are in retreat. tony: i find it disconcerting and discomforting sometimes.

you've got to hold your position and if you think it's right, you see it through. ultimately, if you take a city like london, which in the time i was in office really came into its own as a great city. you know we won the bid for the , olympics. it's become a great multicultural, iconic city in the world today. what makes it great is this ability to go across the boundaries of race and culture and be socially liberal around issues like gay people and race and gender. i think this idea of a culture that is based on values, it is still where most people really want to be. what is necessary and what is obvious is when i was in office,

there was a fair degree of consensus behind that deal of the world. today, it is under strong attack from the left and right. that's not completely new. the context in which it is happening is much deeper and more powerful than before. we're going to have to go out there and construct an agenda for 2016 and the years to come that is about a radical center in making change. but making change that helps the modern world work and it does not say stop the world. john: do you see anybody in the younger ranks who looks like they can carry forward that claim? tony: i think there are lots of people. in the and, however much under attack, there is strong support for this position. without choosing names, when i look of the younger generation

of the labour party, there are some fantastic people. really excellent and strong people. it takes a lot to go into politics these days. you have to read a bit of the traffic on social media to realize you've got to be a strong-minded person. john: henry kissinger said it's very difficult to prepare for leadership now because you live in an era where people grow up and i am sure you made mistakes that you would not jump on now. it's now much harder for people to develop those political skills when you've got social media following every single thing you do. tony: i think because of the difficulty of these positions that we will find a way of adapting to that. they have definitely changed. you have to develop different skills. there is a level, i was going to say rude behavior in politics.

even the politicians in the end , it's a much rougher business. part of a problem with the way the modern world works is if you to a couple of debates on television and there is an audience there, a member of the audience who interrupts you, shouts or stands up and makes some insertion of some sort you , are in a new type of environment politically and it makes it very hard for modern politicians. they will have to adapt to that. they will find a way to do that because in the end these , decisions matter. you can argue what you like about brexit, it matters. john: up next, tony blair on donald trump and the american presidential race. ♪

john: there is another campaign this year in america. you famously found common ground with george w. bush. now the republican candidate who we alluded to earlier wants to trade more with china wants , to build a wall with mexico. he wants to discourage muslims from visiting america. could you find common ground with a president trump? tony: it's not clear to me what the common ground would be. john: that's a very different answer. you managed to find common ground with george w. bush, that implies you would almost find it impossible? tony: the american election is up to the american people. it's not clear to me what these policies really are. if they are some of the things that have been talked about a , trade war with china would be devastating to both sides.

i can't believe that's what he would actually want to do. if you literally say no muslims can come into america, thus not a policy we could go along with. people often forget something like this of president bush, leave aside even foreign policy, george w. bush was in favor of alliance, free trade and strongly in favor of nato. he worked with me on africa and he was the largest life-saving program that any developed a policy has ever had in africa. we worked together on debt relief for the poorest african nations. there were lots of things we could work on together. i have no idea what a trump presidency would look like. john: trump has never had elected office before. george w. bush was the governor of texas. is it easier to find common ground with other politicians?

tony: it's a big change going on with the center right in the center left. you've got quite a lot in common. probably more in common in a strange way than the center left has with the far left in the center right has with the far right. that's the way the world is today. it's one of the curiosities. you've ended up in a situation where there are those of us who are trying to find solutions that are based on values. -- that are not based on values but are based on impractical solutions and sometimes you can find center ground with the common rights. john: you would see donald as part of the same phenomenon? people like yourself and david

are in a different place? tony: we come from different traditions. we will remain in different traditions. i have been a member of the years.party for about 40 for all of that time, i've been in the same labour party as jeremy corbyn. it would not be a shock to people to say my type of politics is different from his. what marks it out as different, in my view, the labour party and the politics of the left has got to be a project of modernization all the time or we are defenders of the status quo. john: hillary clinton is someone who is not exactly in favor of free trade, which she mentioned earlier. she is against charter schools. academies as we would see it. is she someone who is still a

modernizer in the sense you would want? tony: i have no doubt as president she would be a modernizer and a center ground politician. i have known her for many years. i've worked with her closely. i've got enormous respect for her. i am sure the types of policies should want to pursue our practical policies and about america as an engaged power in the world. john: the kind of america and britain that you and bill clinton pushed, do you think that is gone? do you look back and think some of the things we did helped prepare the ground for this in one way or another? tony: we were arguing the case very strongly. also the economy was very , successful. was under him and when i prime minister of the u.k. when

we had 10 years of uninterrupted growth. it was easier to make that case. the financial crisis changed the context in which that debate is happening. it doesn't change the fundamental nature of the debate. you know what i mean? in other words, the idea that really motivates us in the u.s., myself and in the u.k., is to say the world is changing fast. the values around social justice , commitment to equality of opportunity, those values don't change. we have to apply them differently. the world is different. that's the fundamental difference. it was true then and is to now. we are not going to resolve the problems of the financial crisis by shutting down free trade between nations. we are not going to do that. the one lesson that is clear is less free trade means more unemployment and less prosperity.

john: is the rest of the world ready for president trump? you travel a lot. tony: i think it is pretty obvious what the world thinks. the world will, it will come to terms. let's wait and see what they decide. john: do you take into account a president trump when advising people? tony: right now, it's not clear what that would mean. once you get the nominating time out of the way, you get down to a real debate. let's see what happens. the world is uncertain and difficult place today. let's say this presidential election will be watched as closely as any i can remember. john: up next, tony blair and

the middle east. ♪

let's look at the middle east. ,hen you were prime minister america was energetically involved in the middle east, too much some say, do you think it is possible that any kind of resolution can happen without america being more involved? involved on the front, but itinian personally do not think you'll get that resolution with the issue. i spent a huge amount of time on it. i have been to the region to a three a month. i think the key there is in the [indiscernible] is a, there actually

common strategic interests between israel. that door at the moment in is shut in the sense that there is not an enormous amount of open work that is done on it. the key to opening the doors' and -- opening that door is the palestinians. john: do you think it is possible between the palestinians and the prime minister in israel? tony: yes, the important thing to realize is that two things have happened. the first is the anxiety of israeli about how the state's government, so the governance of that palestinian state -- do you have unified palestinian politics in favor of peace? if there is going to be a well-run state, that concerns

the israelis because when you look at the map in this tiny strip of territory, they have to in the region they have at this presence time that it will be safe and secure, so that is the first thing. the second thing is i also think that the majority of people in israel understand that one state with two peoples inside it is going to be a very difficult, if not impossible, task of management. on the one hand, they need to know that this palestinian state is going to be securely governed, but on the other hand, they do understand in principle that two states need one solution. john: can you push it toward that? right, again, right now, the politics are not strong enough to carry on their shoulders the weight of a peace protest. if you involve the region -- john: and possibly the world? tony: and obviously would have

to involve america and europe, but it is the region in my view that is the key player. if they are helping carry this process, and this is why the arab peace initiative might be to reach framework this, if they are involved, then it will give the israelis confidence that they are making peace not just with the pasta and hands but with the region, and will give the palestinians confidence that the evident -- peace not just with the palestinians but with the region, and it will get the palestinians confidence that the evident will be aided in the region. date ally in the region is saudi arabia. you have talked about the poison in the filling is failing.- that

they are trying to bring economic reform to saudi arabia. do you see a change that might [indiscernible] think that it has been one of the most significant changes that has come about in the past years. i think the program of economic change and social change would be of fundamental importance to the future health of the region. john: do you think it can be pushed through? he is a younger man. tony: he is young. the saudi system has been discussed many years. it has gone from being the one that is moving fast, but it is a young population. young people and saudi understanding the change. he is really driving that change . the vision that they set out is

, modern, sensible forward-looking visions but the country. implementing it will be hard, but i think he has the executive capacity to do it. by the way, it is an absolutely vital, strategic interest for the west. john: what about the saudi-iran relationship? it is very cross with america in some ways doing the deal with iran. is that the biggest source of tension in the region in the long-term? the clash between the saudis and a ran? -- and iran? tony: i think the longest tension is the need for the region to achieve new based economy and a religiously tolerant society. these are the two big things at the heart of the struggle in the middle east. i think that is far more important, even though i understand all the implications of the pensions -- tensions

between saudi arabia and iraq. is saudis problem with iraq their desire to export the acrostic revolutionary ideology, so it is not with what the americans had them with iran that is wrong, if you put a constraint on the program, that is a plus and not a minus, the problem is what the iranians continue to do within the region is export instability and chaos. in yemen andorting they will do anything they can to put hostility toward israel rather than lead them into a position when they can be part of the peace process, so when you look at what the iranians are doing around the region, it is hostile to her interest and hostile to religious tolerant societies comes of this is a problem frankly. in the end, i think you'll find that the saudi issue it iran is

not to do it sunni versus shiite, it has to do with the impact of iranian policies that is dictated by those who are ultimately fine iran from threats in the region. john: is there any sign of a change in iran admits the nuclear deal? tony: it is really difficult to read. the iranian people are smart, educated and they have the freedom to collect who they want -- to collect, but the truth is they are not. the ultimate power still remains with religious [indiscernible] this and people have different views about this, and it may be that they want to take the country a different direction. i think it is hard to judge. if you look at the religious leaderships and the revolutionary guards of iran,

they are doing what they have always been doing. i think when you look at the roots of all of this terrorism around the region, i think in retrospect, we hugely therestimate the impact of 1979 iranian revolution and shortly afterward the mecca. we have underestimated the impact of those two events on the way the region developed. john: you also talked about underestimating iran's interest on iraq after the invasion. tony: absolutely. iraq with tooe in much iranian influence, i think we could still use that because in the end, the iraqis do want to stay where they are. and inou have inquiries the past few weeks, you have apologized about the

intelligence, apologize for not realizing what would happen once ofan left and you put a lot blame on that in al qaeda and iran and you say you now understand the middle east better than you did then. do think there is anything you can do to drop a line under this? tony: i have said those things are many years and not just the past few weeks. one of the reasons why when the arab spring's again, i was cautious at that point, precisely because of the experience i went through, so they would be an opportunity to go into these arguments. in the end, the most important thing to understand is how you step back now in the context of the middle east. it is in turmoil in part because it is in transition. the transition is all about whether this dogmatic religious view of how countries should develop triamcinolone what would

be more tolerant, religiously tolerant. john: thank you for joining us. tony: thank you. ♪

♪ narrator: the contemporary art world is vibrant and booming as never before. it's a 21st century phenomenon, a global industry in its own right. "brilliant ideas" looks at the artists at the heart of this, artists with a unique power to astonish, challenge, and surprise. in this program, american painter -- spanish sculptor jame