tune in tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern. we'll showcase the best of today's "state of the union." for here in the united states, fareed zakaria gps starts now. >> this is gpt, the global public square. welcome, everyone. i'm fareed zakaria. i followed hilary clinton, secretary of state, in nairobi. i sat with her and talked about everything from iran to her relationship with barack obama. >> you compared north korea to a teenager demanding attention, and you said i'm not going to give them that kind of

attention. didn't your husband do precisely that, give them the attention they sought with this extraordinarily high-level visit? they were demanding attention and you gave it to them. hick continues to fas nature, even in her role at chief dip lo malt, and there is good reason for it. it is extremely rare to find the candidate has achieved a high rank in the cabinet. it's rare. one has to go back 150 years to find a parallel, and the parallel is quite striking. then the republican party's front runner from the state of new york, a seasoned politician with much experience, was william henry seward. but the party chose to pass over him in favor of a congressman from illinois with a reputation for soaring rhetoric and idealism, a man named abraham

lincoln. he then goes and appoints seward as secretary of state. hillary lost out to a candidate from illinois, and she was voted secretary of state. it was once the rivalled architect, but now she serves as the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and others that make up the imperial administration. the state department was once across the street from the white house, but as the white house staff grew, the department moved in the 1950s into its own building, happily named foggy bottom. the secretary of state who approved the move said distance wouldn't matter much since the secretary was bound to be the chief advisor to the president. it didn't turn out to be true, and over the last 40 years, often the secretary of state has been something of a figurehead while the national security advisor has become the personal

strategist and chief diplomat of the president. when henry kissinger became secretary of state, he found out the way to end the rivalry was to fulfill both positions. in the obama administration, the white house is where the policy is, not the various cabinet agencies. but hilary clinton is different, isn't she? she's still an enormously popular figure in the democratic party, still one of the most admired americans both at home and abroad, and still a woman of formative talent and drive. can she use all that to carve out a role, and what distinctive mark does she want to leave in her position of secretary of state? what is her vision for the world. these are some of the questions i asked her in nairobi, kenya. so let's get started. >> madam secretary, thank you very much for taking time out of

this very hectic schedule to spend it with us. >> thank you, fareed. thank you for coming to nairobi for this opportunity. >> it's my pleasure. north kwor korea. tell us a little more about it. president clinton comes back. he spends three hours talking to the leader of korea. what is his impression? >> we're going to get a full briefing, which we really haven't had a chance to get. >> have you spoken to him on the phone? >> i have spoken to him, but i have a habit of not talking about what i talk to my husband about, but i think we'll hear more about it in the next days and weeks, to share his impressions along with other members of his delegation. obviously, what we're hoping is that maybe without it being part of the mission in any way, the fact that this was done will

perhaps lead the north koreans to recognize that they can have a positive relationship with us. remember when i first went to japan and south korea and china right out of the box as secretary of state, i said, look, we have to get back to the full talk of the peninsula, but we want to take steps to move toward demilitarization with north korea. we are not in any way attempting to threaten north korea in an offensive manner. our concern is what they do internally that then threatens our allies and our partners and eventually us. you know, it's not a good feeling to see them exporting nuclear technology as they have or to continue to build up their own capacity. so we reached out to the north koreans, made it very clear that we wanted to create that kind of

engagement. and they not only rejected it, but they began to take these provocative actions which resulted in the entire international community, most importantly china, saying, wait, you can't do this. >> but the position was unorthodox, and here you have a former president going on what appeared to be a state visit from the way in which he was greeted, being received by north korea's top nuclear negotiator. >> this, as you know, came from the families. this was a message that laura and euna were given by the north koreans which they passed on to their families and former vice president gore -- >> naming him specifically? >> -- naming him specifically. then they passed it on, obviously, as they should, to the rest of us. it was not anything -- you know, bill was interested in, seeking or even contemplating, but, of

course, when vice president gore called, and when our administration evaluated it and began to brief him, if you think it's the right thing to do and if you think i should do it, of course i'll do it. but it is a private humanitarian mission. it was not in any way an official government mission. >> but john bolton said -- >> [ laughter ] >> should i go on? >> no, you really shouldn't. >> they effectively took hostag hostages. >> we've done this so many times before. we've had former presidents do it, we've had city members of congress do it. it is something that is absolutely not rewarding them, it is not in any way responding to specific demands, it is a recognition that certain countries that i think are kind

of beyond the pale of the rule of law hold them subjected to long prison terms that are absolutelily unfair and unwarranted, and maybe it's the fact i have a daughter, but i believed that if we could bring these young women home, we should bring them home. it had nothing to do with our policy, and of course, you mention somebody who, heavens, if president obama walked on water, he'd say he couldn't swim. so it's not something that i think is relevant to what we're trying to do. >> speaking of hard negotiations, the unusual circumstances of your becoming secretary of state -- >> unusual is an understated way of saying it. >> no way around talking about this partnership or this relationship with barack obama, because it is very unusual in the american political context to have the chief rival of a presidential candidate then

become part of his cabinet, and people have often referred to the experience of abraham lincoln picking william henry seward. >> i think in many ways the policies that president obama and i talked about during the campaign were maybe difference in degree, not kind. we have a world view that says america should be leading by example, you know, it's not -- i think my husband said, actually, it's not the example of our power but the power of our example that we want to convey. so when the president asked me to consider this, i was personally very surprised. and i became even more surprised when accounts of the campaign came out and said he had been thinking about it for some time. but i also believe that what i brought to the job, the real

commitment that i have to being not just effective but being part of a team that's effective, which the president knows, we served in the senate together, has really worked out better than anybody could have predicted. i think our personal relationship has, you know, certainly deepened and broadened over the course of the last six to nine months, the time we spend together, the difficult problems we wrestle with. but also the team, bob gates and i, jim jones and i, others who work with us, are really open. and henry kissinger said to me he was very surprised. it was the first administration he could remember where he talked to me and then he talked to somebody in the white house who got the same story. it's because we really try to hash out problems in private. we really understand the significance of the responsibilities that we shoulder at a time of great peril and promise in american

history. and the president is a disciplined, decisive person in the meetings that we have, so it's been a rewarding, professional and personal experience. >> so you've watched two white houses up close. what would you say is the principal difference between the way bill clinton ran the white house and the way barack obama runs the white house? >> i think both of them just bring enormous intelligence to the job. obviously, i know bill much better, but i have seen in president obama as well, you know, just an intelligence that is so compelling to struggle with difficult issues that are put before you. i think that the time in which bill served was so different from the time in which president obama is serving. and in the white house, i think bill is very, you know,

constantly seeking out information, you know, always trying to figure out where to end up, and he does it in a very public way. what do you think, fareed? tell me that. i think president obama is very clear about the process that he wants to lead to his decision. i think, obviously, my husband made a lot of great decisions for our country, and i think president obama is doing the same. >> do you worry, though, that with a president very interested in foreign policy as president obama is, with a national security staff which has his own campaign aides on it that inevitably more power will be there? >> i don't believe that because i'm not a shrinking violet, and my opinions are not only sought but listened to. i appreciate that very much, and we do our homework in the state department so that when we tee

up something we can both explain it and defend it. i have a great team, jim steinberg, jack lowe, everybody on the political side and in these extremely impressive foreign service and civil service people. the white house cannot implement policy. but the partnership between the white house, the state department, the defense department, and occasionally other intelligence departments, both dni and cia and others coming in, you know, is truly a team effort. and i think that the white house in a complicated world with a government as big as ours has to coordinate. i mean, that is one of its principal roles. and i think the nfc is really growing into an understanding of how best to fulfill its role. it cannot implement, it cannot execute, and you need very good,

solid relationships with the rest of the government to make sure that your policies and your -- the direction you want to set are actually followed up on. so when it comes to making policy, i think that we've had such a seamless, ongoing dialogue about everything that, you know, i've been around washington long enough, unfortunately, to know that there will always be people who want to take credit wherever they are or who want to try to take advantage over somebody's disadvantage, but there has been so little of that. and instead it's a really serious professional operation. and it is a sign of weakness. demonstrates, i think, better than any of us could ever say that this iranian leadership is afraid of their own people. mom was diagnosed with moderate alzheimer's.

it was tough news to hear. everything changed. i didn't know what to do. right about then, our doctor mentioned the exelon patch. he said it releases medicine continuously for 24 hours. he said it could help with her cognition which includes things like memory, reasoning, communicating and understanding. (announcer) the most common side effects of exelon patch are nausea, vomiting and diarrhea. the likelihood and severity of these side effects may increase as the dose increases. patients may experience loss of appetite or weight. patients who weigh less than 110 pounds may experience

more side effects. people at risk for stomach ulcers or who take certain other medicine should talk to their doctor because serious stomach problems, such as bleeding may worsen. mom's diagnosis was hard to hear, but there's something i can do. (announcer) visit exelonpatch.com for free caregiving resources.

i think i'll go with the basic package. good choice. only meineke lets you choose the brake service that's right for you. and save 50% on pads and shoes. meineke. on iran, there are a number of people, as you know, who argue that the president and you were too slow to condemn what seems to be fraudulent elections to support the people on the ground because you wanted to preserve the action of negotiating with iran. can you really negotiate with iran at this point? i understand in general negotiations are part of the regime, but practically speaking right now, with ahmadinejad having been in ahing rated in a

very disputed atmosphere, won't you be legitimizing that? >> we didn't want to get through the legitimate protests of the iranian people and the leadership. we knew if we stepped in too soon, too hard, the attention might very well shift and the leadership would try to use us to unify the country against the protestors. and that was -- it was a hard judgment call, but i think we, in retrospect, handled it pretty well. behind the scenes we were doing a lot. as you know, our young people in the state department kept going despite the fact they had planned for a technical shutdown. we were doing a lot to really empower the protestors without getting in the way. and we're continuing to speak out and support the opposition. on the question of engagement,

that has been the president's policy. we have made it clear, we have communicated in a number of ways to the iranian leadership, but we are under no illusions, we were under no illusions before the elections. the president said, look, we can get response. it need to be on a fast track, we can't keep the window open forever, but we are not waiting for someone in iran to say let's talk, we are making a case, we need to have prepared a very robust set of sanctions that we can get the international community to sign off on the way we did north korea. we're also getting together an incentive package. we want to be able to say, here's what's in it for you if you get back in the good grasz

with the international community on your nuclear program, you take appropriate safeguards regarding any kind of civil nuclear program. >> newsweek reporter bahari has now been arrested and is leading what can only be called a stall the show trial. what is your reaction to that? >> i am just appalled at the treatment that mr. bahari and others are receiving. it is a show trial, there's no doubt about it, and it has caught up journalists and clerics and what was the government before the elections, and it is a sign of weakness. it demonstrates better than any of us could ever say that the iranian leadership is afraid of their own people and afraid of the truth and the facts coming out. we've expressed our concern about mr. bahari's confinement and now the trial. as you know, he's a canadian,

and we have certainly told the government of canada that we would be willing to do whatever is appropriate. they have thanked us for that, thanked us for our concern. they believe they should take the lead on that and we're supporting them. let me ask you about afghanistan. it's a little confusing, i think, for americans to understand where we are. it seems there was an afghanistan strategic review. but also, there seems, from a lot of body language, the final troops that president obama would receive. president gates said it would be a very hard sell to receive commanders in the troops. now there seems to be more of a need for troops in the field. secretary gates said, i am open to it. why are the casualties rising and is send morgue trooing more

these circumstances sending more troops into a black hole? >> the strategic review on afghanistan which set forth an approach that we're following made it clear that we needed to integrate military and civilian assets and try to build up the afghan national army and an afghan police force as quickly as possible. what we're finding is that that is the key. you know, if you read the accounts of what our marines and soldiers are encountering, it's tough fighting. they're really taking it to the taliban in areas that have been largely uncontested. >> so you think this is a little like the surge in iraq, that once you start engaging the enemy, perhaps this might even be a sign of success? >> there are certainly military experts and analysts who believe

that, who are explaining to me and to others that what we're seeing is tragic and the loss of life is something that i deeply regret. i mean, nobody is more anxious than the president and i are for us to be successful and to be able to send our young men and women home. but not being on the sidelines, moving out of the comfort zone, remember that british and nato forces have also suffered their greatest losses, is a kind of combat challenge that the taliban has been able to avoid up until now. but no decisions have been made about the military side of our strategy. there is a lot of discussion going on, and what i like about the president in the white house and the team that we have is we're always asking them, what are we doing? could we do it better?

what are the costs? what are the consequences? so there's been no decision, but i think it's important to the american people to know that we have our best commanders, we have our best civilian team, we have our embassy headed by a former general who served in afghanistan but really gets the civilian component of this, to other ambassadors that are there to run our aid program and to work on the political dynamics inside of afghanistan. we're trying to make sure there is as free and fair an election that can be held on august 20. once there is a winner of this election, we have some very hard asks about what we expect from the government of afghanistan. first and foremoest is helping s expedite the training and then take over that responsibility. >> the current administration in

afghanistan, being a useful partner both in terms of trying to do an action and getting it done, or could one potentially see a change in administration in afghanistan is a good thing? >> we're actively impartial in what's going on in afghanistan in terms of the election. i think it surprised people this has turned into a real election. there are campaign rallies, radio and television advertising. i think the incumbent, as incumbents do, has an advantage, but various campaigns are being run by several contestants. so we're just going to do everything we can and make sure the election is fair, and once there is a winner, we will work. now, the previous years of the term of president karzai has been mixed. in some areas we've made a lot of progress and have had a very good relationship. in other areas, it needs improvement. so we will work with whomever the people of afghanistan select, but we will be very

specific about what we need to see coming from the government. >> my daughter is her own person, is very independent, so i will convey this very kind offer.

we'll get back to my one on one with secretary clinton in just a moment. but first, something i want to show you from a town hall meeting the secretary of state held at the university of nairobi. i was the moderator. there was deep, insightful questions from the audience about america's relations with the world and whether our policies toward africa are working, some of which we'll bring you next week. then there was one question from me, which some would consider deep and insightful. this is a news piece i saw while preparing for the town hall, and it involves a very attractive young woman. a city councilman says he offered bill clinton 40 goats and 20 cows for her daughter's hand in marriage five years ago. he is still awaiting an answer, and i thought on this occasion, you know, mrs. clinton, if you think about it --

[ applause ] >> if you think in the current global economic client where asset values have gone down, your stock portfolio is probably down, your husband has had to do a little government work, take time off from the private sector, it's not a bad offer. >> well, my daughter is her own person. she's very independent, so i will convey this very kind offer. >> i've been here for a few days and nobody has offered me any goats or cows. we'll be right back. >> and i'm actually cautiously optimistic that we will be able to tee up negotiations.

you and the president have both communicated to the government of israel that you do

not want any more settlements. you were very clear in your statement, you said no exceptions. yet the government in israel seems to be making an exception. do you intend to in any way tend to enforce that view that the united states has to ensure the government of israel doesn't do what you don't want to do, which is expand the settlements on the west bank? >> we're in the middle of very intense negotiations, and i think both israel and the united states is working in a position of friendship, a durable partnership, a commitment by the united states to the security of israel, which is absolutely imperative and non-negotiable. but there are steps we would like to see all the parties take in order to maximize the chances for success of the negotiations to reach a comprehensive peace that results in a two-state

solution. there are areas where senator mitchell is hammering out the details with the israelis and the palestinians with arab countries, and i'm actually cautiously optimistic that we will be able to tee up negotiations. now, there is no guarantee. these are very difficult issues to resolve. but i think that starting with prime minister netanyahu's important speech where he accepted the two-state solution and laid out -- >> but placed conditions on it to the palestinians. >> both sides do that. that's politics. that's negotiations. i mean, people are likely to end up in a place that makes neither of them happy, and then the rest of us can say, well, that's probably a good outcome. but they start from maximalist positions. that's where people begin. >> relations with israel has been tricky. i give you one example. you extend the prospect of a

nuclear umbrella to israel and potentially other countries in the gulf in the iranian nuclear program. the response from the israeli government was to criticize you, was to say you were giving in your accepting the iranian nuclear program. were you surprised by their response? >> i think they misunderstood what i was saying. i said defense umbrella. i didn't specify what kind of defensive measures might be available to those in the region. but i clearly was sending a message to iran, and we've obviously explained that to our friends in israel, but the message was to make clear to whoever is making decisions in iran these days, particularly about something as important as their nuclear weapons potential, that if they believed that this would give them a more secure

position, a greater capacity to influence results, to intimidate their neighbors, to expand the reach of their idealogy, they were mistaken. that there was no chance in the world that even if they were to obtain that, and it was obviously pref ased and meant in that way because our position remains the same. we do not intend to accept nuclear weapons by iran. we think that is unacceptable. but for the sake of argument and for the sake of their calculus, if that is among their objectives, they need to think again. because they will render their position less secure, they will trigger an arms race in the region, and they will certainly put greater pressure on the united states to extend a defense umbrella in order to hem in and contain them.

so i just wanted to be sure that they were thinking like we were thinking, and i think the israeli response, you know, only looked at the fact that, oh, my gosh, well, does that mean you're changing your policy, that now it's somehow successful? no, of course not. we think this influences the thinking inside iran. >> you just got through a bilateral with china, a strategic set of meetings. do you believe that china is now assured that the united states is managing its fiscal house well, the concerns they have publicly made several times about their fears of an american deficit, management of the dollar? in those discussions, did you get a sense that they're breathing a sigh of relief? >> i think it is fair to say that they are somewhat reassured. i think secretary geithner and larry summers, the economic team, have done an excellent job

of keeping the chinese informed about the steps that we were taking in our government. i think the recent signs of stablizing in our own economy have been reassuring. obviously, we are not out of the woods yet and neither are they, but it is fair to say that the -- in my view, the very large stimulus that both of our countries took, ours in dollar terms bigger than theirs, but as a percentage of their economy, quite significant for them, have really helped to get the global economic engines at least beginning to turn on. the problem, of course, is that both of us may well have been, prior to this recession, on unsustainable pathways. we could not continue to spend the way we spent on an individual level or government

level, and now, of course, our deficit is even greater which the president has said is going to be addressed. they have an export-driven approach, but at some point they're going to have to stimulate internal demand. so -- >> did they make any assurances they were going to do that? right now the government is spending, the chinese government, not the chinese consumer. >> they are taking some steps toward creating what we would call a safety net, some kind of health insurance program, some kind of security type program, because you have to render people secure if you expect them to spend. otherwise they have to kieep their own money under the mattress or in the bank so they can draw on it as they need it. and american consumers spent in a way that kept the global economy afloat for years now. if you think of the global economy before the recession, it was like an inverted triangle resting on the shoulders of the american consumer. but i think spending habits at

least in the short term within our country are not going to be what they were before. so it is in everyone's interest that some of the developing economies do more to generate internal demand. so we face our challenges. i think we have gotten through this first period better than many had expected. we still have, you know, some choppy water ahead, but the president's view is that we inherited this terrible crisis. the fiscal state has been stablized, but now we have to determine which direction we go, and i think we have to go in the direction of lowering our deficit, lowering some of our entitlement programs, encouraging more exporting of our economy which means investing in our manufacturing sect sector, which is part of what i hopes come from the stimulus

bill and clean energy. so there's a lot to be done, but i think the chinese are breathing a little easier. >> speaking of hard negotiations, what message would you have to the senate democrats who seem to be holding up the passage of a comprehensive health care bill, or are they amending it in ways that are useful and productive? >> well, actually, i think that it's a very healthy process that's going on. they are having to hammer out all of their differences, and there are serious differences in viewpoint, for example. but what the president has said, and what i believe is the right approach is that this can't be put off any longer. back in '93 and '94 when i was on the front lines of taking all the incoming fire on this issue, people didn't really accept in their gut that we had to do this. they kept thinking there is another way out of this, and it's not that bad, and we'll try, you know, managed care and

we'll try more hmos, we'll try all of that. and now all these years later, we realize that we have some fundamental problems with our existing system that has to be addressed. so i actually believe that at the end of the day with all of this negotiation and back and forth, we're going to come up with something. my hope is that it's going to be meaningful enough to make a difference, to make a difference on the cost side, which is the paramount issue for people like us who have insurance. how do we keep affording it and making sure it's of high quality? assurances that we're going to do on the public side, the medicaid and medicare programs are not going to undermine those programs in ways they can't deliver cost-effective quality care, getting people insured and moving as rapidly as possible toward universal care, changing the delivery system and the incentives so that we actually figure out ways to reward

prevention, pay for prevention. in '93, for example, fareed, a man became a friend of mine but i didn't know him at the time, de dean, a man who day lot of work on vascular health. he said, i have proof that diet, exercise is just as effective as medical plans in lowering the threat of heart disease. but i can't get medicare to pay for someone to go to an exercise class or to pay for a nutritionist to come to their house and talk to them. well, we worked and worked on that all through the time my husband was president, and finally sometime during the bush administration, the centers for medicare and medicaid, cms, said, okay, fine, we'll begin to pay for this. well, it shouldn't be that hard.

we're more than happy to pay for a pill or pay for a procedure. how do we change behaviors? how do we convince the medical establishment to do that? there is just a lot that needs to be at least included even if we can't get to the finish line right away. >> you're passionate about this. do you ever wish you were back in the white house running? >> i feel like i gave my blood, sweat and tears, and i think we, despite all of the difficulties of that effort, we got people thinking. and we helped further the debate. it was, you know, disappointing that we didn't get it all done, but we got the children's health insurance program done, we got portable insurance. we got some things accomplished in the '90s and actually under the bush administration some changes were made so that the government said to hospitals, we're not going to pay for never erchts. people shouldn't get bedsores,

people should pay for aspirins and shots. so we made progress, but the problem is we never got to a critical mass of progress, and that's what i'm hoping to see now. >> madam secretary, thank you so much. >> good to talk to you. >> a pleasure.

so, april... yeah? you know, your charger is still using energy when it's plugged into the wall, right? yeah, but that's not my charger. i don't even have a cell phone. [ballad ringtone playing] uh-oh. um... [music stops] heh. announcer: millions of kids are using their energy wisely.

more of fareed zakaria gps in a moment but here's what's happening right now. di diveres have recovered a fifth body from a crash after a small plane and a helicopter collided over the hudson river. diveres also recovered a section of the plane today. he'll leave for gaud la har a tomorrow. high on the agenda. the global economic crisis and strategy to contain the h1n1

virus. back to fareed zakaria gps right after this.

in our for our what in the world segment. it's a website, and you probably

don't know what it says. let me explain. it's the website of the former president of iran, and it declares the ongoing trials of son 100 iranian figures, politicians and journalists to be show trials. it's the latest in a series of charges made by major leaders in iran against the regime. i can say that the charge is true, because my friend and colleague bahari is on trial. he's a "newsweek" reporter and an awarding wing documentary filmmaker. he was arrested in tehran on june 21st. in the six weeks since then, he's had no access to a lawyer and he has not been able to see him family. over the weekend he, quote, confessed, unquote, saying western media helped cause the chaos after ahmadinejad's disputed election. it is a lie. he knows it's a lie, and the iranian government knows it's a

lie. after all, it's a lie that they, those in power in iran, forced him to speak. that's what a show trial is all about. it's a phrase usually connected with josef stalin, the ruthless soviet dictator. he tried 50 odd men in mass trials for crimes against the state. sound familiar? in fact, the similarities between the soviet trials of 70 years ago and the iranian trials of today is striking. large rooms filled with row upon row upon row of men. at the front, full rows of the accused. many looking wary, downtrodden and many in the front former key government officials who have built a revolutionary regime, only now to see it put them on trial. when their time comes to take the stand, they confess saying whatever the regime wants them to do, hoping they'll be treated less harshly and one day they

might be able to be free, hoping to see their families again. in the soviet case, those hopes were never realized. the iranian government still has time to change or else it will be remembered in history solely for its horrific use of toe tal tearian tic tacs. it should release him and all its other political prisoners immediate immediately. we'll be right back.

now, our question of the week. last week i asked you to cast an imaginary vote in afghanistan's upcoming presidential election.

i interviewed the two chief rivals to karzai. i asked you to choose among the three. the clear winner was asheer gone any. most gps viewers want to do the incumbent leave office. the real election is august 20th with complete results not expected until september. for this week i want to know how do you think hillary clinton is doing as secretary of state? give her a grade and tell me why you think she sdedeserves it. i'll like to recommend a book. this being summer, i thought a somewhat lighter book than usual. this one is actually a classic. it's "out of africa," a vivid memoir of life in colonial africa. it won seven academy awards. if you haven't read the book,