if you missed any part of today's show, find us on itunes. search "state of the union." you can find more of my conversation with nancy pelosi and stay tuned to cnn for more information on the mall attack. fareed zakaria is next with former president bill clinton. this is "gps." welcome to all of you in the united states and around the world. i'm fareed zakaria. we have a very special show for you today. an important exclusive interview with bill clinton on the plan to rid syria of its chemical weapons. >> who cares how it came up. >> on president obama asking congress to approve a syrian strike. >> i don't think he had to go. >> on america's duelling political parties. >> you got to give it to the republicans.

>> and on his family's future in politics. >> i would never discourage her. i think it is still a noble calling. >> plus, a european country where unemployment is at a 20-year low and the stock market is hitting record highs. this is not fiction. it's not monaco. i will explain where this is. and the symbolism of the one fingered salute is understood around the world but there's a powerful new sign of protests in egypt. the four fingered salute. i'll explain. >> when the obama administration was arguing syria it came up with everything from preserving international norms to preventing another holocaust. one could have dangerous consequences for american foreign policy. almost every senior official, president obama, john kerry,

chuck hagel said we had to preserve u.s. credibility with iran. now, a mountain of scholarship and international relation shows that things don't work that way. countries know that what you might do in one situation says very little about what you might do in another different situation. in other words, you really don't have to attack country a to let country b know that you're a tough guy. now, this has been a particularly bad time for obama officials to thump their chests about credibility because for the past few months the iranian government has been sending signals that started with the election as president. during the campaign, he had vigorously attacked the previous administration for being unable to come to an agreement with the international community and ease the sanctions against iran.

"it is good to have centrifuges running provided people's live and livelihoods are also running." since his election, he's been sending signals every few days. he's exchanged letters with president obama. september 4th tweet from a twitter account said to belong to him wished jews everywhere a blessed new year. he's prepared to shut down the nuclear enrichment plant all together in return for a relaxation of sanctions. of course he is not the man actually running iran. that's the supreme leader who is deeply anti-western and anti-american. but he is also a smart and sophisticated politician who wants to stay in power by limiting internal discontent. and so on september 17th, he said that iran would engage in heroic leniency to try to come to an agreement with the

international community. he also affirmed when we say that no country should possess nuclear weapons, we ourselves are definitely not trying to possess them. this could also be camouflage and smoke screen but there is another possibility. the international sanctions against iran are hurting that country badly. support for assad's brutal regime in syria is costing it money and arms every month. and has tarnished its legitimacy at home. there is a spotlight on iran's supreme leader. one of the chants heard in iran two years ago was mubarak, now it's time. in these circumstances coming to a deal with the west diffusing some tensions, easing sanctions and reviving the iranian economy

would be extremely useful to the regime in tehran. at the very least it would be worthwhile for the obama administration to come up with a reasonable offer that would signal to the iranian people that if the regime is willing to credibly force nuclear weapons, ordinary iranians will have a brighter future. it's difficult to sound reasonable in washington while beating the drums of war. let's hope that will now change. for more go to cnn.com/fareed. let's get started. we'll spend most of the hour today with bill clinton who this week will open the ninth annual meeting of the clinton global initiative. i sat down with the 42nd

president of the united states in his offices in harlem earlier this week and he spoke candidly about the topics of the day. the american economy, politics and of course the possibility of another president clinton in the white house. listen in. >> president clinton, you've seen the agreement that the united states and russia have reached on syria. you read the criticisms. what do you think of it? >> first of all, i think if it is implemented, big if, it is a good thing. and i agree with the president and secretary kerry and everybody else who has been involved in this that the united states needs to stand strong against chemical weapons against proliferation and use of them. we ratified the chemical weapons convention when i was president.

it passed 74-26 in the senate. big bipartisan support. the effects of chemical weapons are hard as we have documented in these pictures. united nations issued a very strong report and secretary-general says no question that sarin gas was used on people in larger damascus area and elsewhere. so i think it's a good thing. some will say, well, this gives the initiative to putin. who cares how it came up. john kerry got asked, well, what can we do to stop you from bombing, he said make the problem go away. so putin says, okay, i'll do that. so they say, well this puts russia in a position of leverage and guarantees that assad will be in power for a while longer. that's a separate issue.

there is inherent and enduring benefit in taking a step that has potential to rid the world of these chemical weapons because it's going to be difficult for anybody else to use them if this happens. now, we're a long way between where we are today and whether this happens. it's worth doing. >> let's go to that separate issue. you said assure assad's survival. should the president have stated two years ago that assad has to go? should the united states have an active policy perhaps in some ways that verges on military assistance that is designed to produce regime change in damascus? >> the united states does have a policy and it was started back when hillary was still secretary of state opening the talks in geneva. assad has no interest in going to those talks as long as he

thinks he is certain to survive. i supported two years ago the proposal that hillary and secretary panetta and then cia director general petraeus made to give more robust arms support to the syrians but i well understood why the president was reluctant to do it because as you see in libya, there is still lots of militia groups there who like america. on the day our ambassador and the other state department employee were killed in benghazi, the ambassador was still the most popular foreigner in libya. libyan citizens marched on the headquarters unarmed of two of these militia groups and forced them to disarm. it's chaotic. so i get why the administration has been reluctant to do that. i think this renewed determination to get arms there, which is not been challenged.

we've not been asked about it and russia can't and we know they are flying lots of arms into the assad regime. it gives them a chance to keep the conflict going and as cruel as that sounds, that's the only shot we have for a negotiated settlement trying to make sure we balance forces a little bit. so i support what is apparently being done to do that. i'm glad that we are supporting groups that are friendly toward the west. maybe the al qaeda related groups will get some of the weapons we're sending to the people we think are more responsible but i don't see any alternative. i think two tracks that we're on is inevitable. doesn't require boots on the ground. doesn't require us to put airplanes in the sites of the fourth largest defense system and there may be going on things

that i don't know about because i don't take security briefings unless they ask me to. so in general i support the two tracks that i think the administration is on trying to make sure rebels have sufficient arms so that they are not run out of the country because that means no peace process. ultimately getting back to the peace process is what's important. >> there's lots more coming up in my exclusive interview with president clinton. first, president obama's decision to ask the u.s. congress for approval to strike against syria. >> i don't think he had to go. >> back in a moment. my customers can shop around--

see who does good work and compare costs. it doesn't usually work that way with health care. but with unitedhealthcare, i get information on quality rated doctors, treatment options and estimates for how much i'll pay.

that helps me, and my guys, make better decisions. i don't like guesses with my business, and definitely not with our health. innovations that work for you. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare.

vo:remember to changew that oil is the it on schedule toy car. keep your car healthy. show your car a little love with an oil change starting at $19.95. on december 16th, 1998, the united states with great britain began a blistering bombing campaign to strike a blow against saddam hussein's attempts to stockpile weapons of mass destruction. the president did not go to congress for authorization or approval. that president was william jefferson clinton.

so how did he feel about president obama's decision to go to congress on syria to seek its approval? i asked him. mr. president, did the president need to go to congress for authorization for what sounded like two or three days of cruise missile strikes? you didn't go to congress to do "desert fox" four days of strikes in iraq. >> i think that he was not required to go because syria was clearly in violation of international law even though they didn't sign onto the chemical weapons convention, there was an international pact against chemical weapons going back nearly 100 years as a reaction to what happened in world war i. so i don't think he had to go.

but i think he believed that first there were partisan divisions in the democratic party and in the republican party that is he had strong support within the republicans for doing something. senator mccain, senator graham, some of the iraq war veterans in the republican house caucus, and he knew he would have opposition in the democratic party. i think after he saw the debate in the u.k., even though you might say that ought to frighten anybody off, he had a parliamentary party and he couldn't deliver it, this made him think this is something the country ought to do together. i think it gave him an opportunity to convince people we weren't going to send soldiers and we weren't going to fly airplanes into the air defense system. they wanted to take action with

rockets and missiles. but there are all bad consequences. i think he did. whether that was right or wrong, there is no question that it had one positive impact. the russians and syrians knew that he wanted to bomb and they knew that he might bomb even if he lost -- >> this issue might come up again. if this agreement falls apart and if the president asks the congress to come back and give him some kind of approval if not authorization, you may still have a situation where the senate votes yes and the house votes no. do you think the president could use force in those circumstances? >> i do? first i think senate is viewed generally as the more important body on these things and the senate has to ratify treaties for example under our

constitution. and secondly, he does have some international law to fall back on because of the chemical weapons issue. let's cross that bridge when we come to it. right now we have a situation in which mr. putin and president assad may think that they have dodged a bullet but they have always stepped into the arena of accountability. for people that are not naive. that's what he want for everybody. we shouldn't want to escape accountability and they shouldn't. getting them into arena of accountability and raising prospects we won't have to look at picture of those kids and what they went through with those chemical weapons and murdering them. that's worth doing. >> president clinton, do you believe when reviewing this whole business of edward snowden and the revelations, do you

think that we have crossed a line in terms of government intrusions on privacy for security? do you think we need to have a national conversation or some kind of a real comprehensive overview and say we may have gone too far and we have to reign this back in or are we broadly speaking in the right place? >> well, both things could be true. that is i think i was talking to a friend of mine who is in this tech business who said i am a civil libertarian. i believe we have to try to protect ourselves and use big daddy to do it. the stated policy, which is that we are going to look for patterns and telephone calls and patterns in e-mails and communications that in absence

of some evidence to tie you or me or anybody else to terrorist groups, the underlying messages would not be penetrated. we now know that's not exactly the case. and it's interesting. we know that this foreign intelligence surveillance court has done a better job than we thought. we tried to be vigilant about this and that nsa and other agencies inadvertently went beyond what the court had authorized them to do. it's a good thing we know this. i would encourage more disclosure on the procedures, not details but procedures. i think it would be a good thing for the american people to have a debate on this. i suppose we have to wait for the smoke to clear over syria and other things that are being debated now.

we have to use big data. we have to protect privacy. i think it would be a good thing if there was transparency about the decision of this court because they clearly have tried to do a good job and they were clearly disturbed when they found out that even though it may have been unintentional, the government went beyond on a couple occasions what they had authorized them to do. >> much more to come with bill clinton including why this ultimate democrat gives some credit to the gop. before we get to that, a major world economy is at the polls today but the big areas of contention between the parties aren't syria or the economy. instead, the public is debating whether to dedicate a day of the week to vegetables. what in the world? jackie: there are plenty of things i prefer to do on my own.

but when it comes to investing, i just think it's better to work with someone. someone you feel you can really partner with. unfortunately, i've found that some brokerage firms don't always encourage that kind of relationship. that's why i stopped working at the old brokerage, and started working for charles schwab. avo: what kind of financial consultant are you looking for? talk to us today. help the gulf when we made recover and learn the gulf, bp from what happened so we could be a better, safer energy company. i can tell you - safety is at the heart of everything we do. we've added cutting-edge technology, like a new deepwater well cap and a state-of-the-art monitoring center, where experts watch over all drilling activity twenty-four-seven. and we're sharing what we've learned, so we can all produce energy more safely. our commitment has never been stronger.

♪ hooking up the country whelping business run ♪ ♪ trains! they haul everything, safely and on time. ♪ tracks! they connect the factories built along the lines. and that means jobs, lots of people, making lots and lots of things. let's get your business rolling now, everybody sing. ♪ norfolk southern what's your function? ♪ ♪ helping this big country move ahead as one ♪ ♪ norfolk southern how's that function? ♪ see who does good work and compare costs. it doesn't usually work that way with health care. but with unitedhealthcare, i get information on quality rated doctors, treatment options and estimates for how much i'll pay. that helps me, and my guys, make better decisions. i don't like guesses with my business, and definitely not with our health. innovations that work for you. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare.

♪ ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] introducing the cadillac xts with the newly available 410-horsepower twin turbo. ♪

now for what in the world

segment? imagine if we had national election this is week. there would be no short aage of big debates. you name the big topic and two parties would have a big disagreement. contrast that with another major country which is at the polls today. the hot topics there are whether or not to have one day a week set aside for vej terryiariani vegetarianism or whether or not foreign tourists should pay tolls? seriously? where in the world is this wondrous country with no real problems? it's one of the world's largest economies and europe's largest, germany. part of the reason why germans are debating mundane issues is because unlike in the rest of europe and much like the rest of the world, the overall picture is quite rosrosy.

the dax is at record highs. growth is coming. chancellor angela merkel is popular as the mother hen presiding over this house at feast with itself and germans applaud her for dealing well with europe. one woman to rule them all. "forbes" magazine called her the most powerful woman in the world. merkel has taken important steps to help europe's struggling economies spending tens of billions of dollars directly and indirectly on them. on the other hand, merkel has imposed austerity on much of europe which has been excessive and counterproductive. it's the only way to get governments like greece and italy to become more competitive.

now, here's the irony. that's not how germany reformed its own economy. a decade ago a major package of reforms were passed called agenda 2010. taxes were cut, restrictions were placed on unemployment benefits and companies were given more freedom to hire and firewo workers. another irony, merkel was at the time leader of the opposition but those very reforms gave her government a huge advantage over other countries but that will not last for long without the next generation of german reforms. you see, germany is an ageing country. according to u.n. projections, the percentage of germans over 65 will increase by half. one-third of germans will be retiree. pensions and welfare spending will increase dramatically.

health care costs will soar. meanwhile, productivity will decline. germany's population is expected to shrink by 10 million people by 2050. france's population by contrast will increase by nearly the same amount. all of these factors will likely result in france becoming a bigger economy than germany within a single generation. low fertility rates are part of the problem for germany but it also has very low rates of immigration. remember, germany is one of the more difficult cultures to as i assimilate into. for all her skills, she has long been a very reluctant reformer. if she gets a third term as is widely expected, she'll need to become bolder and enact reforms that she wants italians and irish and spaniards to do. i wonder if there's a way to say

practice what you preach in german? up next, more of my interview with bill clinton. the former president on the future of the democratic party. >> i still believe that if we stay together, we're going to have a good long time where we can win the white house. i'm far more worried about something mundane. >> what exactly is he worried about? find out just after the break. peace of mind is important when you're running a successful business. so we provide it services you can rely on. with centurylink as your trusted it partner,

you'll experience reliable uptime for the network and services you depend on. multi-layered security solutions keep your information safe, and secure. and responsive dedicated support meets your needs, and eases your mind. centurylink. your link to what's next.

vo:remember to changew that oil is the it on schedule toy car. keep your car healthy.

show your car a little love with an oil change starting at $19.95. i'm candy crowley in washington with the latest on this morning's breaking news. an ongoing hostage crisis after a terrorist attack on a shopping mall in nairobi, kenya. officials say the attack left 59 people dead, at least 175 injured. just now kenya's president revealed his nephew and young man's fiance are among the dead. the building is surrounded by kenyan forces and israeli special forces are on the scene working with this are kenyan counterparts. it's been about 17.5 hours since the attack began. al qaeda linked somali group claimed responsibility.

for more on the terrorists, let's bring in jim. >> it has an intent and clearly an ability to strike outside of somalia in spectacular terrorists attacks and a place where internationals gather as a place to get our attention. it's tied to al qaeda. it's become an affiliate. subset area of al qaeda. similar tactics. anti-western. brutal. they have recruited up to 50 american members. so of course the worry is do they attack american interests abroad. nightmare scenario they can get one of these guys into the u.s. that's not considered an immediate threat but u.s. interests abroad certainly. and one other point, the kenyans

have been doing a good job of bringing these guys under wraps in the last couple of years. this is a worrisome sign they are having a comeback. >> worldwide sign of not good things. thank you so much. back to fareed zakaria gps. >> one week ago larry summers withdraw his name from contention to be the next chairman of the federal reserve. summers tenure as treasury secretary under president clinton is part of the controversy surrounding him. so what does clinton think about summers and his decision and about the new contender in chief, janet yellin. listen in. are you disappointed that larry summers has withdrawn his name from consideration for the fed chairman job? >> well, he's a friend of mine. i think that a lot of the

criticism for which he's been subject about what he did in my administration is not accurate. i also consider janet yellin a friend and she's shown good judgment. she's done a fabulous job at the fed. he was really good at the council of economic advisers when she worked in our administration. i think she would be great if the president chooses to appoint her. but i think there's this kind of cartoon image that's been developed that somehow larry summers was a one-note johnny just trying to let big financial titans ravage the land and it's just ludicrous. he played a central role in helping president obama use the power of the government to try to bring the economy back. when we were on the brink of sliding into depression when he

took office. when he worked for me, he played a central role in implementing much more balanced policies than have been let on where we had more private sector growth but we also had good sensible regulatory oversight. i think that he and janet yellin -- i was thrilled when i heard that president was down to two choices of two people i knew, looked and janet's judgment at the fed has been good. she's been right on everything that's happened in this whole aftermath of the financial crisis. she gets the job, i'll be thrilled too. >> president clinton, when you look at the reaction that so many democratic senators had to larry summers and you look at the election of bill de blasio and rhetoric he used in primary for mayorship of new york.

there are smart commentators who have written this is the end of the clinton democrats. this is the end of that turn you made the democratic party take toward the center and this is the reaction. this is the new much more liberal democrat. >> first of all, there's probably something to that. america is growing more liberal culturally and more diverse. but again, let's not get carried away here. i ran on income and equality in 1992 when i was governor of my state i took 22% of people out from state income tax. in my first congressional session we raised taxes and cut taxes on working poor and eliminated taxes for lobbying for corporations and tried to put a cap and that didn't work but we tried. what happened? the american people gave to

congress to a group of very conservative republicans. when they passed bills with veto proof majority with a lot of democrats voting for it, that i couldn't stop, all of a sudden we turn out to be deregulators. come on. senator warren said the other day when she introduced a bill to reinstate the division between commercial and investment banks she admitted that the repeal did not cause one single solitaire financial institution to fail. canada did a fabulous job in this financial crisis. and they have always allowed banks to issue securities and make loans. why? because they have good requirements and good regulation. that's what's at issue. so i think we need to just -- there's not as much difference in democrats as people think.

and i still believe that if we stay together, we're going to have a good long time when we can win the white house. i'm more worried about something mundane. whoever we nominate. i'm more worried about a mundane problem which is we have not succeed ed in persuading people to vote in the same numbers they do in presidential years. that's something we have to do. we don't do that, we'll have trouble. just like we are today. >> so you're not worried about the democratic party? >> no. we've got a lot of good people in the party. we've got a lot of good ideas. but i think you got to give it to the republicans. they have a much more reliable media base. and they just say no. they know what they want. they want power to cut taxes, eliminate regulation, take

government down except for what they like and they can fill the atmosphere with a lot of static. when you try to get something done, it requires a much more strategy because you have to explain what you're doing. it's tougher for us. i feel good about where we are and where we're going. demographically, the country is moving toward not liberal but we're all in this together solution. we have announced that as sort of a founding value of our foundation and i think that has to be the founding value of the country. to preserve individual liberty and even allow libertarian influences of the tea party. we still have to recognize that we have some things in common we have to do together. >> coming up next, president bill clinton can't have four more years. on the other hand, there are not just one but two potential

future president clintons. i asked him about both possibilities. >> i would always want her to do what she wanted to do. what makes her happy. what makes her feel fulfilled. >> was he talking about his wife there or his daughter? find out when we come back. tickets? hmm, sure. how many? well, there's hannah, maddie, jen, sara m., sara b., sa -- whoa, whoa. hold on. (under his breath) here it comes... we can't forget about your older sister! thank you, thank you, thank you! seriously? what? i get 2x the thankyou points on each ticket. can i come? yep. the citi thankyou preferred card. now earn 2x the points on entertainment and dining out, with no annual fee. to apply, go to citi.com/thankyoucards

man: sometimes it's like we're still in college. but with a mortgage. and the furniture's a lot nicer. and suddenly, the most important person in my life is someone i haven't even met yet. who matters most to you says the most about you. at massmutual we're owned by our policyowners, and they matter most to us. as you plan your next step, we'll help you get there.

this coming week is a big one in new york. it's the super bowl of foreign policy. the united nations general assembly. it's also becoming known for another big meeting. the clinton global initiative. the program brings together world leaders, business titans, to try to find solutions to the world's problems. they are able to document an astonishing 400 million people whose lives it has been able to help in less than a decade. in recent years, president clinton's famous family members have taken a larger role in his foundation. i asked him about that and about the political futures of both hillary and chelsey. president clinton, you renamed your foundation and you've added your wife hillary's name, of course, but also chelsey. what does all of that mean?

>> well, first of all, it reflects the reality that it's a joint enterprise now. chelsey has been very active for the last couple of years and she's helped us reorganize the foundation and try to put it on a sounder operational footing. making it the kind of thing that can last beyond my ability to oversee the thing on a daily basis and raise money every year. she is very good at all of that. she's the only one that has any training in public health. she has a masters from columbia in public health and about to get her ph.d. at oxford. this is her area. hillary is bringing significant new projects to the foundation especially this too small to fail initiative for child development and she was the youngest person ever to chair

the legal services corporation when president carter was in office so she's almost like coming home for this. i wanted to rename the foundation because it's a joint enterprise and it's part of my determination to see that it lives beyond me. >> you can see that this gives me an opening to ask and implies that she will stay actively engaged in the foundation for the next few years. do you have a sense as to whether that will be true or whether she has other plans? >> i don't. somebody may know but i don't. i'm not one of the people who does. >> when you look at her poll numbers, can any other democrat even get into the race? how would you raise money when you have -- i don't think i've seen numbers like this close to 70% democrats say they would vote for her. >> well, i think partly that's because she served well as

secretary of state. and because people across the political spectrum got to see her the way those of us who know her see her. and when i was president, she, like me, was subject to long line of relentless criticism and she did it in the senate. she made a lot of friends in the senate among republicans as well as democrats and people in new york liked her across the political spectrum. it was the first time the country had gotten to see her as somebody who just what you see is what you get. shows up for work every day and gets stuff done. is very strong about it. these polls don't mean much. we're a long way ahead. she would be the first to tell you that there's no such thing as a done deal ever by anybody. i don't know what she's going to do. >> and chelsey. remarkable accomplished young woman but there is also talk she may want to run. i'm just wondering as a father,

you have seen the highs of politics but you've also seen the lows that you said you have been subject to relentless attacks and you didn't have to deal with some of the worst in some senses fox news only started in 1996 halfway through your presidency. given the incredible, you know, scrutiny that they wouldher to take on a political career? >> well, what she said about it i think shows as usual good sense. she said right now she likes the people that represent her. she's happy doing what she's doing. if there ever came a time she thought she could make a unique contribution, she would consider running. i would not advise her not to do it if she wanted to. politics is like pro football. it's a contact sport. if you don't want to get hit,

you should stay on the sidelines. but you can't complain when you get into an arena where you know particularly in the modern age, the power and influence where there's so much static in the air it's hard to establish a gone basis of just facts. but it's still an incredibly rewarding thing to do. i would always want her to do what she wanted to do, what makes her happy, what makes her feel fulfilled. but if she wanted to do it, i would never discourage her. i think it's a noble calling. >> mr. president, thank you very much. >> thanks. up next, a new symbol of protest. why four is better than five or even one. when we made our commitment to the gulf, bp had two big goals:

help the gulf recover and learn from what happened so we could be a better, safer energy company. i can tell you - safety is at the heart of everything we do. we've added cutting-edge technology, like a new deepwater well cap and a state-of-the-art monitoring center, where experts watch over all drilling activity twenty-four-seven. and we're sharing what we've learned, so we can all produce energy more safely. our commitment has never been stronger.

the annual u.n. general assembly begins this week in new york and that brings me to my question of the week. every year the representatives of all member states get to give a speech. every year the same country goes first. what country is it? a, brazil, b, the united states, c, the united kingdom, or d, china? stay tuned and we'll tell you the right answer. you can follow us on twitter and facebook and if you miss a show, go to itunes.com/fareed and you can get it. this week's book of the week i " "innocent abroad." if you look closely at

photographs of john kerry shuffling around the middle east, you see one key aide at his side. he was clinton administration's point man on the middle east. it's a behind the scenes account of diplomacy and high politics that is relevant today largely because little has changed. for example, the israeli prime minister for many of those years was netanyahu. now for the last look. egypt's revolution entered a new phase. the war of symbols. on the run hand, you have egypt's current custodian. here is his face painted on the chocolate. if you don't get for sweets, here's a sandwich named after him. there's an entire site designated to spotting images but a hand has become the other side of the story. this four finger salute is considered the symbol of

defiance against military rule and a reference to the mosque where muslim brotherhood supporters clashed recently with the army. it means for. hence the symbol. and the message is spreading outside of egypt. turkey's prime minister has done the four finger salute in support of the muslim brotherhood. behind these symbols lie the two great unresolved issues in egypt today. will general secede power to an elect government? the answer to our challenge question is a. brazil volunteered in 1947. the tradition has been upheld ever since. the united states usually goes second. in 2011, by the way, brazil's president became the fiwo