give us your comments about this program, please visit us at qa.org. programs are also available on the c-span podcast. ..

>> host: and the name of the book is "flight of the eagle," the author, conrad black, who joins us now from toronto. mr. black, what were you trying to do with this book, this history of the united states?

>> guest: peter, i was trying to present the perspective, historical perspective of the support decisions american statesmen have made at each stage of the progress of the country from colonial status to position of unparalleled preimminence in the history of the nation state and in the whole world in a period of less than 200 years, and, of course, there's a very extensive and ouch ex-- often extremely and scholar ri and rigorous well-written literature on the history of the united states and every aspect of the history. it's a complete history of the country, but i'm not aware of and harry kissinger confirmed this in the note that any previous attempt to put in sequence, they had particularly

important decisions made at each stage in the progress, and i think it's surmised that the united states grew and grew and became more and more important because it had the english language and the democratic tradition, and the ability to populate half of a very rich continent and attract motivated immigrants from all over the world, and that grew like something planted in the garden, and, of course, there's that aspect to it, but that same thing, essentially, could be said, but other countries have been less successful like brazil, argentina, and the difference has been in the statesmen who design the institutions of government, and directed the country in the most critical phases in development. >> who, when it comes to the founding fathers, who is one of your heros? >> guest: well, i -- in this sense, i don't think i'm

particularly innovative other than perhaps the reason. i think the principle figures for george washington and benjamin franklin, and they are legendary figures and don't need me to bust up the esteem in which they are held, but it's not widely know that george washington was, in fact, a very brilliant guerrilla war leader, and that's essentially what he conducted. he kept that army going virtually unpaid with calls for new recruits in rotating the personnel for seven years, and he had to move it around and move in land to make it more difficult for the british to get at him and move around with the british chasing him and only occasionally in the early phases of the war in the famous crossing of the delaware and the

attack towards princeton and beyond, and at the the end of the active war in yorktown, did he come out and stage a successful action that really turned defense. he came really close on a few other occasions like the line in german town, but he was essentially a guerrilla war leader while maintaining the dignity of a career officer. he was a very highly regarded officer in the british army prior to revolutionary war, and in the case of benjamin franklin, he was a renowned scientist, writer, printer, and a personality, but he was one of the greatest diplomats in the history of the world, and his achievement in assisting persuading the british to evict the french from canada, making the revolution possible, and then only less than 20 years

later, recruiting the french who -- where no parliament or anything like a parliament had met for 170 years, an absolute monarchy to come into a war in favor of republicanism and secessionism and democracy was an astounding achievement without the french. it would have been difficult. the americanings would have won eventually, but they might not have won the independence of all 13 # colonies and would have taken longer. yorktown was mainly a french battle. >> host: well, conrad black, early in "flight of the eagle," you talk about the seven years war and also detail, i would say, george washington's failures as a military leader and his aggressiveness; correct? >> guest: well, i -- he had -- he made a few mistakes, but he did win after all, and he was, you know, we don't know what he would be like commanding large

units like later american military figures like general lee or grant or sheman or eisenhower or mcarthur, we don't know how he would have done with that, but with what he had, he did well, but he was not intolerable or napolean and almost never made a mistake. >> host: why did you open the book with -- >> guest: well, because it was essential to remove france from canada from the united states as it came to have the opportunity to achieve independence, and a few people led by franklin recognized the possibilities for america to become a great country, but let me put it in different words from a moment ago. the american the achievement of

the two and a half million free people and half a million slaves for them, in effect, to get the british to evict the french from the borders and the french to evict the british to manipulate the greatest power was an astonishing achievement, and it wouldn't have been possible without the results in this continent of the seven years war. the french and indian wars as they are called in the united states. i mean, that war had a different name everywhere it was fought. it depended what part of it you were talking about. >> host: now, conrad black divided the book -- >> guest: it was the first world war in the sense that it was fought all over the world. >> host: conrad black divided his book in four sections, and the first one is about the as parent state in 1836.

what happened in this period, conrad black, and what is the united states aspiring to? >> guest: well, in the early part of the period, they aspired, really, just to be rid of the french, but the leading columnist saw the potential for america in for the most part saw the potential as working in tandem and in partnership with the british, but the relationship gradually changed. franklin, as early as 1740 predicted that america would have a greater population than the british isles in a hundred years, and he was almost exactly right that did occur, i believe, in the early 1840s, and until relations broke down between the british and the americans, the hope amongst these people,

including washington and jefferson and all but a few real hot heads like samuel adams or patrick henry was worked as, but instead of being subordinate status, the two jurisdictions would be virtually co-equal, but sharing the same mop ark, and it evolved, relations broke down, and the, you know, that was the aspiration. then once independence was achieved, it was quite another matter to set up a system that worked. the original articles of confederation were not successful, and at the same time that the committee led by thomas jefferson was instructed by the continental congress to prepare declaration of independence, and franklin was instructed to try to round up some allies in europe for the revolutionary war that was about to begin or had, in fact, begun, the -- there was also a call for a satisfactory

set up of confederation between the different colonies, and there's no such thing that happened, and what did happen was that washington and franklin convened the constitutional convention in 1787 which began as a matter of resolving a boundary dispute between virginia and maryland, but quickly turned into a call for delegates from all of the colonies to try to devise a system to govern themselves in a federal way, and it was a remarkable success. it was a terribly difficult task, which formed the constitution, which, in my opinion, 1 not working particularly well right now, particularly served the country immensely successfully and justly admired all over the world. a tremendous achievement for james madison, the principle author. >> host: why do you say it's not working well now? >> guest: i don't think the u.s. government is functioning well now, and i don't think most

americans is not functioning. congress is not well-regarded, there's a terrible an antagonism between the factions and parties and not much gets done, the deficits are too large, and legislation tends to be ineffective, but i think there's a general concern, and i refer to this in the end of the book, and it's reversible, but at this moment, americans do themselves an injustice and country injustice if they didn't reflect on the fact that education system is not competitive, and that health care system, while it's good for 70% of the people, it leaves a hundred million people underserved compared to other prosperous countries, and the justice system, i had my problems with it myself, but the fact that the prosecutors win 99.5% of the cases, 97% of them in trials, and that the u.s. has six to 12 times as many incarcerated people per capita

as other democracies like australia, britain, france, germany, japan, and canada, tells us something. there's 48 million americans with officially a criminal record. even if you just take out the driving under the influence or minor problems long ago, you still have 15% of american adults officially as felons. well, that can't be right. something should be done about this. these things can be done, and the u.s. deals with problems when it has to. >> host: go back to the history of the united states before we go to current times. your first section stops in 1836. what was going on in that country? what was going on in the world? >> guest: well, that was as general jackson was leading as president, and after the constitution was prom -- promulgated and the offices were

well filled with john jay and john marshall as chief justice and the early presidents were all really distinguished, i think, and the -- and other people. the congressional leaders, henry clay and so forth and daniel webster, they were very, very substantial people, and -- but there was by the 20s a theory that this friction between the slave and prestates and this state that did it, they could declare laws were not applicable in that state, and this was the position adopted by south carolina and the politician of the time, john c. calhoun, the vice president of the united states under john quinncy adams, and andrew jackson's first term, and jackson declared the formula

where the line of 3620 would be tolerated and even encouraged to protect it, but secession or any reduction of the prerogatives of the federal government opposite any individual state would not be tolerated, and he carried that proposition in south carolina, and he cared it out, and that effectively, and i don't think -- there's no evidence this was in andrew jackson's thinking at the time, but it effectively enabled free states to be strong enough deem gram of cocainely and -- demographically and economically that when a show down happenedded years later, the country was able to suppress the insurrection and abolish slavery, and that would not have happened if the south attempted to secede in jackson's time

successfully. if they attempted to secede and i think not possible to suppress them at that time. >> host: the second section, predestined people, 1836-1933. what are you trying to relay? >> guest: a tremendous period of growth. of course, there was the terrible crisis of the civil war, but for the reasons that i just mentioned, well, the north was able to prevail. there's much larger in the south and industrial strength, but the south were such doubty fighters, it was a struggle to overcome them, but then the country just grew, let america be america, and the population almost tripled from about 33 million to a little over 90 million between -- in the 50 years after the civil war, and at the end,

the united states was next to or along with the british or about to be formed german empires, 1871, after frank oppression war, those three were the greatest powers in the world, and this was just one long lifetime after yorktown. people were alive when that occurred who were small children when the united states, america achieved independence, what a swift rise, and in the following 50 years, the population tripled, and after world war i, the united states was by most reckoning, the most powerful country in the world, and that process achieved sen waited itself considerably. the period ends in 19 # 33 # because that was another terrible crisis with a world economic depression, and there were extreme threats to democracy in other mowerful

countries in the world, and franklin d. roosevelt was inaugurated in a time when the united states was depressed economically and psych psychologically, and it was his task and mandate to revive it, didn't do that, but had the reviving strength of america to preserve democracy in the world very successfully. >> host: the next section in "flight of the eagle," indispensable country, 1933 #-1957. conrad black, why does it end in 1957? >> guest: well really to be honest, peter, i wanted them to be equal number of pages and equal number of chapters. it could have gone to the end of the cold war, but i thought it appropriate to take the most desperate periods of reliance of the democratic world on america

and put them in that section. the united states, despite the tremendous heroism of the americans, canadians, australians, and others for the fall of france and soviet union in 1941, a few months apart, and the bril lat leadership of mr. churchill, the british and canadians could not have stayed in the war without the help of the united states, and then is all worked out cheaply under the brilliance strategic instruction of church hill and roosevelt and other advisers like general marshall and others that they took more than 90% of the casualties in germany, but the ang lo american powers and the democratic powers were the winners. france, italy, germany, and

japan were dictatorships in the haps of leaders hostile to the west and democracy, even france was audiotaped by germany, but four years later, five years later, all of these countries were occupied, and americans in particular, and all were brought into the western alliance as allies where they remine, and they will take over fighting germany, 24 war dead in russia, shocking figure. they, all they got for the trouble was a temporary and from which they have become -- from which they have been evicted. >> host: mr. black, was that a planned strategy on behalf of the western allies?

>> guest: well, you can't say in 193 # # -- 1933 roosevelt planned it up, but he planned the stages making up the policy, and in the balance of the period in that section of the book up to the mid-50s, the strategic team that he assembled was still in charge, and he died in 1945, but president trueman and secretary of state and defense, generalize p hour is the first commander of nato, and his two term president, dean afterrenson and george and bolen and others were people that roosevelt promoted, and they continued to direct the the -- directed through the 50s, and everyone makes mistakes, but in general, absolutely brilliant strategic direction and almost

completely successful, and ultimately, of course, as everyone knows, the rival ri ended with the soviet union dissen grating, falling like soup and the ussr and the united states never exchanged a shot between them. >> host: the last section of "flight of the eagle," 1957 to present. a couple of issues during our recent history, mr. black, if we could explore those. number one, the effect of the vietnam war. >> guest: yes. yes. well, obviously, i think the effect is terribly serious and with us still. the u.s. is over the paralyzing fear of using its military and some could make the case, and i particularly trieded to make it because i'm not sure that it's true, but i respect it made in a serious way. the americans enter casually at times or has recently and the

military engagements, but i'm afraid that the manner in which the war was conducted and the manner in which the end of the war came have left a damaging impact on the country. i'll tell you why. the -- this gets complicated, but as you know, the democrats entered the war, president johnson, obviously, there was an american presence in south vietnam before that, but the act of military participation of the americans came in president johnson's time, and he deployed 550,000 members of the armed forces there, almost all of them conscripted, not volunteers, and he largely won the war, and this

was demonstrated in the on thive, but instead of coming to that con clues, he became demoralized and deescalated the war and retired from the office. president nixon managed to salvage a non-communist vietnam and withdraw american forces entirely while doing that, and in the great north vietnamese defense of april of 197 # -- 1972 of mr. nixon's visit to north korea and the soviet union, they defeated on the ground. they had heavy american air support, no american ground support, and nixon submitted the peace treaty not senate for ratification, had the constitutional right simply to sign it by his authority as president, the constitutional authority to make the agreements, but he wanted the

senate, which was in the hands of the other party, to agree to it, the implication being that if as was expected, the north visited the terms, the democratics would join the republicans and prove the use of air power against north vietnam, which is what dropped them essentially along with the reequipping and training of the south vietnamese to accept the peace in the first place, and the fact that the vat that meze violations of the vietnamese agreement came at the time of watergate affair when the executive authority of the administration was evaporating every day, it contributed to the senate and the house of representatives cutting off all aid so there was no chance of survival, and the implications are serious. the fact is we won the cold war, and in some respects, it doesn't matter, but there are, i mean, in that, in theceps of having won the cold war doesn't matter, but there was a great many

people who died in south vote yom in the killing fields of cambodia and amongst people who would not have died if the treaty that the senate ratified that mr. nixon and the collaborators negotiated had, indeed, been upheld and enforced by the united states. >> host: for the last 50 years, something you write about in "flight of the eagle," we conducted or talked about arms control talks with the russians. have they been important and effective? >> guest: well, when -- essentially, not particularly, but they were necessary for domestic political purposes. the -- this is a complicated history as well. president eisenhower, when he entered office in 1953 reduced the size was standing forces, but exsench waited the american

superiority of the defense authority and called it more bang for the buck, a crude formulation, but that's the essence of it, and he had the famous exchange with at the end of the 50s saying we have more conventional force in germany and could overwhelm you there, and eisenhower said, if you attack us in germany, there's nothing conventional about the response, and it was well understood if there was attack in west berlin, for example, that brings in nuclear response, and the kennedy-johnson administration under the secretary of defense and secretary clifford adopted the policy of allowing the soviet union to be equal in nuclear capability with the united states in the theory then they negotiate on the basis of mutually assured destruction,

and we can stabilize the cold war. all it did, really, was enable the russians once they got close to the strength surge ahead of it because they believed in the concept of superiority. when mr. nixon was elected, he did the job of calling it nuclear sufficiency so he reduced the defense budget, but produced these multiply independently targeted warheads and so the larger rockets could have as many as like an mx, for example, as many as ten independently targeted warheads, and in this way, he -- he purporteddedly reduced the defense budget and introduced the concept of anti-missile defense system and spoke of nuclear deficiency, but, in fact, he used american technology leadership to give the russians greater incentives and signed the greatest nuclear arms limitation and reduction agreement in the history of the

world in 1972. it was good for domestic opinion, good nor world political climate, but his own view was that the russians always cheated these things and couldn't win a military technological contest with the united states anyway, and so we shouldn't be bothered with it, but, in fact, it did achieve something. now, i, and i personally am skeptical about attempts to continue negotiated reductions in the nuclear arsenal now at the same time that we, in the west, not just the u.s., but in the west are apparently tolerating a proliferation of nuclear weapons less responsible than any held up until now. it's worrisome. ..

>> the country just grew at 1 million infants per year just before world war i. with astounding growth rates and in the 18 eighties the economic growth rate was constantly 8% per year and

already the largest economy in the world. it was not like china in our time had gross from a very low base it was the world's greatest economy when that decade began and it still grew. at an astounding rate with huge increases in productivity accompanied by pioneering events in almost every industry steel, so in those periods at times setting up the country to get through to the point* where the states could abolish slavery to ensure the integrity of the country to deal with the economic pressure to focus the

pressure not on the are rich or mythical categories roosevelt conjured for his own purposes of malefactors of great wealth anwr profiteers. there were none. that is nonsense and 1933 but of the rockefellers have the boards would pay for this they would burn their houses down but their real enemies name was a japanese imperialists and then the containment strategy was devised very imaginatively and it worked there were some mistakes but it worked and it worked completely and not to make light of those who died there but total war between the great powers. it was a combination of everything.

it was tremendously successful. >> host: you write u.s. remains the most successful country ever been and although it is laudably and complacent with most leadership cadre has failed its it is not easy nor driven by a death wish but the west seems to have lost its vocation for greatness in the absence of any rivals to it. >> i did it meet with those adjectives that is all but to embellish that with the statement with the most successful country in the history of the world but the great irony is the united states is responsible and

the rest of us must never forget or cease to be grateful for the triumph of democracy of the free market system and with allies certainly i am proud to be a britain citizen but the united states latest but today it is not a well functioning democracy and what we see is without an international challenge to pre-eminence, not to minimize the terrorist activities that are extremely dangerous and terribly provoking to have a great deal of sorrow the existence of the united states to weigh the antagonistic totalitarian power like russia, the

absence of such a challenge has left the country under motivated and it is taking an inexplicably long time that there is a challenge and the internal challenges the erosion of the american society then it will be dealt with this inefficacy and courage and determination that has met every crisis or severe challenge but it should get on and i say nothing. >> host: conrad, something you mentioned from the book talking about american society, a rhode profit terrorizes the nation 99 point* 5% of its cases and is stacked is the deck and the guarantees of individual

liberties with the bill of rights 48 million american have a criminal record there is no generation -- a knowledge of the system and in 2005 you were charged with 17 counts of financial and related crimes and spent three years, two weeks, in prison in florida. what is your status when it comes to the u.s. and the judicial system? >> with the 17 counts they were all rejected by pagers or abandoned by the supreme court of the united states but it would not occur with any sophisticated country the supreme court had being vacated excoriated though lower courts from madeleine

justice ginsburg remanded back to a lower court to assess the gravity that retrieved into accounts so i stand convicted my sentence was reduced -- reduced to the left the country but in my previous book by describe all that and the disclosure required so people didn't think i was hiding it. i was not ashamed but i was persecuted that there is life after episodes like that. but it gave me a vintage point* for what i did say and i do know my american friends are absolutely appalled with the state of american justice especially the american justice system but 5% of the world's

population and 50 percent of lawyers and all the counting those that have to go through serious training to be a lawyer i am not talking about those who stroll into the court and announces he is a lawyer but professional. and it takes about 10% of gdp. that is now with the author of the constitution had in mind and what i said about the bill of rights and fortunately is true. the grand jury was supposed to be an insurance against prosecution but they are compliant to the wishes of the prosecutors. fifth and sixth and guarantees due process process, impartial jury access to counsel and i was posting a $38 million.

it went on for years and years and i did that leaving get access to the choice because in the process frequently used a completely false affidavit was supplied in a proceeding to freeze the sale of an asset of the apartment i was selling in new york. i had earmarked as the retainer for my counsel but they sees that on the basis of which was thrown out by the jurors. there was no basis whatsoever but meanwhile i had counsel and assets and other countries that i could use to pay them but not the council that i wanted. this is not what the constitution says and what the people think is going on.

where are the media? although they are starting to we have people like nancy grace declaring people to be guilty before they have been charged. and the media lynching of a suspect it is not a society of law and that is not the true spirit of america. i have left the country and then officially not welcome there and i have no great desire to go back although you can see i do have considerable respect but it is not my problem but it is of those if you were there and 48 million officially do have a criminal record even allowing for the fact millions of those are the ideal i wore a fraternity party 20 years ago, nothing would have been impact to be elected to the office.

mr. bush had a deal like conviction. that approximately 15 percent of the adult population of the u.s. and more than one-fifth of the male adults is officially felons. this is nonsense. simply not the case as former senator web said mentioning sixers 12 times per capita, therefore it those countries don't care about crime which isn't true for americans are more criminal by nature which is rubbish. or it isn't working so you fix it. that what you have to go through i that when the "scooter" libby fiasco followed by the unjust conviction of senator

stevens to see the executive and legislature attached -- attack something would come but hasn't. >> conrad black has written biographies of fdr in richard nixon as record of history what might have been a matter of principle was his book about his time in prison did you write that book in prison? >> yes. not only about that but it connects the of previous biographical book that i wrote but it covers approximately 20 years but it does cover that period and returns went i go to canada i have not seen for five years because of the interventions of the authorities of your country. >> host: he has owned "the daily telegraph", a "chicago sun-times", the national post in canada and the sidney carroll.

finally with light of the eagle you dedicate to from loyal american and french in particular terry brown one negative tina brown, eisenhower, nancy kissinger, peggy noonan noonan, rush limbaugh, etc., etc.. wiry specific about using the word oil in that dedication? >> in the crisis that i went through the onslaught some people went out of their way to be supportive some went quiet and if few defected to be antagonistic i wanted to show some recognition to those that were supportive the way when the system works not confined to it to

the united states, when that degree offical is focused on a person there is the intent those targeting him to ostracize and isolate since i was writing about the united states i that i would focus exclusively on americans but we all resisted that temptation and as i was a guest of the american people including kissinger, i have many american friends and i am grateful to all of them. >> the history of canada i don't expect to sell any in the united states but for any viewers your interested in canada, there is lots of good biographical work of

the individual period of the country's history it has not been presented with a history that it deserves it is very rigorous and scholastic but it is the reid and tends to be a simple narrative without analysis and attention that the personalities that would make it interesting. that is what i try to do. >> host: flights of the eagle is the name of the book, conrad black is the author. the subtitle the grand strategy that brought america from colonial independence to world souders ships and in bookstores now. thank you for your time from toronto. >> guest: thank you so much peter. thank you for having me.