. >> rose: welcome to the program. we begin there evening with general david petraeus and the tragedy at aleppo. >> i think the islamic state has been beaten up very badly. it has to know it's going to lose. and soldiers who are in a lost cause, obviously, start to lose heart. and you've seen reports, in fact of islamic state leaders executing soldiers who have sowt to desert or not done their duty. that is a sign, obviously, that there are cracks appearing in the firmament here of the islamic state defense. having said that, still taking any urban area as large as mosul which at its peak has had two million people in it, is a very significant undertaking. the enemy will undoubtedly huddle, hug, if you will, civilian populations. i mean i wouldn't doubt that baghdadi is staying a live by probably living surrounded by hundreds of civilians.

>> and we conclude this evening with a remembrance of shimon peres. >> the greatest thing that makes me satisfied is to-- really t is the greatest pleasure. >> i don't think the world say plesh-- i think to serve is a pleasure. >> rose: pet ray us-- pets rayus and peres when we continue. >> funding for charlie rose is >> rose: funding for "charlie rose" has been provided by the following: >> and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide. captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> rose: david petraeus is here, the former director of the

cia, served 37 years in the u.s. military. he commanded u.s. troops in iraq during the 2007, 2008 surge. he also led coalition forces in afghanistan from 2010 until 2011. with the collapse of the ceasefire in syria, and as coalition forces ready to retake mosul from isis, i'm especially pleased to have general petraeus back at this table. pel welcome. >> thanks, charlie. great to be back with you. >> rose: there is so much i want to talk about. but let me begin with iraq because it is on the highest agenda, the highest place on the agenda, the retaking of mosul. it has symbolic value. you were there during the iraq war. it will face something-- say something about the plight of isis. so it has a lot of meaning. give me a sense of how you see it. >> it does. it has symbolic meaning. it also has very tangible physical meaning. the fact is i think there is no question that we are going to

defeat the islamic state in mosul and indeed throughout iraq. the real issue, actually, is post islamic state governance, in the capitol which is mosul, an area where i was privileged to serve for the first year as commander of 1901st airborne division after the fight to baghdad. this is the most complex human terrain in all of iraq. sunni arab majority, shia area minority, many kurds, christians, yazidi, and many of them have grieveances against each other. and there are even rivalries within the different ethnic-- ethnic and sectarian groups. it is very, very complex. and frankly it's going to be far more challenging than at this moment than the islamic state it will be a tough fight, city battles. isis is dug in, it has tinl, imwere viced explosive devices am but there is no he request it is going to be defeated. the same is through throughout iraq, if i could. because again, the islamic state will be basically defeated as an

army. there will still be now insurgent or gorilla element-- guerilla elements, still cells, but the level of should decline considerably. the sloo for iraq is politics in baghdad. we have seen some very concerning development there in recent weeks. there have already been months ago a vote of no confidence that resulted in the minister of interior departing. in the last two weeks the minister of defense has been given a vote of no confidence and then a very highly respected kurdish political leader sabari was given a vote of no confidence, the minister of finance having previously served as minister of foreign affairs. this is an effort ultimately, undoubtedly, to take down the prime minister of eye rag. had err al abadi it aer poos led by the former prime minister who is highly secretary tar quan actions three years after the end of the surge really undid so much of what it was we achieved together. who alienated the sunni arab

population and created fertile fields for the planting of the seeds of extremism which the islamic state then used, exploited as it was able to get back up off its stomach when our enforcers and enablers left and then went into syria, drew all kinds of additional strength, combat experience, money, weapons, vehicles and swept back into iraq as a veritiable army. >> so if mall aki came-- malicki came back would we assume that he was doing the bidding for iran? >> well, there certainly would be-- considerable iranian influence. he's not one who when i was privileged to work with him as the commander of the multinational force in iraq during the surge, who had a particular love for iran. but he had a need for what iran could provide at various times. and he is using that now. the truth is that he didn't stay in iran very long when he was in his period of become outside iraq as many of these leaders were. he actually ended up in syria for the bullk of the time.

but the aye rannians clearly provide-- the iranians clearly providing support, assistance, direction, weapons and so forth for the shia militia which to be sure did protect baghdad in a moment of per ill when the islamic state seemed to threaten the capitol, but who now are very, very powerful, and are really beyond the control in some respects of the prime minister. and have caused real problems when they have gone into sunni arab areas. and in many cases abused the population. this is an example of the kind of challenge you have post islamic state. again it's all about the struggle for power and resources. it's a struggle large for iraq and baghdad, keeping in mind by the way that it's baghdad that determines the distribution of the oil revenues. that's the biggest sen trif gal force that keeps iraq together. and it's going to be about post islamic state governance in mosul. and where we were able to chief

achieve good governance to all the elements and responsible to all of them with minority rights guaranteed as well in the early days. but where that proved much more problematic over time. >> there is an axeium, i assume, of military strategy that says it is one thing to push the enme back. it's another thing to hold a territory. >> that's exactly right. in fact a number of us have said don't clear until you know how you are going to hold. that is very much operative here except that i would add don't clear until you know how you are going to hold an govern. that is the real issue here. and there are a lot of conflicting objectives, desires and grieveances that are going to make that very, very difficult. i know that the president's special envoy is very received with this as is the new ambassador to iraq from the united states. they're working it hard. meeting up in iraqi, kurd stan, irbill which is new to mosul where a lot of the different leaders are huddling to determine what follows islamic

state control of mosul in the province. but again, there is a lot of conflicting objectives here. >> one historical point. donald trump often makes the point on the campaign trail that show the obama administration is responsible for the rise of isis. and he cites the fact that we left iraq and because we left iraq, what used to be al-qaeda in iraq morphed into isis. and there had been more american troops remaining in iraq when we left, even though the government did not want them. we would have seen a different situation. >> i'm not partisan. will not imhent on a particular candidate's statements. i will comment on the facts. and the facts are that the real cause of the rise of isis was the alienation of the sunni arab community in iraq, which again created this opportunity for the islamic state to get support within the sunni arab. >> rose: by maliki. >> this is by maliki, claimed

his shia base. >> rose: so the sunnies got-- did they allowed sort of the old al-qaeda in iraq to. >> that is to some degree. there is another element, though, and that is that the prime minister also prevented us from continuing to enable his special operations command and counterterrorism forces to continue to keep the islamic state down, to keep it defeated on its stomach, if you will. and that also was prevented. he made an agreement to that affect at one point in time. and then it was never operationallized. now i would have liked to have seen 10,000 troops stay, without question. i do doubt that it would have given us the influence over prime minister mallici to keep him from carrying out these ruinous sectarian actions. but with what it would have done is we would have had bases, infrastructure, communication, satellite shots, all the rest of that, so that we very rapidly

could have reinserted forces into iraq when it was clear we needed to support the iraqi security forces to prevent the islamic state from taking baghdad,erbill and so forth that is something i think that is indisputable. and it took us too long, frankingly. it took a very long time. as we have discussed before at this table, time matters when are you fighting an enemy like the islamic state, which is enjoying success in cyberspace in part, in large part because it is seen as a success. and the sooner you can show that the islamic state is a loser is the sooner that it's no longer as effective in recruiting would be jihadists and coming. >> sure, yes. >> the united states announced today that in some near time in the future, that some 500 to 600

american troops were going to iraq, i assume to participate in some way in this effort. >> uh-huh. >> what are they going to do and who else is going to be on the ground voferred in the retaking of mosul? >> well, gradually the president, secretary of defense have granted authority to the commanders to embed u.s. forces further, closer to the front. that authority exists for the commander on the ground, lieutenant general steve towns end who by the way knows mosul as well having fought there as a striker bri gaid commander before coming to baghdad and baqu ba and the surge in iraq. a really talented commander. so that authority is there, if he chooses to use it. beyond that, there is a base being reestablished up there, it's called kiara west airfield, a huge sort of strategic level airfield that in fact housed one of our bri gaid combat teams and probably 80 or a hundred helicopters. when the 101st airborne division

was deployed in the province. that is a very important base from which to project a lot of different power, undoubtedly even perhaps to run unmanned aerial vehicles, manned aircraft, attack helicopters, perhaps some long shooters from the ground. and so forth. so that is another very important element. it is a huge base though and it requires enormous protection if you are going to put a lot of vulnerable american assets and colis assets on the ground. so it's interesting now that we're approaching 6,000, is the kowbt that i have seen as an estimate of what we may end up on the ground. i very much support that, the par a docks is of course that we have them there without the status of forces agreement that prevented us from keeping 10,000 troops on the ground when we pulled them out before. >> and what are their rules of engagement? >> i can't, condition speak to those. >> rose: but i asked the secretary of defense whether they go on search and destroy

missions and he said yes to me. >> it is publicly known that special operations forces are authorized to carry out certain raids and other activities for very, very high value targets. >> rose: which are offensive. >> he those are offensive in nature. it has been used relatively infrequently but has resulted in very important-- . >> rose: how long will this take, do you think? >> i don't think the fight to retake mosul will be anywhere near as difficult certainly as we would have estimated six or feen 12 months ago. i think the islamic state has been beaten up very badly. it has to know it's going to lose. and soldiers who are in a lost cause obviously start to lose heart. and you've seen reports, in fact, of islamic state leaders executing soldiers who have sowt to desert or not done their duty. that is a sign obviously that there are cracks appearing in the firmament here of the islamic state defense. having said that still, taking any urban area as large as mosul which at its peak has had two million people in it, is a very

significant undertaking. the enemy will undoubtedly huddle, hug, if you will, civilian populations. i wouldn't doubt that baghdadi is staying a live by probably living surrounded by hundreds of civilians. >> rose: we probably know where is he, do you think. >> i would think we have a pretty good idea. nobody is going to run an army and caliphate as actively as he has to without us getting some sense of where is he. as with addnani. i'm told that we knew about adnani and it was when he left his sheltered area to rally the troops. >> rose: that a drone took him out. >> that is my understanding. >> rose: mine as well. so this could happen before the end of the year, you think? i'm not asking you to give me a precise. >> i think it could. >> rose: but certainly before the obama administration hands over power. >> certainly mosul, absolutely. i think the question is whether raqqa, the real capitol-- . >> rose: that is where i am going. >> i think that is a question.

that still needs a lot of preparation. there is a lot of quote shaping of the battlefield that has to take place. and really that's a case of preparing more forces, certainly, than are available now. and once again when you come back to don't clear until you know how you're going to hold and how you're going to govern, there are quite profound issues there. that is a sunni arab majority area. you can't have the kurds, the syrian kurds clearing that and holding it. that will produce enormous friks. there clearly is a requirement for additional sunni arab forces in syria to help take that operation. >> rose: want to go back to iraq for a second. troops on the ground, kurds? >> kurds. >> rose: iraqi soldiers. >> iraqi army soldiers, special operations forces, iraqi police units that are actual units of police bat all ons. >> rose: shia militia. >> they will be there somewhere. they are determined to play a role. but obviously our objective is to keep them out of the sunni arab areas. there will also be a subi-- sunni arab, if you will,

militias that have been formed from the nanoa province, even christian millishes as and yazidi millish yas. >> rose: who chose not to be part of the iraqi army. >> they couldn't be part of it. they were isolated. they were supported to some degree by the iraqi government. and they will now all have to be incorporated into this. so again you are getting an idea of the complexity of this. and of the conflicting claims of who should control what area. >> rose: will your old adversary sulmani bb playing a role. >> i'm sure he will be put in an appearance. >> rose: he will put in an paryns in the taking of mosul. >> he won't go into mosul, will stay out-- he won't go into the front line area but there will be selfies, undoubtedly, of sulmani with admiring shia militia supported by iran at some point in the operation. >> rose: they will be supporting shia militia who are

from iraq. >> yes. >> rose: supporting him and he will be, have some connection with their engagement. >> yeah, there san individual naiped alamari, he was the minister of transportation, most recently, who has emerged as sort of the overarching leader for a variety of these shia militia. what is ironic is that he used to be pie con duity when i wanted to get a tough message to general sulmana the commander of the ku dz force. >> rose: how would you do that. >> i would call him up and tell him to pound sand or whatever it was, something perhaps more substantive than that. >> rose: pound sand was a military term. >> that was a response to one of the messages that sulmani sent me which was essentially, the intent of which was to con vein-- convey i should deal with him rather than iranian diplomats or other z. >> rose: american air power will be employed? >> absolutely, yeah. let's remember that what america uniquely brings to this fight, in quantities that are many

times the aggregate of all that our allies, parter ins and host nation can provide, what we bring are what are called intelligence, surveillance and reconaissance assets. these are manned and unmanned aerial vehicles, pred ders, reapers and so forth. precision strike assets to exemployed what we are getting through imagery, intelligence but also signals in human intelligence. and the ability to fuse all of this, to in an industrial strength way, to bring together all the different forms of intelligence, digitized and make sense of them and to understand what it is we are seeing on the battle field to help our iraqi partners with that kind of information. and indeed, to act on it ourselves with our coalition partners and with iraqi partners. >> rose: now back to syria and raqqa. that is the longer term project. >> it is, yes. >> rose: is it six months? is it a year? is it. >> it could go faster. if the islamic state is getting

beaten up quite badly, they will collapse in iraq. they will have to try to fall back. but mosul is fairly isolatedded at this point in time. in fact, what we are actually doing now over there is cleaning up some packet-- pockets that are to the south. you have kiara here, mosul here. there's a town called shercat down here, they're going down and cleaning that up so they have clean lines of communication all the way up from the south and from baghdad. they may do a city over here that is a bit of a ses pool, haliji one of the last cities we liberated in the surge in the fight against the sunni arabs before turning on the shia arab militia and then just concentrate everything on mosul. but mosul, the lines of communication have been cut quite effectively. and it's a very long trip across the desert if you want to get in there. as we used to say, you have to really want to be a terrorist if you are going to come across the desert. >> rose: you and i were at a

recent conference in which there was a pronounced-- i thought majority opinion, that says in syria we ought to be focusing on the civil war first, that there is a kind of emergency there. because of what is happening in aleppo. and we need to move against, in some way, to have some influence against the tragedy that is taking place there. >> this is horrific. this is the humanitarian disaster of our time, of recent decades, really. perhaps going back to-- . >> rose: the it is absolutely-- again it's bar baric what is going on. what the russians and the iranians and supportk bashar al-assad's air force and what they are all doing. they are basically employing tactics last seen on this scale in chech that and groz nee, where if you qunt seem to defeat them precisely, you just destroy it all. barrel bombs in particular, obviously, very imprecise, very indiscriminate and civilians are

bearing the brownt of this. there are a couple 100,000 people, is the estimate, in these enclaves, in eastern-- the eastern part of aleppo that are being encircled and are just being pummeled. and again, this is an absolute humanitarian disaster of the highest order. >> rose: now they tried to do something about it by having a ceasefire negotiated with the russians. >> yes. >> rose: it lasted a week or less. >> yeah, it is very clear the russian objectives are very different from ours. it is our-- whether you want to say we are being played or what the issue is, cuz they repositioned during this time, replenished and so forth and then just went at it. but the idea that we're going to work together and focus only on the islamic state and fatah al sham which is the al-qaeda affiliate, used to be al nousra, that has obviously not transpierd. nor did the provision of humanitarian assistance to those areas that are not under the control of the regime. so this is very, very desperate. and you're going to see the creation of massive casualties.

it's ongoing. the number of sortees is very significant. and there is nothing precise whatsoever. >> rose: i want to make one quick point. if this is about the civil war in syria, this is about assad versus rebel forces who are in a helpa which they hold. >> yes. >> rose: and they are being mbed and their families are being bombed. >> that's right. there is bashar al-assad's regime forces substantially augmented on the ground by iranian supported lebanese hezbollah, shia militia, kudu dz force and russian special operators who have been on the ground as well. >> so the question is, do we need to say yes, we want to go after isis and mosul and yes in iraq, and yes we are going to go after raqqa and where else we think it is necessary to carry the battle to them and syria. but right now we have a global cat as sphee of unseen par.

>> it is extraordinary t is tragic. >> so what do we do? >> well, i think people keep asking is it too late. and the answer is no, it's not too late. it's not too late to declare a safe zone. it's not too late to declare a no fly zone. and indeed if the regime bombs folks we are supporting or we are concerned about, we tell them we are going to ground your air force. we can do that. >> we can do that very quickly, sure. you done even have to really enter their air space, although we are in it. >> that is why-- you can do it. >> so why done we-- air launched, sea launched and others, that is a question obviously for the administration. but again. >> but what is the rational what is the argue? >> well, i think. >> as to why we are not doing that now. >> the concern is always then what. that is a reasonable, understandable question. okay, we do that, then what. okay, do we get into it with the

russians. okay, then what? and i think this is the kind of question that has caused, again, understandable reservations. but the fact is where we are right now is absolutely tragic. you know, if you back all the way up, the rule number one in dealing with potential refugee situation is to try to keep them always in the country. we did a no fly zone to support the iraqi kurds for better part of a decade or so following the gulf war until we ultimately went into iraq to take down saddam hussein. this is again very doable. yes, there are risks. and yes those risks have increased and gotten more complex and complicated as each additional element has committed to shore up al-assad at moments. and the russian introduction is particularly concerning. so this is not to be provocative, this is not to

again provoak. if you don't know you can prevent them from carrying out an absolute, this is a war crime, actually. everyone now agrees, you look at the definition, this is maybe the definition of war crimes. >> so how hard is it to build a coalition? >> we have a coalition it is a coalition against the islamic state. >> the coalition not against the islamic state. we're talking about a coalition to do something about the catastrophe in aleppo. against assad and his russian helpers. >> numerous of the countries that are part of the coalition against the islamic state were part of an earlier coalition that was actually seeking to shore up the quote at that time, moderate sunni opposition, to bashar al-assads. >> they were all you man-- unanimously opposed to assad. >> and still are. >> absolutely. they still viewed him, i think correctly, as the magnetic attraction that will keep this war going because of the way the

sunni arabs and sunnies elsewhere in the world see bashar as acting and being responsible for the deaths now, at least 400,000, maybe 500,000 syrian civilians, and the displacement of over half of the population either internally or externally. and you know, before you say well i will let them fight it out. this is a mid east problem. they have never gotten along together, let's remember that this is a region that does not play by las vegas rules. what happens in the middle east does not stay in the middle east. it speus out. and in this case the tsunami of refugees from syria into europe has caused the most significant domestic political challenges for the leaders of our most important european allies and partners, that they have experienced in decades. and that's going to play out over the course of the next months an indeed years. >> is this a consequence of

incrementalism. >> well, it is a consequence of decisions not taken. but there has never been a guarantee. and you know, the challenge with this, look, to be fair-- i was in at the situation room table in the beginning without going into what it is that i might have recommended, certainly others have talked about it. it's in memoirs and so forth that you can find. there clearly were opportunities in the beginning that. the challenge was that no one could ever say at the situation room table this will guarantee this particular outcome. the challenge is by not having done that-- . >> rose: how often do you see a decision in which somebody says i guarantee you, if we do this, this will be the result. >> not very often. and again it is always about taking risk. there was considerable risk but obviously there was considerable risk in not taking action. now we have seen that materialize. it is hard to imagine it being worse than it is right now. this is, again, a catastrophic situation and history is going to judge very harshly. >> i think it will. i mean certainly-- . >> rose: it did in saf-- sahr

sahr. >> it did in africa, rwanda. >> coughi annan and bill clinton both have apologized. >> yes, yep. >> rose: what would you do? >> well, i would have long since done a safe zone as well as a no fly zone. >> rose: is finding a part of sir why that refugees could go to? >> yes, where they know they are going to be taken care of. where you can get humanitarian assistance to them. where you can again keem them closer to homes. >> rose: where you can have army pros tect them. >> yes, indeed. we have now built forces that can help us do that on the ground. look, i agree with the idea of use host nation forces whenever possible to be doing the fighting on the front lines. remember, the lessons that i laid out i think last time i was here at this table included one that this is going to be a generational struggle. and therefore strategy has to be sustainable. that involves the costs and the greatest cost of all, obviously, is the loss of our young men and

women in uniform. and we've got to take every measure to mitigate the ponts of that, where we can recognize in that inevitably there will be, and there have been, losses. albeit modest numbers of losses so far. we could do that. we could have a-- we could ground bashar's air force. again that is not undoable at all. >> this is a piece by breathe steven in "the wall street journal," obama will leave office in 136 days when he wrote that the new administration will need its own syria, the first most essential step renounce the most fundamental principal laid down last year by secretary of state john kerry and that syria should be a unified country, the war in syria is a complex business, significantly involving four foreign states, russia, iran, turkey and the united states. we haven't mentioned turkey and at least five major nonstate militias along with the assad regime itself. but the war is a zero sum

struggle for power. either they win absolutely or o upon nds do. no government can long accept a compromise sovereignty if syria is to remain a uniform country in principle its warring factions will fight for as long as they are able to make it. >> i tend to agree with that. i have said for some time that i doubt very seriously that humpy dump tee can be put back together that is tragic but it is reality. and you know, the military constantly asks policy makers, what is your desirednd state? what is it that you are seeking to accomplish? we're very clear that we want to defeated the islamic state and al-qaeda affiliate in syria. beyond that, though, it's very difficult to imagine the concept being held out as realistic any more. its idea of syria as a union tear state, perhaps of some kind of federal nature, is starting, i think, to defy reality. >> rose: so what are you left

with, the possibility. >> i think we have to ask what, in fact, a new administration is going to have to come to grips with. they are going to determine what are the pobtds. what are the-- what is in the realm of realism as you examine this. now i think certainly among those is going to be some kind of sliced up syria at the end of the day. and that is going to be very, very difficult. it's going to be fought over, by the way, when we reflect back on iraq and those who used to say well, let iraq break into shia stan, sunnistan and kurdistan and the question that a lot of us used to raise is okay, tell me how you are going to do that, who is going to draw the boundaries, who is going to display the hundreds and hundreds of thousands of people that are in the wrong area, if you will. and by the way who is going to provide the resources in the case of iraq for the sunni arab area which has no energy production left at all now that the oil fields are under the control of the iraqi kurds. these are very significant

issues. and we're seeing it play out in syria. and that could, indeed, be a vision of what kind of horrific vision, if you can't get it right in iraq which is why it comes back again to politics. it comes back to a struggle, as brett said, a struggle for power and resources. yes, there is religion in here, ethnic issues in here, but it's really all about power and resources. >> rose: i'm parra phrasing here, but who was it that said all that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men and women to do nothing. >> yes, yes, and in some respects, there is a lot more that we could have and arguably should have done. >> or have to do. >> along the way. and now i think it's an rose: general davidth you.. petraeus, back in a moment. shimon peres died last night after suffering a stroke two weeks ago. he was 93 years old. one of israel's last surviving

founding fathers, peres devoted his life to building the jewish state. born in poland in 1-9d 23. he served asity real's president from 2007 to 2014, and tbies as the country's prime minister. he was also foreign minister and defense minister. in 1994 he was awarded the nobel peace prize for his efforts to secure a lasting peace with the palestinians. in 2012 he received a presidential metal of freedom. per es was revered globally for his leadership, his intellect and unique understanding of the world. in a statement president obama said a light has gone out. but the hope he gave us will burn forever. shimon peres was a soldier for israel, for the jewish people, for justice, for peace and for the belief that we can be true to our best selves. he appeared on this program many, many times over the years. and here is a look at some of those conversations. >> so the borders can be solved? >> yes, i think so. >> rose: are we further away

today than we were? >> yes. >> rose: we are? >> yes. >> rose: because? >> because one thing you have mentioned, namely that they begin to build a state and they can see-- . >> rose: and they believe that in this year, they can get a vote at the united nations recognizing a palestinian state. >> yes, but that is an illusion. the vote without answering the real question will be an empty declaration. some of them understand it. it will be an empty shell. and i think-- . >> rose: others think they have no choice. >> but this is not a choice. the other choice, the other choice is to complete the negotiations. more patience, make decisions, be courageous and you will do it. this is the best bet today. >> rose: but why will it be destructive to declare a palestinian state? >> because the-- . >> rose: it puts the negative on it. >> this state will not be able

to prevent the west bank from becoming gaza. they will be taken over by hamas. they will be firing missiles against us. it maybe a continuation of terror. so what do they expect us to do? you have to relate to the problems as they are, and as difficult as it is, to offer up a solution. >> rose: to look at your career, why would i be, why would i not think that it's possible that you would be in favor of talking to hamas? >> i will tell you a story, charlie. i was in the international organization, there were 15 vice president there. 14, i was one of the 15, 14 asked that arafat will become a member of socialist international. i was a minority of one. they didn't overrule me. but they did ask the organization at the time there

were really-- -- they took me in the corner and said look, gentlemen, you are a minority of one, you have to listen to the others. why do you object? i says i don't object. if you will tell me that arafat is a democrat and a socialist, i shall voted for him. but as a terrorist, how can you be for him. you know what, they left me alone. and they told arafat, you have to stop terror. you have to declare that you are ready for peace. you have to start the negotiations. and the same should be done with hamas. to take hamas entities and terrorististic organizations, a shooting group of people, having an ideology that calls for the destruction of israel, how can they do it. >> rose: bring me to today's news. you must know something about

what is going on there. >> yes, they are continuing today, just an hour ago there was another missile that hit. >> rose: quil anyone? >> i don't know yet the results. i just-- and there were some bottle events. one of them was really shocking, coming in a settlement, killing with a knife the mother, the father. three children and a baby. >> rose: do you sense that time is running out? do you sense that there is. >> time is demanding, not running out. >> rose: it's what? >> demanding to take a fast step because of the battle developments. not to disturb the new-- i don't believe the ends of the world. >> rose: but you also are aware of the demographics. >> we are aware but-- .

>> rose: you were, sharon was, that is why sharon made the initiative he did, om heart made the same kind of initiatives. >> they are not insisting any more the way they used to about the right of the refugees. they softened their language, saying the solution of the palestinian refugees should be done in a just and agreed way. when i talk with them, they understand. i talk with them, openly. and it is difficult but it is a change of mind on both sides. it's very hard to overcome. the intervention of bombs and acts of violence which make the people angry, what can you do. incidents that happened, the

killings, it's terrible. >> st reasons so you have to overcome many hurdles and many deficits. and you shunlt lose your patience. >> is that to the israeli people. >> i'm saying it to the israeli people too. >> patience. >> i'm saying it, the best solution for security is-- shooting for peace. that peace can add to our security. nothing else can do. >> do you tell yourself in the morning when you look in the mirror, give me the strength and courage and opportunity to help be part of finally making this peace. is that what you would like to see as a crowning achievement of your service to israel. >> well, the crowning a chiefments, you have to achieve all your life. there is no one achievement and finished. but i want to tell you something. -- for 15 or 20 years i was the deputy in the defense. and i think he is the most

unusual and genuine man that one can think of. but when i in a good mood, i think he made a mistake which would i would never think it's possible. i think his dream was too small. at the time, the thing the dream is a miracle am now i look back, i'm telling you the reality-- so in order to correct the mistake i tell myself, don't be afraid. don't look with regret. i mean we have problems, we lost good people, we lost life but all told, israel is an exceptional performance. 63 years in a desert, going through seven wars. we made a country which is successful economicically. which is unique in its exotion, that came back to the land, that

assembled the people, that and still fighting and keeping its destiny. look, i am -- today 88 years old. >> how old? >> will 88. i started when i was 24. i remember the whole process. i remember the first day i came to work with him. we were outgunned. we didn't have a single gun. we didn't have a single plane. you were supposed to lose everything. we didn't have-- so what do you want from me. i'm going to lose my house-- then i will have nothing. and we started. >> rose: so dream big and count your bletions. >> dream bick and bigger. i think-- when i look today about the debate of the economy in the united states, the united

states, actually was all the time the greatest dreamer in the world. for a short while you have more money than-- and then it went wrong am look at the future, not at the balance of today. you have to be up tomorrow, not up to date in economic. the coming ten years will be sensational in research and development. it is a totally different world. so don't be so poips. and-- pessimism and short tempered. and america still has the best institutions for innovations, for penetrating the secrets of nature. go ahead, so there are deficits. deficits, i believe-- . >> rose: but are you also an expert on optimism too. >> and in a just fired manner. why should i regret. what is called optimism-- .

>> rose: you don't look at a campaign that you lost and say. >> i lost campaigns. i never lost the cause. >> rose: never lost the cause but lost the campaign. >> yes. >> rose: the israel people have had a chance to make a choice and they rejected me? >> that is differently. i think a-- is mistaken, if he wants to be on the top, then he has to be ahead. when you are a heads of the people, you are in a minority. it takes time. so i think i was as i should have been-- people weren't ready. but i continue to work and most of the things that i was fietding for became a reality. i have my own satisfaction in my heart. and i think that's part of the future too. don't give up. i gnt see why you should don't quitted and i remain a optimist

with everything n pie heart that is. >> and i tell people don't give up. deficits, if you want to arrive at the promised land, you have to nernt for the. >> so what. >> when you speak of these aspirations, do you-- you know t clearly one who was part of the founding of the israeli state as a young aid to ben gur onas you saidz can you identify with the same aspirations of young palestinians. >> yes. i think that they have to get off a different past. we solved it from a different point. but i will tell you something which maybe i'm exaggerating. but i feel the palestinians, youngsters are listening to me too. and i can speak with them. and they know what position, and

the young israelis, i was six years in politics. in the six years i was the most controversial politician in israel. >> rose: why was that? >> and now i'm the most popular one. i don't know. have i no idea. when i was controversial or popular, why was a controversial. baiflt because i moved a little bit too fast, too much ahead. and i think fighting is better then satisfaction. >> rose: used to be said, used to be said, even though you had been defense minister, that shimon was not a general. he was not a man of the military even though he had been defense minister. do you believe that, and therefore he might be soft on defense and security. >> generals are fighting every day and this sort of things.

-- you live the talk then. and i think since we didn't have anything building the-- was the first priority. and that was my responsibility, more or less. that is what ben gur onwanted me to do. i wanted to go and fight. he wouldn't let me. he said look, we have to build, we have nothing. so historically-- . >> rose: that is one of your legacies, you built up the israeli defense. >> that was the need, the priority of the nation. i didn't think in terms of credit or legacy. i don't work for history, i work for people. and you have to do, at a given time, the right thing, the most demanding one and look, they praise everything i did. so what.

i'm afraid of praise. you know, when i look at what was the greatest tradition to the jewish people in the world, satis fraction-- satisfaction, a good joke and i will be satisfied. the minute are you satisfied you became lazy. when are you not satisfied you create, you change, you change, you engage. and that is a great thing. so i don't see an end. and i don't think history is a judgement. i think we have to judge history, not history has to judge us. because history is basically-- blindness. we want to open our eyes better to see longer, to see deeper. to see a long distance. -- -- we have it, at that time, the expect see of life was half,

all the kings in europe, you know, they didn't have antibiotics, they didn't have running water. they look at it differently, really. and each of us has a given time to contribute. his contribution to the rest. contribute and there will be an end to the contribution because there will be an end to your life. don't waste it. >> rose: and so what do you hope the epitaph will say? >> i don't care. for me, if somebody will say that they saved the life of one child, this is the greatest compliment, i hope to be remembered. >> rose: save the life of one child. >> yes. >> rose: in this long life that you continue to flourish in, what has been, brought you the greatest sense of

satis-- satisfaction and where is the deepest regret? >> the greatest thing that make me satisfied is to serve the people, really. it's the greatest pleasure. >> i don't think its-- woo is a pleasure, i think to serve is a pleasure. and i was for 60 years in the administration, minister of-- and prime minister, i am asking what took most of my time. instead of handed-- among people and institutions. when i was prime minister i hardly held the-- hearded word yes. i don't have-- i hardly hear the word no. and they discovered that if people feel that you serve them, they will responds gladly, if you give an order, people will-- if you ask them them to volunteer, you will be surprised

how many of them will volunteer for everything. so the greatest satisfaction is to gather the good will and trust. >> rose: do you think were you a good politician? >> i'm not sure. i think i was true to my mission. and i don't know. you know, there is a difference between being elected, and accomplishing things which are not popular. and if you want to be elected, you must, you know, when i was in the administration, i was the most controversial figure in israel. z and when president i was the most popular man of the country. i don't know when i was more satis fiedz. >> rose: why do you think that is, now that you are president you are more popular than when prime minister. because the argument was made even though you had been defense minister, israel seemed to have paid more attention to former military heroes like-- sharon

or-- . >> i don't think. i think it is all gossips and psychological analyzing. i expect very much psychology, but i am very weak on it. i really don't know to make up my mind. so i'm not impressed by it. maybe i took a little bit a step too much ahead. and i paid for it. and i don't regret it. but i will tell you something else. in israel and all in order to be elected, you-- i got 20% advantage. but then a chain of-- started, it is not our-- is the terrorists who decide it. the one thing in life, never complain and never explain.

>> there are people here in this audience who feel strongly that the passion and the palestinians have to have a state to live in peace, not to be occupied. >> this is my wish too. we are not there because we want to be there. but because we were attacked. it didn't go to occupy anybody. we didn't have the slightest intention to do so. we were attacked. we fought, and that changed the map. and changed the situation. >> has it changed israel, though? that you still are there? and having to. >> i don't know, really. i mean even with the same land, we are separated communities. and every community feels they are better probably than the other on both sides. but no matter. i still believe, that wants to

put an end to the present situation. and understand that it cannot be done by force. it must be done by agreement. the palestinians, and they wish they will be at the same level that we are. and they can do it. we are not superior people. superyority in that case is to be democratic. superyority is to employ size and technology am and they can do it, it is in their hands. unfortunately, they are split by the hamas, by the religious, by the iranians. they are two victims. but i feel like them, i would like to see every palestinian ent-- enjoying freedom and

equality and dignity it doesn't give me any pleasure to see the palestinians suffer. very far from it. and believe me when i read about the children in syria that are being killed, i feel like a father feels about every child. who wants it. and i think we shall-- i know that people say optimistic, maybe. but you have a license to be optimistic too. israel achieve things that nobody thought we should achieve it. and that the culture, the high-tech, you know, the fact that we are the only country in the middle east that speaks the original language, hebrew, no other country speaks the language of their fore fathers, i never thought there would be more hebrew speaking people than danish speaking people, for example. and there is today.

so this story is a great achievement in my eyes. >> rose: what do you want your legacy to be? >> it is too early for me to think about it. >> i'm all concerned about tomorrow. than about yesterday. >> rose: remembering shimon peres who died at age 93. for more about this program and earlier episodes visit us online at pbs.org and carlie rose.com. captioning sponsored by rose communications captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org

>> rose: funding for "charlie rose" has been provided by: >> and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide.

♪ this is "nightly busine" wi. handshake? stocks took off late today on reports that opec reached a deal many thought elusive. to limit oil production. but will the deal stick? severing ties. california took the unusual step of temporarily suspending its dealings with wells fargo, effective immediately. and costly misclassif senato want to know if mylan incorrecy classified its to san payments to states. those stories and more tonight on "nightly bu for wednesday, sep good evening, everyone. and welcome. not many saw this coming. opec has reportedly agreed to cut oil production. and this is something