. welcome to "amanpour" on pbs. tonight, new year, old threats. from north korea to iran, an in-depth look at president trump's biggest foreign policy challenges with "the new yorker's" robin rice and my conversation with the stars of the hit indy movie "call me by your name." the film has won a whole host of awards with oscar nominations around the corner. timothy shalimay and army hammer talk about love and life.

good evening, everyone. welcome to the program. donald trump meets with his national security team to strategize on the challenging year ahead, dealing with north korea as a fledgling nuclear power and whether or not to keep the iran nuclear deal alive. this as the white house announced the president will attend the annual policy wonk top in davos, switzerland. sources describing it as an american vindication tour. robin wright has wintnessed the tension firsthand. her latest piece for the "new yorker" is called "iran in turmoil to trump's delight." and daniel was a foreign policy adviser to hillary clinton's campaign, he's executive editor

of foreign affairs. welcome to both of you. it couldn't be more scary. what do you think we should be looking at. we mentioned north korea and iran. rea and zoom out from trump. trump's policy with north korea has been sound and fury than fire and furimey menfury. but the next year will put to the test a stated policy of three or four american administrations which is that we won't accept a nuclear north kor korea. as this crisis comes to a head, washington is going to need to reckon whether there is a red line we'll stand by. >> i'd say there are two other countries more important to our united states and long-term foreign policy. one is russia, clearly in a critical year because putin faces reelection. his expansionist desires,

ambitions, are everclearer and china, of course, where president xi jinping is really the major power of asia, the major challenge to the united states whether in terms of military might or economic strength so i think there are a whole range of issues that we once thought we had a modus operandi and we don't anymore. >> let's pick up on china because it dove tails with north korea as well and in fact richard haass, head of the council on foreign relations, former state department, says that the u.s. under president trump is engaged in an abdication of global leadership and walking away from institutions and alliances that set the rules for the world. and not least in the pacific. do you think that is an accurate depiction of where america is today? >> i think that is an accurate depiction. i also think the consequences are going to be long-term rather than short-term this reduces friction between the united states and china so it's a good example of the transactionalism

that donald trump has made the centerpiece of his approach to the world. it will be in the next presidency that we'll pay costs for that when we see challenges in the south china sea and the effects of a long-term american abdication in leadership on human rights and democracy, global economic openness and green energy so i would look to the effects of that not now but in a few years. >> when it comes to north korea, it's like whiplash at the moment. you've got this issue of leadership. you have president trump talking tough military game and comparing sizes of nuclear buttons and this and that and on the other hand saying he'd be willing to engage with north korea under the correct conditions. do we know where the policy is headed on north korea. >> no. the problem is he talks about not allowing north korea to keep its nuclear weapons and it's so far along in its program, dispersed in so many places around the country that it would be hard to take it out militarily and the cost of a war

would be so devastating for that part of asia, for the united states, for some of our alliances that the military operation so what do you do? you try to figure out a policy that will contain north korea so that it will feel okay they have a capability but they won't use it and they mow tknow the price be too high. that's where i think the president's policy is unrealistic in some ways. >> this was a break through, the first meeting between north korea and south korea. we don't know whether they're at each other's throats or trying to deconflict. how do you access that, that president moon in south korea said it was president trump who helped contribute to this a roachment. >> i think president moon was being very savvy in giving trump credit for something he didn't deserve credit for. it's a strategy leaders have deployed, be as obsequious as possible to president trump and

do whatever you can to mitigate the dangers of his behavior and i think that's what happened with the talks in korea. >> interestingly, the readout from south korea was that the south korean readout quoted the president as saying you let them know, i.e. pyongyang , that thee will be no military action as long as talks are ongoing. is that wise? or maybe it is wise to take the threat off the table. >> that's great and let's hope diplomacy makes some progress. may great fear is this is a pr stunt by kim kim jong-un and that especially getting the south koreans to pay for the delegation, not just the athletes but the cheerleaders and all the other delegations that will go with them. >> to the olympics. >> to the olympics and in the meantime north koreans work away at their program and they have given every indication they won't roll back their program.

the danger is we get through this period of brotherly love and dialogue and all it takes is one set of twooeets to get thin back to where they are. that's why i don't real a lot to the potential of this dialogue. let's hope. >> one final wrapup on north korea before we move on to iran. the "wall street journal" has talked about the bloody nose strategy that the united states is seriously considering some kind of military exercise if there's another test or whatever of the north korean nuclear capabilities or its intercontinental ballistic missile. is that realistic and what actually do you think that would do. zbl >> it gets terrifying very fast. you have millions of south koreans and japanese and

americans in range and there's every reason to think kim would be bloody nose option and they'll worry about well, if we don't do it now that we will lose it down the road. s specially with an impetuous young leader who don't have the kind of worldly experience of either his father or grandfather. >> this mo-- let's move to iran and try to drill down on what will make america and the rest of the world safe nest this new big kerfuffle in the white house and the trump administration. should we keep the iran new deal, shant we? shall we waive the sanctions again? shall we not?

for americans who may be dubious about this, what is the value of the nuclear deal? >> i'm most interested in robin's views but the most important effect is that it has contained the north korean nuclear threat. everything we worried about in the obama administration administration has been contained. >> the iranian nuclear threat? >> the iranian nuclear threat. >> robin? >> it's the most important nuclear non-proliferation treaty. it sets a policy for any regime considering developing the world's deadliest weapon. it opened the door to try to unravel other things. so trump says they don't want regime change. but the danger is there's a can't set of actors in tehran.

the current policy would not be acceptable for the trump administration and what they're effectively talking about is regime change and these protests have pushed that argument forward and the president on new year's day before most of us were awake tweeted, you know, "time for change. the iranian people want freedom." so he's taking this agenda further. >> much further than president obama because we saw the same protests in 2009, i was there on the ground and it was notable that, in fact, president obama did not step forward in a way to defend the protesters. of course, your new article, i said, is "turmoil in iran to trump's delight." what -- how did this start? we understand president rouhani with his budget basically made it transparent, that he's forced to give billions of dollars to the hard-liners, to the conservatives, to the religious. was it his gambit or a plot against him? >> it was a perfect storm. you had escalating prices

anyway, in part because the government's trying to undertake reforms that the imf or the world bank would want him to take. at the same time, you had the culling of poultry for fears of avian flu. so that jacked prices up. then you had the president trying to be transparent, showing his budget, exposing also how much money the religious institutions receive and, of course, that means the regime and then you had hard-liners who want to discredit president rouhani because there is -- the bigger context is the transition. who will succeed the supreme leader who is aging and some claim a little bit ailing and rouhani is one of the key alternatives and so is a hard line cleric who lran against hi for president and the consensus is it was the hard-liners who started this to discredit president rouhani and it took off in a way that is beyond anyone's control. >> 31 cities or more around the country. not as huge as in '09. they've tapered off a little bit

but there's a sense people are angry. i was staggered by president rouhani actually saying, you know, to his own cohort, how can we expect these young people to live like we live? these are different generations, as you said, the majority weren't even born before the revolution. >> and the majority of voters have been born since the revolution. you have among that young generation you have official statistics claim 29% unemployment. if you include underemployment it could be as high as 40%. that's not sustainable. so the working classes are feeling the brunt of the economic issues plus the young who took to the streets. but this is not 2009 at all. we had eight days of protests. the green movement lasted for six months, then you had millions of people. what was stunning about these protests, you didn't have the reformers getting out on the street, the people who were the green movement protesters. there's not that coming together of the different factions in iran. >> and daniel, obviously people are looking at the whole sort of big picture.

1979, the revolution, was a pivotal year for hardline personal politics, religious politics in the region and people are looking at the somewhat sort of lifting of restrictions by saudi arabia on the people and trying to liberalize islam there. they're looking at potentially iran changing its stripes. do you see it that way? is it huge and transformative right now or are we still not sure the way this is going? >> i think we're not quite sure. it's a moment of turmoil throughout the region and different kinds of goffs a s ag are looking for different strategies to deal with that turmoil in various ways. i think the temptation from washington is to see it as all about us and u.s. policy. i think that's true with iran where we would like to think the protests are all about iranian foreign policy and the kinds of activities u.s. officials don't like but we should remember in each one of these cases it's fundamentally about local conditions and politics and not try to make it all about the united states. >> daniel, robin, wish we had

more time. thank you so much. fascinating. now to some of america's cultural diplomats, it's actors. it's award season and perhaps the fastest rising star is one timothy chalamet, the 22-year-old stars in a movie called "call me by your name" about a young student and an older teacher who began an affair in the sun-drenched roman countryside. look at this clip. >> that sounds different. did you change it? >> i changed it a little bit rjt why? >> i just play it the way lizt would have played it if he altered bach's version. >> play that again. >> play what again? >> the thing you played outside. >> oh, you want me to play the thing i played outside? >> pleads. . >> a flurry of awards and nominations has descended on

this film. the latest from the baftas and fresh the golden globes i sat down this week with chalamet and his co-star armie hammer. their banter and chemistry continues off screen as well. this film has struck a chord. everybody's been knocked out by it but it's an independent little movie. were you surprised by the reaction and how it's being received? >> i didn't go into the movie thinking it would be sort of accepted and celebrated like this. it's a beautiful script but it's also -- it's very much an indy movie. we shot it for almost nothing a little tiny town in the countryside of italy that was gorgeous but it felt more like a passion project and a labor of love. it wasn't anything anyone was expecting to blow up. now that it's been so wonderfully received, especially concerning how much of our blood sweat and tears we put into it,

it feels nice. >> how do you account for how it's resonated? >> i guess there's no formula to people -- to knowing why people like things but similar to what army just said. even in my short experience so far, i've been part of a lot of indys that don't get seen or get description so i don't know what it is. so there was a fan base for the book that came out in 2007, so that was part of it. so it's time for uncynical unabashed pure celebration of love and all the sorrow that comes with it. but a lack of gross dark subject matter for the sake of being cynical. >> that is a really good way to put it because i think everybody has relished what you just said. the lack of cynicism and the pure beauty, not just visually but also in terms of the characters so the characters, you were a 17-year-old, you were

20-year-old graduate student and working for your father during the summer. how did it come about? i mean, you are two straight guys playing guy guys. in very -- how did that happen? was it the director? did he throw you into the deep end? how did you create that chemistry? >> well, i mean, they say experience is the greatest we had four days of each way other before we started filming, i know sometimes many i instinct with other actors is intimate scenarios and stories is to get as much information as possible about them in a kind of artificial way. when you have that gift of three or four weeks like we did it's not even about that. we just spent a lot of time with one another and then there's also -- and i'm sure armie would have a lot to say about this as well but i feel like it's the random luck of the universe that we hit it off as human beings

and that you can't really -- it's not about that first impression or randomness but rather we hit it off. >> we genuinely like each other, too. our relationship grew to how the film worked. i showed up and he had been in the small town where we shot it for weeks at that point familiarizing himself with the place so i showed up and we got on bicycles and he said that's where you want to get jigelato. there's great pizza there. >> and the film was all about you on bicycles as well. >> it's an easy way to get around a small italian town. >> but what did the director do to make you comfortable with these scenes? >> he didn't treat anything preciously. it wasn't like on days when we were riding bikes he would come up and go "don't forget, tomorrow we have to do a scene

with nudity and you're going to have a love scene." every scene relaxed enjoyment o everything whether it was a scene where we were picking fruit off of a tree, that became the most enjoyable thing we could do or a scene where we could be laying in bed, that was the most enjoyable thing. every scene was celebrated the same way love is celebrated. every scene felt like that. so he made us comfortable. >> is it a gay movie? your characters -- we think you're gay but towards the end of the film -- i don't want to make a spoiler alert, everybody's seen it -- you call up and say that, in fact, you're engaged to be married to a woman you've been on-and-off dating and we're not sure whether your character is gay, you have relations with girls in the movie. how would you describe the film? nlts . >> i think it's too each his own. i think that goes for the

characters and for audience member. i think it would be fair for anybody to watch this movie and say it's a gay movie or a bisexual movie or a coming of age story or a coming out story or a northern countryside in italy summer movie or a first romance. i don't know, i'm always careful with any project i'm a part of. the art for me takes place in the head of the viewer not on screen so to each his own. >> one of the most arresting dramatic speeches was your father when oliver leaves for the summer and you're left alone and you're very sad. your father's speech brings real tears to the eyes. >> absolutely. in the speech he's saying essentially live and let live and accept the pain in your life and the sorrow and this if you're feeling badly when you're grieving, whether that's for the loss of a romance of another human being, you're doing it perfectly. pain is enough, you don't have to beat yourself up because it's pain. that's a whole other layer you

don't need. that's how i understood it. >> it's incredibly timely. it's all about tolerance as well and how do you think that -- i mean, do you think this moment is a moment that needs to hear that message of pure tolerance? >> i think that that is a mess thank that is always timely. i think that's something people can always stand to hear more of. i think there's always a place for movies that are about love, which is love is love is love is love and it should be celebrated in any form it takes, especially if it's genuine. and to go back to michael's speech, it's that thing of don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened. and i think that that's a beautiful thing to remind people of. >> i wonder whether you guys also twig that -- he is basically telling you as a young man that it's okay to have feelings and it's okay to be emotional. because so many young boys are told, you know, be brave, stiff

upper lip. >> don't cry. >> i love that you say that, that's been one of my favorite things to hear in response to the movie, particularly about a young male character that is experiencing the spectrum of emotions like any human being because i think it's a particularly recent phenomenon, very american as well that, like you said, it's supposed to be stiff upper lip or moodiness or brando or alcoholism or whatever, you know? and that it's fine to just be, there's nothing wrong with that. if anything one should embrace that. >> i want to get to the me too movement because obviously hollywood is the sort of crucible in terms of what's going on in terms of women's right and women's pushback against sexual abuse, harassment and quid pro quo in your business. how has that affected both of you and do you also believe that it is you guys who have to help us women? >> i think absolutely. the importance of doing this interview with you as opposed to another journalist is not lost

upon me. i went to the golden globes with my sister and it was really relate as it related to the second part of your question as far as what's the guy's role? beyond the importance of the movement how does the guy fit in? and it was like an education talking to her and she said, you know, you're part of this new wave, you're a millennial, you're the new generation, you have to be talking about this and i guess i always thought -- i always think i'm unknown any way but i thought as a consequence of my age or lack of clout or something that it's not one's responsibility but that's where the problem lies, it's everyone's responsibility. >> and you're a slightly older generation, you've probably seen this overt misogyny in hollywood. >> sure. >> what do you think? there's a feminist writer lindsay west who just said "it's men who created sexism and misogyny and they have to help us fix it. it will be useful if one day robert downey jr. wakes up and

demands equal pay for his co-star, et cetera, et cetera." what do you think of that that aspect of it. >> i don't disagree. there's a system in place that has a wonky set of rules and it seems kind of one-sided but like any system it's not one element at fault, it's normally like a confluence of things. i think part and parcel with sexism there's almost like a powerism that's in play as well where it's just been you wiacce that those with power are allowed to abuse it and because of the male dominated nature of a lot of systems in the world, it's the men who have the power who are able to abuse it. i do think there is a big role to play. i think that there is -- curt vonnegut said it when we head sa -- he said artists are the canaries in the coal mine.

they'll kill us first because we're so sensitive and because this movement has found its genesis in the entertainment industry shows you that this is something that is now starting to kill canaries and it should be something that expands past that. so there is a role to play. there is something to do. and you want to be allied with the side of doing something as opposed to being a part of the problem. >> do you have any qualms, timothee, about working with woody allen? your next film has him as director and he's been accused by his daughter of sexual abuse, hasn't been charged or arrested, none of that. i wonder whether you think about it and whether you ask how has he escaped the me too revolution? >> it's going to be really important for me to talk about that and to really -- there's -- i hesitate to talk about it right now because what i say will only -- it's only going to anger people so when that film comes out -- if it comes out --

it's going to be really important to talk about but that's not the time right now. >> what's next on the horizon for you? >> i will be making a broadway debut this next summer here, so i'll be here for the summer. yeah, just trying to enjoy right now this process, this kind of crazy wave of call me by your name love that the film is getting trying to enjoy as much time with my family. >> armie hammer, timothee chapel hill -- chalamet. thank you so much. that's it for "amanpour" on pbs. join us again tomorrow night.

steves: for a more lively way to enjoy paris and cap an exciting day, steve and i have hired a car and a driver for a blitz of the city's best nighttime views. and this isn't just any car and driver. this company employs a fleet of historic deux chevaux cars, and they're driven by local students. man: the different districts are like a snail, going around the island, the city. steves: the french raise flood lighting to an art form. and with a city as beautiful as paris, it's no wonder. les invalides, with its golden dome marking napoleon's tomb, is magnifique. the naughty blades of the moulin rouge keep turning, and its red lights tempt lost souls in pigalle. just to be out and about at this hour, the energy of the city is palpable. notre dame is particularly stately after dark.

sightseeing boats enliven the river and its sparkling bridges. the pyramid at the louvre glows from within. and the eiffel tower provides a fitting finale for this victory lap through the city of light.

♪[music] >> you're watching "beyond 100 days" on pbs. president trump keeps the world waiting on the iran nuclear deal. >> ahead of a critical deadline on friday, we still don't know if he plans to reimpose u.s. sanctions. >> mr. trump is under pressure from europeans and his own national security team to stick with the nuclear deal. he also faces pressure from the russia investigation but insists repeatedly that there was never any collusion. >> also, on the program, searching for survivors. eight people are still missing after mudslides and flash floods in southern california that left 17 dead. >> the new york times was barred from publishing any more classified