♪ ♪ welcome to "a man pour on pbs." tonight, after decades of war in an exclusive interview the afghan president afghani tells me why he is making an unprecedented offer of peace to the taliban. also ahead, decades of war between israel and the palestinians. i speak to the former speaker of the israeli knesset abraham berg at a time when peace seems farther away than ever. ♪ ♪ "amanpour on pbs" was made possible by the support of

rosalynn p. walter. ♪ ♪ good evening, everyone, and welcome to the program. i'm christiane amanpour in london. at war for almost 40 years since the soviet invasion with the united states fighting the last 16 years, hundreds of thousands of civilians dead, has the time for peace in afghanistan finally arrived? president ashraf ghani tells me it has and he's reaching out to the taliban with the best offer they've had yet, legitimization, talks without preconditions with everything on the table, but the taliban is far from grasping the hand of reconciliation. it doesn't even recognize ghani's government, and it says it will only speak with the united states, but president ghani tells me it is time now to separate that posturing from reality. president ghani, welcome to the program from kabul. >> it is a pleasure to be with you. >> you have put everything on

the table. why are you doing it and why now? it is because our society is a consensus now. our women, all ethnic groups and political parties converged on the need to seek peace, equally. we have an international consensus that is supporting us plus a very president event has happened in the muslim world, the scholar, the islamic scholars are beginning to speak clearly on condemning suicide bombings and it is not rooted in our islamic culture and civilization. so we need to move forward and the other side is the opportunities. >> you talk about consensus and yes, of course, the afghan

people in the region and your international partners want peace, but they are very divided on whether you should be offering everything including re-examining the constitution to a group that seems to have the upper hand on the ground right now controlling a lot and active in the majority of the land and also for women especially who have historically been not considered equal by the taliban. and you, of course, once called them terrorists. >> terrorism is an activity and the good friday accord, was it reached with a group that were nice people or a group that were engaged in destabilizing? so the important issue is now those who want to separate themselves from international terrorist organizations and terrorist activities would need to be separated through this

process. secondly, our women have emerged to speak for themselves, to take great public positions and five women ambassador, three ministers, they're increasingly active. they are going to be engaged in every part of the peace process. thirdly, i would question with respect your assertion that they're militarily dominant, for the first time since the departure of the international troop, we are steadily moving and we have a four-year plan and we are offering this not out of some desperation, but out of courage and conviction that the violence that is inflicted on our people and the type of violence that they're resorting to is an indication of weakness, not strength, to kill innocent civilians is not an act of courage. >> i know you say that, and of

course, it is not an act of courage to kill innocent civilians. however, the packs on tfacts ond according to a u.s. military report just recently said your government only controls 18% of the country's districts. that means the taliban does have the upper hand right now and furthermore, this group which calls itself the -- >> i would strongly disagree with that. i would strongly disagree with that. i've just had the briefing from, again, from the u.s. general nicholson would disagree with that. this is not a fact. >> so what is the fact, then? how much do you control? >> if consolidated, they, in effect in terms of the number of district, and at most, even if you go at the liberal classification, and it's nine to 12 districts out of close to 400. they've not been able to take a

single city, a provin shall capital or consolidate the key goals to overthrow the government or to create two separate geographies. it's not happened. >> let me again come back because the unsaid that last year alone afghan civilians suffered 10,000 casualties, dead and wounded and your capital has come under awful suicide bombing in the last several weeks. 100 people killed by a weaponized ambulance, taliban breaching the most secure hotel in the capil, the intercontinental, but more importantly, i want to ask you to respond to their response. this is what they have said, and i say that they call themselves the islamic emirates. so the kabul process and other such efforts seek surrender from the islamic emirate at a time when the islamic emirate is without a doubt, a force that has defeated an international

arrogant power like america with all its allies and tools at disposal. so do you believe such a proposal is logical? that's their view of your offer and the encouragement by americans to talk to you? they don't even want to talk to you, the government. >> well, certainly, let's separate posturing from the realities. every group that is dedicated to violence is going to exaggerate its own importance and its posture. the question is directed to the people of afghanistan. when a group is so desperate to kill innocent civilians and take responsibility for it. that's not an act of strength. that is not an act of a group that thinks they're winning or defeating.

>> so this is what the former u.s. defense secretary chuck hagel told me yesterday, and of course, let's not forget he was president obama's defense secretary. this is what the american point of view seems to be now. >> there is no other way out of this. there is no military solution. at some point the united states is going to say enough is enough. we've never been in a war this long, and i think ghani understands that, and i think this approach is the only legitimate, wise responsible course of action to take. >> so he obviously fully backs what you are doing. i wonder what backing you're getting from the trump administration. they have not wanted to talk to the taliban even though the taliban has reached out directly to them. >> the secretary is right. we have to show an end to a war. we've had full support and backing from the trump administration and it's actually

the new south asia strategy of the trump administration that has created the enabling environment to both have the strength to move forward with security reforms and consolidation of security and also to put the ultimate political solution clearly. we want to thank the trump administration for bringing all instruments of american power and particularly its diplomatic, full weight so that the region and afghanistan and the international community can move forward. >> what about your neighbor pakistan which you have called the center of the taliban which the trump administration has censured and removed a hefty, many, many hundreds of millions of dollars of security aid for their activities in this regard. you know, without their support it's not going to work, is it?

>> we have offered a comprehensive discussion with pakistan and yesterday i announced that afghanistan is willing to arrive. it's an agreement on a plan to repatriate the 2.2 million of our fellow citizens that have been living as refugees in pakistan so that there will be no excuse. pakistan is at a moment of choice. it's past the course of action and it's resulted in a situation where >> can i ask you a question that

others have asked you in the past and you've had questions about cnn about this, since the autumn you have been classifying the key details around your military, the numbers of military and police, particularly those who have been killed in this ongoing battle. why are you doing that and that doesn't show confidence, does it? a winning side doesn't classify the body count. >> it does not classify the body count. this is totally false, and it's available and should you want interviews i would ask the ministry of defense interior and the national director of security to share all of the figures with you. >> i have been interviewing you, mr. president, for the last 18 years and in all your different government positions and now as president. you have been trying to work this problem for that long. is this a last-ditch effort for you? what happens if it doesn't work? what happens to you? what happens to your people and to your country?

>> well, first of all, no effort for peace is last ditch. we will succeed. our past against all odds is to be able to do impossible things. when the soviet union invaded us in 1979, was there anyone in the world that believed that we would succeed? friend or foe, we succeeded, but subsequently were unable to benefit from our gains. when i became president the overwhelming opinion was that we would collapse within six months to nine months. we are moving forward. let us please understand that the absolute majority of the men and women are under 30. there is a generational change in government, in society and

particularly in culture and the younger generation of afghanistan both own the problems and own the solutions. i was in the city of herat for four days inaugurating the tapi project and its related projects. the sense of creativity stuns me, humbles me and we hope that they will take a chance that is offered earnestly and for the good of our people, it's the command of god almighty, allah, to seek peace. war is not the way. but my firm belief is that our nation will succeed as we have succeeded against all odds in the past. >> against all odds, indeed. president ashraf ghani, thanks very much for joining me from kabul tonight. >> thank you. and the former afghan president hamid karzai has also just weighed in. he strongly supports president

ghani's reconciliation efforts and urging the taliban to work with fellow afghans for an end to our suffering. >> turning to another intractable regional conflict and the one between israel and the palestinians and the one inside israel. in nine years under benjamin netanyahu and with israel's political left in disarray, netanyahu has a freehand when it comes to making policy, but one prominent israeli voice refuses to give in to what he calls the group think paralyzing israel's government. my guest abraham hamberg. he was a rising political star, speaker of the israeli knesset and even acting as president for a short time in the summer of 2000 and now he is out on the fringe labeled by many a gadfly pointing an accusing finger at israel for failing to bring peace and equal rights to this part of the middle east. his new book "in days to come, a new hope for israel" is his

account of his personal journey from zionist true believer to modern-day jeremiah. abraham berg, welcome to the program. >> thank you very much. >> is that all right? is that where you stand? you are a true believer and you helped create the state of israel and now you have turned against this with a vengeance. >> well -- >> yes. >> i don't have these kind of emotions. i'm not angry. i have a lot of hopes. i mean, i see the problems. i'm upset with the political situation. i wait for some kind of of a gappy inspiration in our region and somebody to come with a vocabulary and syntax of peace with an iconic conflict and yet at the same time i didn't give up and i believe that the opportunities are there, and i believe it is possible. >> you've written this book and you are angry. you are quite angry at your father for all sorts of things and you do, in fact, in your

words talk about a period of sanity in israel that you say expired in 1967. that's decades ago. >> i was born before the watershed, '67 was actually a turning point up until '67 the first 19 years of israel were years in which israel slowly, but surely moved from a young enterprise into something very promising. then came '67 and introduced into our life new dimensions of thinking and mesonic politics and occupying other people despite their will, the palestinian people. there are certain parts my father as well as so many of my friends and colleagues were and are part of the system, and yes, i come and i try to offer an alternative which says a better israel is an israel that discourages this doomsday, you

know better than i do, but i feel quite calm when i come to it. i have a good argument. i don't have to be mad. >> okay. you have a good argument, but again, as i said because people are saying you are sort of a gadfly now particularly with sort of the left relinquishing the stage and its voice very, very heavily silenced, the right wing, and benjamin netanyahu bringing orthodox right into the cabinet and is in the ascendancy, and it's marching along quite ahead with very little opposition. they say if it was a snap poll today netanyahu would win again. >> right. however -- the -- theec whattening of the almost breaking down of the left camp in israel has two dimensions. the external one is is part of the weakening process of so many liberal democrat se liberal democracies in the world and tell me what's going on with the democratic party and tell me

what's going on in germany and it's the same argument about 21st centuries and we are part of it. the second has to do with our own private -- in israel to be a lefty means you are for or against somewhere with the palestinians and this is not a comprehensive philosophy. being a liberal, progressive, social democrat means separation between church and state. equality for all of the citizens and the fairness was game and fair distribution of public resources and we, the camp, the peace camp and the social democratic potential camp in israel forgot about all of it and therefore, in my writing and in my political arguments i try to say yes, it is about us and the palestinians because the occupation is so malignant yet at the same time we have to build so many new institutions and approaches for a better israel. >> you call israel the only half democracy in the middle east.

>> israel prides itself. we have an issue with standards. we like to set the bar so high and then we are so upset when the world comes and says, hey, you sit by yourself and i say yes, we have high standards because the nature of the history, and the high call of being a jew for so many years and deprived of political sovereignty, yet at the same time we give ourselves labels that we have to justify, the most moral in the world, only democracy in the middle east, and i say it's a beautiful democracy, but it's -- it has issues. we are dominant in other people and the palestinian has millions of people between the jordan and the mediterranean and depriving them from any possible political rights and it is not a full democracy, and i say within israel, with the issues of church and state and it is not fully democratic and therefore, we still have challenges and the

work to do and it is perfect. >> what would your solution be to the principal exist earn threat for to a man and of course, they were all men, the former security heads and military chiefs all say that that situation exi existential threat. >> first, the existential threat is not there for a while. syria, as much as it is devastating is not an existential threat. jordan is okay and even the iranian issue is not as dramatic as our prime minister would like us to fear of, yet, when you look inside you must realize that the fragmentation of the israeli society and the collapse of its previous value system is something very, very problematic and my offer, in my writing and

in my political position, challenging my camp first before trying to challenge the right wing is to say as follows, between the jordan and mediterranean every individual should have the rights for the same rights. let's begin with this. this actually calls for us, the jew, the privileged element to relinquish some of our absolute total privileges. >> are you talking about a one state then? >> not necessarily, but let's begin first with the individual rights. you live in ramallah, and you have to vote for a parliament. the palestinian parliament or a joint parliament that's a different decision and first put it on the table that's not okay for any western democracy like the israeli one and this is where we belong and should belong to deprive the rights of so many millions and it's about rights and it's about the concept of what is wrong vis-a-vis rights. the second element goes to the

understanding that this space should be a shared space. would it be a shared space because we are married or we have the same family or just because we're good neighbors and we share the same space and that's the outcome of a political negotiation. one warning i have for my society. this beautiful formula that everybody is in love of a two-state solution has expiration date. it is not there forever. >> what do you mean? >> when we spoke about it first during the '70s we were trojan horses or just in hamburg, and we were no good nicks and over years people say it is a good formula and even prime minister netanyahu rhetorically adopted it and it doesn't move. will it go on forever? the answer is no. >> okay. so let me ask you, how does the trump administration and the equivocation there on a one stage or a two state, the moving of the u.s. embassy now apparently on a fast track to moving to jerusalem.te or a twog

of the u.s. embassy now apparently on a fast track to moving to jerusalem. jared kushner who is already under his own issues in washington with all of these investigations. what is the american momentum to help pushes ra israel a two-sta solution. >> as much as you call me a jer my and and trying to proffer sigh -- >> what effect is it having? >> america is in a way, not a real player. it's not a real player. i mean, trump is a strange presidency, as if supporting the right-wing policy in israel because of the right-wing conservative policies over there, but it is far from being perceived as a fair, honest broker between the sides and in a way, being so bizarre with the presidency, it brings the burden back to the signs and it is us and the palestinians that it's dialectically speaking, it is very good and i believe what we

discussed today it is not two states and no solution. i hope one day there will be a two-state solution and i hope it will be generous to see that that is one way to go about it. if we are not there, the deliberation is about one ate with two regimes, one full of privileges for jews and one not so generous to the palestinians or a better one state that everybody's equal. >> let me ask you specifically about the prime minister. everybody knows that you know, there are all these allegations and investigations. he calls it a witch hunt. how do you think it's going to end up? will he survive the duration of his prime ministership? >> may i ask you a question, i want to defeat him at the ballot box. >> okay. i do not want to defeat him at the police station. >> whatever he has, i wish him the best and i wish everybody

that no country deserves a prime minister under investigation or in jail. >> then what effect, what has been the bibi effect? i started to say that he's turned the country sharp right and he's brought it into the cabinet like never before. he's put an indelible stamp, in fact, bibi has been for the israelis a pretty good prime minister, for all of his flaws few have done it as well as bibi which is probably why he's endured and why he will probably continue to do so. >> he is the most omnipotent prime minister we've ever had. he is so powerful, he's the king of israel. bibi the king, in the eyes of men he's revered almost as a royal individual, but at the same time the more power he has the more -- the more personal problems are then, the lack of confidence and the reluctance to move into history and he's an

arch political king and n such a good, historical leader. >> and we will leave it there and wait to see what happens in your country. >> there will be peace in my country. >> against all odds as president ghani said. abraham berg, thank you so much for joining us. >> that is it for our program tonight. thanks for watching amanpour on pbs. join us again tomorrow night. ♪ ♪ ♪ "amanpour on pbs" was made possible by the generous support of rosalynn p. walter.

steves: salzburg's cathedral, constructed in the early 1600s, was one of the first grand baroque buildings north of the alps. it's sunday morning. the 10:00 mass is famous for its music, and today it's mozart. enter the cathedral, and you're immersed in pure baroque grandeur. ♪ dona nobis ♪ ♪ nobis pacem ♪ since it was built in only about 15 years, the church boasts particularly harmonious art and architecture. in good baroque style, the art is symbolic, cohesive, and theatrical, creating a kind of festival procession that leads to the resurrected christ triumphing high above the altar. ♪ nobis ♪ ♪ dona nobis ♪ ♪ nobis pacem ♪ ♪ pacem ♪ music and the visual art complement each other.

the organ loft fills the church with glorious sounds as mozart, 250 years after his birth, is still powering worship with his musical genius. ♪ nobis ♪ ♪ nobis pacem ♪ ♪ nobis ♪ ♪ pacem ♪

♪ katty: "beyond 100 days you're watching "beyond 100 days" on pbs. the real beast from the east announces an arsenal of weapons he says is unprincipled. christian: he posts his weapons can blast through any defenses. why is he telling the world now? katty: he says the world did not listen to russia but now it well. from cold war to trade war, president trump announces big carrots on steel and aluminum products. christian: also on the program, a near miss. it slips around a car in a bitterly cold