captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc >> woodruff: gd evening. i'm judy woodrf. on the newshour tonight: the inquiry begins. under mounting pressure, the white house releases a summary of the call between president trump and the ukrainian ader now at the heart of the impeachment investigthion. then, waves to come. the world's water at a crisis oceans, ice, and ecosystems.ges plus, power and prosperity. on the ground in china as we kick off our new series focusing on the country's internal challenges and international ambitions.n

no other country than china have you had such a great amount of change in such a short amount of time. >> woodruff: all that and more on tonight's pbs newshour. >> major funding for the newshour has been provided by: ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ moving our economy for 160 years. bnsf, the engine that connects us.

>> supporting social entrepreneurs and their solutions to the wsild's most pr problems-- skollfoundation.org. >> the lemelson foundation. committed to improving lives through invention, in the u.s. and developing countries. on the web at lemelson.org. >> supportedthe john d. and catherine t. macarthur foundation.ld committed to bg a more just, verdant and peaceful world. more information at macfound.org >> and with e ongoing support of these institutions:tira >> this prwas made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. >> woodruff: questf impeachment continue to swirl as new details emerge about

president trump's actions with ukraine shine a spotlight on the limits of executive power. it all comes a day after the speaker of the house announced a formal impeachment inquiry. our lisa desjardins betens with the .es >>rdins: ather rapid- fire day of news centering around president trump, who was at the u.n. meeting with world leaders today. but the headlines came from hise sion to declassify and release a five page memo describing a july phone call with ukrainian president volodymyr zelensky. the text is critical to the fast-rising impeachment debate. it shows president zelensky bringing up the military, s javelin missiles he wao buy from the unitestates, immediately following that, president trump asks fot whahe says immediately following that, president trump asksor a favor: to look into crowdstrike the company that concluded russia was to blame for hacking into democratic party ail in 2016, a conclusion the president after zelensky responds,

stressing the ethics of ukrainian investigations, president trump next says he heard about a ukrainian prosecutor who was unfairly shutdown. that may have been a reference to this man, viktor okin, whom the us saw as corrupt and joe biden tried to have fired.s a few sententer mr trump saysenhere's a lot of talk about biden's sot biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that, so wtever you can do that was a reference to hunter biden, who served on the board of a gas company that was ntvestigated for corruption. the bidens were ned three times. attorney general barr would come up again too. oken dlr so did the president's personal attorney rudy giuliani. trump said he was going to have attorney william barr give you a call ath we will get te end of it. >it.

>> ukraine understood exactly what was being asked from it and that the president of the us would interfere with our national security with national security of our ally, and do so for the illicitrp e of trying to advance his election campaign, having already sought foreign help in his first presidential campaign, would now abuse thpower of his office yet again, this time to seek the help of another nation in his prcaesidentiaaign is the most fundamental betrayal of his oath of office. >> dickerson: as it happens, also today-- >> trump, made me more mous. >> desjardins: --was a scheduled in-person meeting between mr trump and the ukrainian in an extraordinary moment, he was asked if he was pressured to investigate prden. >> i'm sry but i don't want to be involved to democratic

elections of u.s.a. elections of u.s. no. had i think good phone cal. it was normal. >> there was no pressure. 7. >> reporter: mr. trump s confident, pointing to poll numbers. but later, zelensky, speaking in s native tongue, seemed to clarify that he did not pressure anyone in u.k. as a result. >> desjardins: in the meantime, another thread of the two men's july phone call involved the department of justice, which announced today that the original whistleblower accountis a possible criminal act by the president on campaign finance charges. but according to a justice department spokespern, after reviewing the controversial call, prosecutors could not make criminal campaign financ violation. the justice department also issued a statement that the president has not spoken with the attorney general about

having ukraine investigate hything related to former vice president biden son. on capitol hill, many republicans circled around the president.>> rom my point of view, to impeach any president over a phone call like this would be insane. >> desjardins: many, like south carolina senator lindsey graham, echoed the president's calls for >> vice president biden is a good man. i've enjoyed a good relationsh. but i can assure you that if any republican family member wasin engageonduct like this, it would raise questions. a lot of people felt the guy was corrupt. but the one thins that i think be dealt with there is that the son of the vice president was receiving a lot of money from the ukraine and some of the sources of dee funds were investigation by thede prosecutor. i don't know what the right answer is. i just hope somebody will look at it. >> desjardins: the spotlight will likely rein on the capitol tomorrow, where the acting director of national intelligence joseph maguire is

seto testify about the original whistleblower complaint. >> woodruff: and lisa joins me now, along with our white house correspondent yamiche alcindor. so, yamiche, the decision by the hite house to release this memo bad onat phone conversation, why didhey do this? >> well, that question is really at the heart tofoday. why would the white house take the risk of releasing at least some tails of this call between prent trump and the president of the ukraine? there are o answers to that question. the first is the president obviously thinks that this call hewas him in some y. the second answer is that there was public pressure to release this call, and the white house had no-- no choice but to release this call. the president at his press conference today said he hated to do thi he said he felt he had to doer this because s a lot of "fake news," and he felt like democrats were lying about himho the white i've-- the white - house aides i've been talkingo all day say this reall exonerates the president. they say it's okay for the president to bring up the bid because it's perfectly part of his role as president.

but democrats are really pushing back on that. but this is a calculated risk by the president and the white house. close to nancy pelosi and close to other democrats who say they're taking their own risk by announcing this formal impeachment inquiry. what we're seeing is both des estaking risk here, and today th white house essentially made the decision this call was okay to release and that the public should see it. >> woodruff:nd, yamiche, what are you hearing from the white house about how they see the litical impaof this, the reaction among republicans on the hill and so forsith? >> pnt trump is really trying to reset the narrative when it comes to this call. he's trying to arue that democrats were out to get him, that this was all planned tonn ruin his time at the united naons, and he's been trying to push that message to g.o.p. lawmakers. today, early this morning, the ite house called several i senatoo the white house and they had first a convsation about the transcript, or th supposed transcript-- not a verbaitin transcript.

but they also had a conversation about g.o.p. messaging. a thcidentally e-mailed their messaging to democrats and the mocrats got list of things that the republicans want watoed ay. on the list was there was no quid pro quo. the real problem was not the phone call but the leak and the fact we know about the phone call. ito important to talk about the political implications, the trump campaign manager for the 2020 elction bid, said in the last 24 hours, since nancy pelosi announcea formal ipeachment inquiry, they've raised $5 milli off of this. they're saying this is it motivating their base andat motg fund raisers to give to their campaign. this is all going to be something to watch as we go forward. >> woodruff: lisa, let me come back to you.e we know that speaker pelosi when she announcethe impeachment inquiry, we didn't get a lot of s details. >> t still firming up, but here's what we know right now about thdemocrats' impeachmt

process first. there are six committees who have now been empowered to include their investigation, already ongoing, asart of the impeachment process. those committees are being catasked with making theis se judiciary committee. that is the committee that will weigh the evidence in the end and decide what articles impeachment move forward. then the hose judiciary committee would vote ny articles of impeachment, then the full house but, judy, it's interesting today we're seeing so much news about thi s kind ofppose oned transcript, there's more and more focus on it, judy, th actually i know from sources in the house, house democrats arede w conng, they're weighing the option of only focusing on this particular issue this, phone call, this exchange of the preside and what was happening there. they may leave everything else on the table because they think this is stronger than anything else. >> woodruff: so thid oohave a very significant impact on the-- on what that inquiry looks like, what they focus on. >> that's exactly right. and we saw jut in the last few

exiting from reading theexembers complaint itself from the wib, which was released just in the past coupleof hours. congressmen and women have just had the chance to read it. democrats coming out have been saying it is significant, it does raise even more concerns. and house ind elligence airman adam schiff said specifically, it is well written and it isin writtea way they now have things to follow up on-- more witnesses and re documents. they can't say who those are because it's class tied right now. but there is motinfor getting in the hands of house democrats and republicans tonight. republicans, meanwhile, by the way, most of tm are, as we reported, on the president's side. not all, mitt romney, senator from utah,rmer presidential candidate, said h found things concern for him in what he read of that phone call this morning. >> woodruff: and we'll cece how they're reacting as this whistleblower formation comes out. finally, lisa, what about the rest of the congssional agenda you were talking to us about, how that is going to be affected by all this focus now on

impeachment? >> right, these are the folks who are supposed to govern us, thpresident and congress. there are several issues that now could be in jeopardy because of, obviously, even re nse tens relationships here. at the top of that list the u.s.-mexico-canada trade deal, which the president would like to get passed, but even he mentioned todahe is not sure that will get through theou congress. after that, gun violence, is interested in, but, judy, had not actually put forth a oposal on yet. d after, that prescription drug prices. these are all three issues that there was talyabout be bipartisan negiating, perhaps and now we have to watch them because it seems that those are all going to be made more difficult because of the atmosphere of impeachment. >> woodruff: it's fast moving, so much to follow. thank yo both of you, to lisa and to yamiche. we appreciate it. >> woodruff: there are many icestions about the role of the department of juin all of this. john yang is here to examinene that.>> ang: judy, the inspector

general had asked the department of justice to consider if the president had violated campaign we are joined by devlin barrett, who covers national security and law enforcement for the washington post. develin, let's get right into this. whistleblower complaints under the law are from the intelligence commuty, are supposed to go tongress. how did this one end up at the justice delartment? >> w it's a pretty compttcated path, but the complaint is made, folks in the intelligence community question whether this is a valid whistleblower complaint because the president, obviously, is not a member of the intelligencey. commun he's not an employee of one of those agency. so what happens is they get legal advice from the justice department. and what the justicepartment says is that no, this is not a valid legal complaint becauwh thstleblower rules dothn't really apply to conduct of the president. but interestingly, and in soe ways more importantly, the justice department says but there may be a crin nal violatre, so we need to

look at that, so we're-- we, the justice department, are goinketo a look at what happened here and see if there's reason to pursue a criminal investigation. >> criminal violation of what? the question that wasaw. immediately presented by theis eblower's complaint is, is the president seeking a thing of value if a foreign entity, whica violation under campaign finance law? and that question quickly turned into could yoaracterize an investigation by a foreiig government as a thing of lue? and that's the question they were wrestling with. >> and what was the timing of all thi when did it get to justice and when d the folks in public integrity clear-- say there was no violation? >> so itto getthe justice department in late august, and, you know, different parts of the justice department get read in and get involved at fferent times. but, essentially, you're talking about the public integrity section th some input from the criminalusivision at thece department and the national security division. but essentially, they look at

this question and by last week, we're told-- and that's important becau, obviously, a lot was heaping on this issg ue publicly last week-- but last week, we're told the justice department decided there wast a criminal case to pursue here. >> and what do weeen attorney general barr's role in all this? the justice department said in a statement that thest president d the attorney general never discussed the biden vestigation, but what do we know about what role he played in this? re so, we' told by senior justice department officials that barr was aware of the lel question that came in to the justice department early on in thocess. that is, is this a valid whistleblower complaint? can this be treated in the normal course of, you know, whistleblower complaint handling? so barr was aware, roughly, that that was going on. however, they also say that barr was not involved, once the question became a criminal question about campaign finance law, that barr did notr participnse in those discuss and he was not a part of that. >> are there any other questions

of legal questions arising fr this? of course we know impeachment is a political process. but are there any other legal questions arising from all this? >> well, i think there's going to still be--ly obviothere's a hearing tomorrow, and there will ba i lot of, ii th, tough back-act-forecast about exa what individual officials, whatv opinions did they take on some of these issues? but as a leg matter, the justice department says this is, for them, case closed. i don't know that, frankl democrats and the congress are going to take that as an immediate answer. but thejustice department views this as not a criminal issue for them to resolve. >> devlin barrett of "the washgton post." thank you very much. >> thanks. >>oodruff: and now, for mo on the memorandum of the phone conversation between president trump and ukranian president zelensky, i am joined by larry pfeiffer, former senior dictor

senator murphy, thank you very much for joining us. given your lone gtowledge, familiarity with ukraine, what is your reaction to thiwes mem are now seeing of the conversation between president trump d the pr sident of ukraine in july? >> it's absolutelevastating. within moments of zelensky asking the president for more reased weaponry to fight russia, the esident asks zelensky to investigate one of the president's polical opponents, joe biden, and make some vague suggestionhat vice president biden was bragging out getting a prosecutor-- stopping a prosecution in ukraine, which is fundamentally not true. there's no way to come away from impression that a riority of the preosident's is take part in his political campaign forre lection in the united states. and, of course, this phone call

doesn't standots own. rudy giuliani's name is brought up several timupes. and we know that giuliani, and perhaps other were repeatedly trying to get the ukrainians tos open up investigations to politically destroy one of the rivals.t's i don't think we've ever seen anything like it. are you not allowed to trade away the credibility of the united states in order to score political points or destroy your political rivals. and i tenk it undrscores the need for the inquiry the house began yesterday. >> woodruff: senator, as you know, though, the ite house is saying this is just an effort, an open effort by presidentum to encourage the ukrainians to clean up corruptionhin their-- ineir government. >> well, that would be made mori credibthe president had mentioned any other corruption ouinvestigation over thee of that call. there are, you know, likely dozens of different corruption matters that the president could have pressed the ukrainians on,

if his actual concern was cleaning up corruption in ukraine. he only mentioned one, and iten ha to be requesting an investigation, which is notich presently happening, against hs likely 2020 campaign opponent. second, if he was re interested in corruption, heha woule told zelensky to talk to the embassy. he didn't. he told zelensky to talk to rudy giuliani, who is the president's political fixer, who is a president's campaign, who is not in charge of rooting out anticorruption in ukraine. that's the duy of the u.s. embassy. so t president gave away his priority ithe context of this call. he was trying to enlist zelensky in his political operation. >> woodruff: well, ifyou read the memo, it comes across as if president zelensky is agt eeing to do what president trump asked him to do. he sounds like he's agreeing to work with rudy giuliani and to work with the attorney general barr. you-- you've met with president

zelensky. >> i have met with president zensky, and raised this general issue with him. at the time i didn't know the president himself had made thesa s of zelensky. i did ofow at the time that giuliani had made certain demands. the president with my meeting zeth him, presidenensky, said he had no interest in getting involved in a s. election. i think you can perhaps understand that a novice politician, a new pr esident whor has nene this before, is attempting to, you know, set a good relationship with a u.s. president who is clearly making requests that are out of bounds. and so, yes, you read that transcript, d it looks as if zelensky ht s an interin doing business with trump. it's possible he was trying to get out of that phone callou wia confrontation. we don't have any evidence that lensky actually went ad ordered that prosecution. ind fact, it appears that he did not, that the new prosecutor that he brought in has made asi de that there's no merit to pursuing this. >> woodruff: senator, we know

that you and oteremocrats have been calling on the whistleblower in this case, others in the intelligence community, to step forward to testify before congress. we now know that the actingor diref national intelligence is going to testify tomorrow morning before the house intelligence commi. what would you want to know from him? >> well, i mean, i'm concerned that this information is onl going to flow to th members of the intelligence committee. i've got to go back and check the statute. t i just saw the revelation that the whistle er complaint will be presented to the intelligenmmittee. remember, th's only a hand full of senators. and ultimately, if this is the bject of an impeachment going to vote o impeachmentis either in the house or the plnate needs to see this whistleblower cont. so that's the first threshold we need to cross. but then, of course, on substance, i don't know anything thats in thicomplaint. so it may have to do with ukraine. it may have to do with russ'sia. thhy all of us need to see this as soon as possible, not just the intelligence committee. >> woodruff: senator chris

murphy of connecticut, who is on the fogn relations committee, thank you, senator. >> thanks. >> woodruff: after that conversation, inpress conference, president trump accused senator murphy ofg threatenraine's leader with revoking democratic support in congress. it was one of several unsubstantiated laims made byd c mr. trump today. senator murphy's office theh sent uss statement: >> woodruf and now, to take a closer look at the memorandum released bthe white house of the phone conversation between president trump and ukraine's president zelen i'm joined by larry pfeiffer, former senior director of thee white hous situation room during the obama administration, and chief of af to the

director of the c.i.a. during vie bush administration. he's currently s as the grerkt of george mason'sde university hsenator for intelligence, policy, and international sec urity. larry pfeiffer, thank you very much for bein yhere. >> tha very much for having me. >> woodruff: so as somebody who has worked in the white house, in the sittion room, sat in on a number of phone calls between the president ofit the states, leaders of other countries, how normally would a whistleblower complaint be haed around something like this? >> oh, gosh, i don't know if there's normal really here. we have phoneio convers that are beingtranziebed, that a memorandum is being written to capture that transcript and be something as explicit as we saw today, or it could be sometng summarizing the conversion. so the transcript today, you know, clearly was prettyt explicit in we president was saying. at one level you have to applaud the president for putng this

very explicit document out. >> woodruff: but uin r experience in-- let me just bacs up for a second. in record ago it's not recorded. there's no audio recording of these conversations. >> right. >> woodruff: so there are individuals there takingnotes. >> right. >> woodruff: as fast as they can. >> they're actually listening to the conversation live, and they're typing furiously onr thmputers trying to capture every single word and nuance of e conversation. woodruff: then what is done with that? >> so we have three individuals. they worls.up three separate transcripts. they then get together and reconcile them into a unifed draft. that is then provided by the situation room to the n.s.cdi ctor responsible for the call-- in this case it would have been europe. and an n.s.c. seniorector or director would review, that apply some expertise to perhaps correcting some of the material, and then they wuld ultimately decide in what format that final memo would be, would it be an explicit transcript or more of a summation? in tkis case it looks they went with the verbaitin

ooanscript. >>uff: but again it wasn't recorded. >> no. >> woodruff: it's whatever their notes were. >> absolutely. >> woodruf buhow many people, roughly-- obviously, things are ne differently from one administration to the next. >> sur >> woodruff: roughly, how many people ultimately would have access to that document? >> so the document itself, there would be the individuals in the situation room. there would be the information in the the directorate. that would be anywhere from oner to or four people in the directorate. that memo is then provided to e national security adviser's situations.e, under normal there could be a few people there. and then it is prthided to the executive erkt of secretary of the national security councild for filing distribution. so another couple of people. and fending where it is-- depending on where it is distributed, it could be anotheu haof people. >> woodruff: wearing your hat as someone who worked in the intelligence community, ande talked about your ience working in a white house, if one of those individuals eit--her hd s the whistleblower himself or herself, or sharedti that infor with som eone who has now seen this and

decided it was concerning enough ward.ing it for >> right. >> woodruff: but you were just saying a moment ago, this is not a normal thing, clearly. >> no, not-- i mean, to see something so egregious that one would put his career on the line to do a whistleblower complaint suggests to me that theyrehave than just one phone call, and they have some fairly compelling information to provide. >> woodruff: and in fact that's the information that has been-- that has been reporte out. we are just now starting to see reaction from members of congress w have seen-- and our lisa desjardins ntioned that-- who have seen what te whistleblower complaint is. and some of them are saying it's diurbing, including reublican senator ben sass of nebraska. >> right, i'm not surprised. g was fully anticipating that this whistleblower complaint would be-- would be more complete, re-- have more information that will ultimately require additional disclosures. perhaps he reflects conversations that he

earticipshed in-- he or e paymented in. perhaps it reflects emails or other documents tht relate to what was going on with the ukraine problem. w druff: and just a very quick question based on your experience in the intelligence community, isgenc-- is it expected that the president, that the white house would know the identity of the whistleblower? >> no, the whistleblower should be being protected by the i.c. inspector general, an the intellheence community. so the president of the united states should not knw the whistleblower's name, unless the whistleblower decides they want their name to be disclosed. pfeiffer, director of the hayden center at georg george mason university. unank yo >> thank you very much, judy. woodruff: in the day's other news, iranian president hassan rouhani used his speech at the u.n. general assembly today largely to condemn us regional intervention.

rouhani denounced the trump w administrationhdrawal from the 2015 iran nuear deal and blasted us sanctions against his country. he said iran would only come to the negotiating table if those sanctions are lifted.ed >> ( transl ): i hail from a country that has resisted the most merciless economic terrorism. the us government while imposing extra territorial sanctions and threats against other nations has made a lot of effort to deprive iran from the advantages of participating in the global economy. this is the of the iranian nation: let's invest in hope towards a better future rather than in war and violence. >> woodruff: but the white house is showing no signs of liftingsa thostions on iran. us secretary of state mike pompeo threatened tougher penalties on the islamic revolutionary guard corps-- or i.r.g.c.-- when he spoke today in new york.

>> the more iran lashes out, the greater our pressure will and should be. >> as long as iran's menacing behavior continues, sanctions will not be lifted. they wl be tightened. >> woodruff: later pompeo said he would like to see a peaceful resolution with iran, but it was up to the iranians to make that decision. benjamin netanyahu has now been cision to me.ent made thatnew form benny gantz failed to broker a unit government. neither of their parties were able to secure a majority in parliament in last week's election.netanyahu now has up sx weeks to form a coalition. he failed to do thter the first election in april. parliament today afterrned to britain's supreme court ruled that prime minister boris johnson's suspension of the body ahead of the brexit deadline was ilgal. the prime minister addressed the house of commons and took aim ao

the opposition labor party and its leader jeremy corbyn. johnson challenged them to trywi to oust hi a no-confidence vote, in hopes of breaking theid ck over brexit. >> they see evermore elaboratepo legal antical maneuvers from the party opposite.mi which is detd to say we know best and thumb noses at the 17.4 million people who voted to leave the european unio >> after yterday's ruling, the prime minister should have done the honorable thing and resigned. yet mr. speaker, here he is,k forced b this house to rightfully face the scrutiny he tried to avoid >> woodruff: johnson plans to withdraw from the european union

october 31swith or without a withdrawal agreement. but the opposition said it won't back a new election unless a noe deal brexit is ruled out. the trump administration has reached a deal to send asylum seekers at the us mexico border to honduras, one of the world' most violent nations.e s. has already signed similar pacts with el salvador and guatemala. many of the details remain unclear, but it's part of a broader strategy to deter from mexico.m entering the us puerto rico and the u.s. virgin islands escaped the worst of tropical stot karen. thorities did report minor poweoutages and flooding. karen is now moving away from the islands. but forecasters warned the heavy rain could linger across the northeastern caribbean. meanwhile, jerry was downgraded to a post-tropical cyclone as it passed near bermuda, with sustained winds around 40 miles per hour. and, stocks bounced back on wall

street today, after president trump signaled a trade deal with ina could come soon. although asked for details by a reporter late in the afternoon, he saihe had nothin the dow jones industrial average gained 163 points to close above 26,970. the nasdaq rose more than 83 points and the s&p-500 added 18. stilto come on the newshour:om the staggering damage climate change is already wreaking on the world's oceans. the military struggles to roots out taliban fighters. plus, power and prosperity -- an inside look at modern china. >> woodruff: the world's oceans ngd the world's ice are increasingly feehe effects of climate change and the risks of dire consequences are growing.

that's the message of a new o repo from the u.n.'s intergovernmental panel on climate change, or the i.p.c.c. scientists say it's virtually certain the oceans and seas have already absorbed an enormous amount of cess heat in our imate system. our but if current emissions don't change, the sks for marine life and for people living near the coasts will get signifantly worse. william brangham is here with more. part of our regulacoverage of the leading edge of science. >> brangham: judy, the report is fill with some very specific and very sobering assessments. among them, if greenhouse gasar emission't reduced, sea level rise could hit three feet by the end of the century, driven in large part by the anlting of the ice sheets and glaciers on greeand antarctica. even if emissions are lowered, tiesreport says coasta one of the lead authors on this report joins me w. michael oppenheimer is a professor of geosciences and international affairs at the woodrow wion school at princeton university.

he authored the chapter on sea level rise. professor oppenheimer, always good to see you here on the newshourgh let's dive rinto the section that you authored. this prediction of sea lel rise if current trends don't change seems incredibly stark. >> yes, well, selevel is rising, and it's rising at an accelerating paas, and the for that is-- you said it-- the greenland and antarctic ice sheets are losing isle faster ande aster. theymping into the ocean and that's a major cause of sea level rise, and ndso behi that, largely, is human-caused warming of the earth. the second thing to be concerned about is that sea level rise is projected to cause a large change in the frequency of occurrence of extreme water levels at e coasts, and thes are the things that cause big floods-- for instance, when a storm like hurricane sandy comes along, and there's a storm

surge, if it's rise riding on top of a higher sea level, it just pushes water to a higher level in the places inland where people live. and the third thing that we have to know about ths roblem is that we basically face at theem ex two types of futures. the changes can keep accelerating because under the er"business as usual" scenario, that's what happens-- sea level just keeps rising and risg at aaster pace through 2300. that's the furthest we went out-- the year 2300. an alternative is to start the kind of strong emissions reductions that were agreed to in the paris agreement in 2015. and in that case, the raof acceleration of sea level slows. sea level evually-- long, centuries you out-- stabilizes. and that means that webuy time. that would give us a chance to adapt to the problem. if we don'tow it down, it's going to become unmanageable. >> i think the report detailed usw what wed to consider

these once-in-a-century type flooding events, by 2050 if we don't make any of the changes you're describing could be happening every single year. i mean, that kind of an impact on coaonstal communities doesn't strike me that those communities are prepared for that kind of flooding. >> they're really not prepared. there are very few places ine world-- the netherlands is one-- which isd prepar pahigher sea level, up to maybe a couple of meters higher. but the trouble is that most of the world hasn't pantd atn to this problem. in fact, in most places, they don't cope very well with the current risk. and you can s that in the united states where every time there's a big storm that com along, there's loss of property, loss of money, and in many cases, loss of life. we have to up our gae wit regard to adaptationor it's going to get out of control. and that's much easier to do if we're working in a world where emissions are going down, rat ar thworld where emissions are

going up. >> the report also detailsde lot of the scientific evidence that is absorbing the heat that we have been building up in our atmosphere, and that the acidity levels of the ocean are goigoing up. what does a warming, more asiddifying oceado? >>en the ocean warms, particularly when it's subject patches of the ocean that lose their oxygen. that's because oxygen tendsr to disappom warm waters. it's also because polluti is causing algae blooms when those blooms sink in the ocean, they decay, and decay means basically the organisms or the dead material, eats up oxygen. when oxygen disappears from parts of the ocean, organisms that are supposed to be alive and provide us food through sh, for instance, they disappear. so we're undermining the ability organisms in the and,the

therefore, to feed us by warming it and asiddifying it at the same time. >> i'd like you to take off your p.p.c. hat for a section. i want to ask your question about political fiell. days ago we saw four million people on the street demanding action. we saw world leaders relatively ghtor commitments to fi climate change do you thi this evidence is going to be enough to move the needle? >> science is never enugh. science can set the basis for solving the problem, but it's people who have to deide they want it solved, and they have th tell their leaders that they want it solved. that's my personal opini. i.p.c.c. doesn't criticize or comment on governments. so it's verouy eging to someone like me who has worked on this problem for 35 years to see the young people in the streets demanding action. my generation didn't solve the problem. tnow it's going to be heir shw lders. they k, and they're angry about ite and i think this is

going to result in poitical change-- not bst enougt i think it's coming. but a part of the problem i'm really worried about is you cannot solve the coala problem just by reducing emissions. esn'tederal government give much, if any money for planning and adapting, doing things like building buildings s that ar on stilts, building sea walls. they just don't give mu forju this kind of thing in advance. but after a big storm, sure, they come in, they fix up the situation, thepay billions of dollars. but it's too late by then. it would be much cheaper to fixt n advance before people die, before billions are lost in property. >> as always, michael oppenheime a pleasure to have you on. >> thanks for having me.

>> woodruff: afgnistan's government is trying to reach a peace deal the u.s. was unable to deliver earlier this month when president trump canceled talks with the taliban. h more fighting.ay only be special correspondent jane kerguson traveled to gaz me province, and taed to leaders in both the afghan government and the taliban about the way forward. >> reporter: the only safe way ghazni province is by air. helicopters carried us there we went there with top government officials, into areas, untilnt recently, lled by the taliban. not long ago this would have been a deadly place to land, with these fields full of taliban fighters. even today, it's a risky trip for afghanistan's national security advisor dr hamdullah mohib. he's here trying to reassure people that governments are in control. >> their main concern is what if this is only temporary? what if we are not able to

maintain what happens to them? >> rorter: that's because al across afghanistan, the taliban are launching attacks on police and government forces and even popping up in towns and cities to audaciously grab ground momentarily. the afghan government is keen to show off areas like this they have just rently re-taken using the elite special forces. this area of ghazni, and i'm standing now in the middle of an old police headquarters, was held by the taliban for over five years. e tobiggest challenge wi make sure government forces can hold their ground here and they don'have to keep sending in d e special forces time antime again.ea and that thrt is never far away.ol these soldiersus taliban fighters are less th three miles from this spot, d d surely watc arriving. for some, not even the army can help. siraj khan is the governor of a neighboring province that fell to the taliban 12 years ago. any hope he had of a military

rescue has long faded. they cannot remove them, he told us. onthe liban are very str there. afghan commando its are kept busy, chasing out the enemy. but then thehave to move on to the next, inevitable taliban advance elsewhere. the regular forces who replace them are weak and ill equipped, d they struggle to hold on. it's the same problem american forces faced here for years. now, more than nine months of intensive negotiations between the us and the talan have fallen apart, onhe cusp of a deal for withdrawing american troops. that deal would have brought american soldiers home, but left the afghan government to largely fend for itself, with just promises from the taliban to negotiate with president ashrafn ghanabul. the problem with that-- the taliban refuses to recognize the afghan government, calling it an american puppet. afghanistan's minister of defense asadulbeh khalid still eves his forces can get the

taliban to negotiate with thern kabul gont by hitting it even harder with military offensives. operation and in sses wed our made it triple, to put more pressure on taliban to push them to come to the table. >er> repowhich negotiating table is that? >> afghan government. >> reporter: and so, theia country's spforces keep raiding taliban strongholds. in the capital kabul we joined them on a late night search on the outskirtof town. several dozen soldiers stormed moonlight, on the hunt for a taliban commander. the forces are heading into the house now. with so many major attacks happening in kabul that kill civilians, raids like this are all the more essential.thim this allhey found was the man's father at home. he was questioned and let go.

with few options on the table other than intensifieding, casualty rates in this war are stgering. president ghani announced in00 nuary that 4afghan national defense and security forces, called the a.n.d.s.f., have been killed since he took office in 2014. that's around 1,000 dead every month. >> it is definitely not sustainable whether it's the civilian casualties, whetherhe it's.n.d.s.f. casualties or whethen it's the talisualties. >> reporter: for former deputy defense minister tamim asey, the numbers haunted him during his time in office. >> i would go home and sleep well for four or three hours on a dathat i would count that every hour i don't lose two or three peop. ou that would be my best day. because in everyon average we used to lose one or two a.n.d.s.f.on

and 24 hou is we are talking about 24 people, or 40 people, or 48 people. >> reporter:f america wants to withdraw its troops from this total chaos, then the trumpinth administration will also have to deal with afghanistan's neighbors. pakistan has long given safe haven and support to the taliban across the border. and, aording to asey, iran is increasingly helping the group too. >> sometimes the iranians have been very blunt: if they pressure us we pressure you here. >> reporter: they being the americans? >> yes. >> reporter: any deal to try to end this war is a multi- dimensional minefield? relationship between the us and russia, us and iran, us and some other country even pakistan ch ges, unfortunately and sadly we see the consequences here in afghanistan. >> reporter: even if peace in afghanistan can be achieved, it leaves the question of what to do with the thousands of taliban fighters. if they remained, acegi

would be f, yet the likelihood of them voluntarily surrendering their weapons is very low. >> we would have to integrate their rank and file as well. and we are looking at thesee plans that we are making in these districts to utilize their fighters to secu some of these areas if we were able to. >> reporter: back in kab, we sat down with national security advisor dr mohib in his office at the presidential palace. he says he is planning for all scenarios.ha >> now we woul to be very careful. we cannot integrate them into the a.d.s.f. right away because we would be creating a trojan horse. we have to be careful at what w percentawould are able to do this and maintain the security forces integrity while o it. >> reporter: flying up to remote badakhshan province, w mheaded out tot with this group of dozens of taliban fighters. they had just surrendered to government forces as the front line shifted. unbowed, their commander was confident the americans will

soon be gone. >> ( translated ): all theig fors should leavers >> re vporter: do you stillw america as an enemy? >> ( translated ): all the foreigners should leave afghanistan, whether they are from america, canada or anywhere else. >> reporter: these fighters are out of the war, at least for lea now.ou but across thery, combat rages. by the afghan government and us forces in the first half of this year than by the taliban. and the taliban continue to kill and maim civilians by the dozens in suicide attac in the capital kabul and elsewhere. people like shafiqulla a taioor, injured by an explosn while on his wayome from work, find theires on the front with presidential electionsr. coming up, the violence, already

horrific, is intensifying. >> you know taliban are not all oking to make peace. there are ceain elementswi in that may want to make peace but the rest of them are looking to continue fighunder other banns. m th not be under taliban but perhaps under isis or renam and rebrand themselves in other ways and continue. >> reporter: for most wars to end communities often have to choose peace over justice. until there is an end to this conflict, afghanistan's peopleli ll get neither. for the pbs newshour, i'm jane ferguson in kabul, afghanistan. >> woodruff: beginomorrow, we will launch a 10-part series exploring today's china and its relationship with the us foreign

affairs correspondent nick schifrin, special correspondent katrina yu, and producers arouno thd conducted more than 70 on-camera interviews in eight chinese cities a across seven countries. why have we dedicated so manyur res to reporting on china? nick schifrin is here with a preview of our series, china: power and prosperity. >> the two most impoant countries in the world are china and the u.s., and where theire relationship heads will help determine the future of both economies. global communications and technological innovation, and what kind of world we live in. for decades, u.s. companies have worked with chinesepliers to increase productivity and profits. both sides benefited, and chinat wants the inten to continue says forsamer ambasr.

>> cooperation is thtion only f correct choi the united states. the united states is regarded as china's partner. >> the era of economic surrender is over roarks but the trump administration and bipartisan chinese economic pships reject and are now trying to confront chinese technology and influence. jake parker is vice president of the u.s.-china business council >> we've seen the optism of the business comthnity slowly decline over time. and as that optimism has declined, it's been replaced by the strategic voices, by the intelligence community, by military, who see a strategic rivalry between the unite dtates and china. >> reporter: and in that rivalry, it's not only the u.s. that has become morbae comve. the great wall was built over centuries by multiple dynasches, annese leaders who took a defensive stangs used it for today, china looksover the wall and projects its power with an amtious and expansive foreign policy.

china's belt and road initiatives spends hundreds of billions of dollars in infrastructure around the world. chinese communication giants, including huawei, export a management callartlance and city cities." and the chinese military has undergone one of t fastest expansions in history.th foe chinese, president xi jinping is the symbol of a new nationalism and strength, says central communist party school professor: >> ( translated ): xi jinping's new era is toin realie the gretiat rejuve of the chinese nation. >> reporter: but the u.s. fears china's expansion. china created a networkf more than 200 million cameras, rgeting muslim... and crack down on all dissent, smbolize by police tactics in hong kong. xi jeping does fac challenges. after targeting enge political

opponents, he has internal critics. onomic growth was slowing even before the trade war. and the country is the world's largest emitter of greenhouse gases. but china's central planners are driving ahto create the world's largest electric vehicle market, and the country's wealth has allowed for the ofturn what it calls "cultural aristocracy." so as china's position on the world stage gro, modernization will only speed up,ays the woman known as china's millennial market stewart, 34-year-old sarah jane . >> in no other part have you had such a great amount of change in su a short amount of time. >> woodruff: nick, we know chindoes not have a free press. how hard was it to do this reporting? the first step was just to getd vis as, we ho talk to the chinese government, share some of the details of our stories. inside china, many of our interviews were set up organization that's inside the government, inside the information rinistry. and those interviews, we had a government minder with us during most of the interviews.

and so not only did we report from china, but wefromso t like we needed to go outside of china, and that's why we reported from all over the world. >> woodruff: was there ne kind of al message that was coming through from the chinese in all your reporting? >> stick with cooperation, drop sn't help war, it do either side. , analso, from their perspective, they talk about how t eir infrastructure program, the technology, not a threat to the world, as the u.s. is describing it. they say that if we cooperate, if the u.s. and china coothpera, woperarld can improve. and when it comes to hongkong, as we talked abut in there, and also will talk about, they say at's aboutecurity and stability inside china. >> woodruff: and that's very diveerent story than you hear from the critics. >> yeah, talk about hong kong,k they t about suppression and dissent, not allowing any kind ofdi ssent. muslims critics are trying to ytalk about iga camto criticize muslim culture and identity. and the u.s., when it comes to chinese technology, chinese

infrastructure programs, and general foreign policy of china, theyreally see that as a threat and want u.s. is trying to combat it and really sees ait as an ideological battle right now. >> woodruff: well, it is ani very scant series. we look forward to it. it starts on the newshour tomorrow night. what is it, eight, 10 in a row? >> 10 nights in a row. >> woodruff: 10 nights in a row. nick schifrin we look forward. and that's the newshour for night. i'm judy woodruff. join us online and again here tomorrow evening. for all of us at the pbs newshour, thank you and see you soon. >> major funding f the pbs news fur has been provided by: >> you can do thkethings you li to do with a wireless plan designed for you. with talk, text and data. consumer cellular. learn more at nsumercellular.tv >> financial services firm raymond james.

>> and with the ongoing support of these institutions and individuals. >> this program was made b possibthe corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you.k yo captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org re >> yoatching pbs.

hello, everyone,yone wcome to amanpour & company, here's what's coming up. >> you want freedom take fripri in your country. if you want democracy hold onto your sovereignty. >> they may be addressing the world from the united nations, but donald trump and boris johnso face major headaches at home. democracy and the rule of law. t. discuss with the exp then -- >> f years of this assault on the environment and the climate, it is recoverable. having a longer, periodhis would be extremely dangerous for the u.s.ld and for the wor >> former vice president and climate action pioneer al gore