tonight, holding russia accountable. britain kicks out more than 20 diplomats in the crisis over the suspected kremlin poisoning of a former spy. and the former cia director michael hayden joins me on the uk's next steps and why it might not get the support it wants from president trump. plus, my conversation with the new leader for st. patrick's day. mary lou mcdonald brings a message of unity to america. >> announcer: amanpour on pbs was made possible by the

generous support of rosalind p. walter. good evening, everyone. and welcome to the program. i'm christiane amanpour in new york. britain gets tough with moksz just over a week after a former spy his daughter and a british police officer were poisoned by a russia-made nerve agent. the prime minister is expelling 23 russian diplomats and suspending all high-level contacts with moscow. >> they have provided no credible explanation that could suggest they lost control of their nerve agent. no explanation as to how this agent came to be used in the united kingdom. no explanation as to why russia has an undeclared chemical weapons program in contraconvention of international law. instead they treated the use of a military grade nerve agent with sarcasm, contempt and

defines. >> and russia's calls mays exaction unshould have had and short sighted and promising to retaliate. britain needs the high-level support of the eu and america but how will the president react? here is what he said about this yesterday. >> theresa may is going to be speaking to me today. it sounds to me like they believe it was russia. and i would certainly take that finding as fact. >> so in a phone call he then told the prime minister that he is with her all the way. and the white house today says it stands by britain's assessment. just before may told parliament what she is doing about it i spoke about and the moving chess species of national's security cabinet with michael hayden, the former director of the cia. general hayden, welcome back to the program. >> thank you very much. >> so "the new york times" is writing tillerson ousted as trump silences dissent in cabinet. is that how you see the firing

of tillerson and the, you know, the giving the job to mike pompeo? >> that's not the only thing that's going on here. but i do think it's an interesting and important element. i mean, director pompeo will be the new secretary of state after confirmation. he gets very good marks at cia for management. but his world view is much more like president trump's world view than secretary tillerson's ever was. and so what we'll see here i think is a tighter relationship between the two. that's a plus in many cases. when secretary pompeo speaks, the world will believe he is speaking on behalf of the president. but, again, that unanimity of view means he won't be the kind of counterpoint to president trump that secretary tillerson has been on many occasions. and, frankly, that makes me a little nervous. >> well let's take point by point then about what might make

you nervous. russia, for instance. director pompeo has sort of played down or simply dismissed a lot of findings by the intelligence community on the level of russian interference in the elections. what do you think -- what will be the response now as we go ahead, especially as we see russia is really being accused by britain of having something to do with this nerve agent that has been poisoning one of the former spies there. the crisis that erupted in britain. >> well to be fair to director pompeo, he has accepted and defended the intelligence community view with regard to the russian interference in the 2016 election, except for one, i believe, invertant misstatement he made that the agency quickly fixed. so he is probably not quite the same person as secretary tillerson with regard to russia. but i do think he has a healthy

skeptical view and really important, christiane, the woman replacing him at cia is really good on russia and very tough on russia. >> we'll get to gina haspel in a moment. but first i want to drill down a little bit on russia. what are the next steps. >> well the prime minister theresa may was very clear in the language. i mean, she said it was highly likely that -- and i don't think she says that just based upon the forensics of the crime scene. i think her intelligence services are giving her strong supportive information. and then she laid down the ultimatum, without of an adequate explanations great britain views this as illegal use of force by the russian state against the united kingdom. now, that doesn't mean the two countries are going to whear. but i do expect sanctions and quite a few fewer russian diplomats serving in the united kingdom. and of course the russians will respond to that. the moves will be made tougher

if they are supported and at least matched a bit by the united states of america. but here again, christiane, we're back to in earlier premise that for well over several years the president don't seem to be anxious to take tough moves against the russians. >> well let's move on to some of the key issues on president trump's plate and presume bring for the new secretary of state. of course iran. i want to play you this sound byte from president trump talking about why he split up with secretary tillerson and the iran issue. >> what did you say to rex tillerson. >> rex and i have been talking about this for a long time. we got along quite well but disagreed on things. when you look at the iran deal, i think it's terrible. i guess i felt it was okay. i wanted to either break it or do something. and he felt a little bit differently. so we were not really thinking the same. with mike, mike pompeo very a

similar thought process. i think it's going to go very well. >> where do you think mike pompeo stands now. he was a hawk on iran. some who know him now since he's been in office he has moderated the views on that deal. you're in the know. what do you think is going to happen. >> i think even if director pompeo is moderating his views and that's a naturally occurring event when talking to the cia analysts all the time, even if he has moderated his views his views are more like the president's than rex tillerson's everywhere. and one other interesting dynamic in all of this, christiane, that i don't think has been commented on enough is that secretary mattis and tillerson talked a lot, met for lunch. they hammered out joint positions. much of what secretary tillerson tried to impress upon the president secretary mattis was doing the same thing.

and now i think we find that secretary mattis is a bit more isolated inside the power minoritiy, inside the national security cabinet than he once was. this is going to be an interesting dynamic. >> what should the rest of the world think then, those who are american allies just on this issue on the iran issue where with he know america's allies and all the powers that created deal do not want the united states to ditch it? and there is a may 12th deadline looming for whether the president grooes to kin the sanctions waiver. >> well let me offer a comment that won't be calming to my european friends. you know, during the campaign here christiane we talked about some folks taking president trump seriously but not taking him literally. people like me took him literally but not seriously. i actually think as -- abe, as the president gets more comfortable in the job, more confident in himself, as he

begins to surround with himself with advisers who agree with him and less willing to push back, check out what the president says on a lot of issues, because i think he is going to be governing a lot more literally than we expected in the past. >> right. and that leads you straight into north korea, which potentially, a massively important, unprecedented summit is looming. not even president reagan and gorbachev can match the unprecedented nature of this potential summit between donald trump and kim jong un. not to mention, that none of the state department or ambassadorial figures left in. but what do you think -- obviously the opportunities -- but the pitfalls particularly given mike pompeo's views on north korea? >> so number one i have a lot of concern that we have created this sense of equivalence between a real president of a real country, donald trump and the united states, and kim jong un. i used to negotiate with the

north koreans, a back-bencher in again eve aif but i was at the table negotiating with the people's korean army. and the one thing they always wanted to maneuver to achieve is isolated the united states and create this sense of balance and equality between the united states and north korea. and we granted them that as a going in position for the talks. with regard to the actual expectation of the talks, here is an interesting dynamic, i think, christiane, actually, soon to be secretary pompeo is a bit more skeptical about the north korean's willingness to ever give up their nuclear weapons than i think the president is. i think he has listened to cia analysts who pointed out they're not crazy. they are coldly rational. within their calculus they would have be crazy to i have up the weapons. he may have a more realistic view of what it is we could or

couldn't achieve than some others, including the president. >> so now general hayden, we get to gina haspel who you praised as an exceptional manager and very good cia agent. and frankly a lot of the cia are saying the same thing. however, there is the black spot that people are talking about in her past and in her experience. as we know she led one of the first u.s. secret sites in thailand after 9/11 where there were 9/11 suspects, harsh interrogation and the like. let me just read to you in tweet that john mccain who knows a thing or two about being a prisoner of war and torture tweeted yesterday. the torture of detainees in u.s. custody during the last decade was one of the darkest chapters in american history. the senate must do its job in scrutinizing the record and involvement of gina haspel in this disgraceful program. do you agree that it must scrutinize what she did. >> of course. we all have history. and when you're up in front of

the senate for confirmation they want to know about your history. but gina's history will reveal that she did her duty, that she didn't raze her hand with enthusiasm to go out and do these things. she did it out of a sense of responsibility. . she was directed to do it by competent authority and told by the department of justice at the time that it was absolutely consistent with american law. and so let's give some credit where credit is due. gina and a whole burcham of other people in her generation of officers did what we expected. they went to the sound of the guns and tried to defend america to best of her ability. the fact that the program was controversial, go ahead and have another debate about that if you like. but i think that has been already litigated. let me tell you the one person i want in the room telling truth to power in the circumstances i just described to you is gina haspel. >> obviously the question is, do

you accept that you obey orders that may not be ethical? and we have had the national debate on torture. it is illegal. there is a 2014 commission and findings from the senate. what is the actual answer these days? >> these were extraordinary circumstances. america was under extraordinary threat. extraordinary decisions were made. now 17 years later people who have been made safe, people who are operating in a calm environment may want to go back and actually judge whether they were the right or the wrong decisions. that's a fair debate for history. that's what the senate intelligence committee, at least the democrats tried to do although in a very one-sided sort of way i think. we should not in any way blame the people who did what -- what they were responsible to do and asked the appropriate organs of

government whether or not this was constitutional, lawful and consistent with american treaty obligations. >> um-hum. >> they were given yes answers to each of those. they did their duty. and let me put out the harsh statement here between us, christiane. and it worked and it made america more safe. now, look, there are a lot of people out there who make the argument i don't care if it made america more safe, i don't want my country doing that. i respect that argument. but that's the argument that people can have and they don't need to bring in people like gina into that debate. >> you were not the cia director when all this was going on. but the 2014 report did criticize you for precisely the statements you are talking about now that you felt it worked, that you sort of underplayed some of the harsher tactics, the kind of things you are saying right now. the question then is and finally, president trump has said in the past that he believes torture works. do you think that this is going

to become a live issue again for the united states if there is a similar situation or that kind of situation withh the presiden who believes that way and gina haspel who has actually led one of the sites? >> that's a great question. and it really captures what really ought to be the issue, christiane, not history and an officer doing her duty 15, 16, 17 years ago. but what does it mean for the president? and i take what candidate trump had said, even what president trump has said. when gina was nominated to be the deputy director last year, i offered the commentary that her choice was a clear signal that cia intended to neither repudiate nor repeat its past because, number one, the law has changed. and number two, cia officers feel a genuine sense of betrayal as to what happened to them as

we changed administrations in this country. no responsible head of cia will be telling his or her officers to go do this because he or she will not be able to provide the kind of protection that they deserve and they should demand. this is a moot point. >> well, that is extraordinary insight and general hayden on that note thank you so much for joining us. >> thank you, christiane. so, in saturday many americans and countless others around the world will be celebrating st. patrick's day. irish leaders make their annual pilgrimage to the united states for the holiday. among of the greenest of the guest mary lou mcdonald elected leader of the irish republican party. unlake her predecessor she is a leader with no history or lengths to the times of the ira or to the ira, the militant republicans who fought a

campaign against british rule in northern island, a period known abbas the trublts. they ended with the signing of the good friday agreement 20 yearsing a. and mary lou mcdonald the first female leader in more than 65 years joins me live from washington welcome. >> thank you so much christiane, nice talking to you. >> so on this historic moment really as everyone is celebrating 20 years, almost to the week or so of the good friday accords. what message are you bringing today to the united states? >> well, i suppose in addition to wishing people the joy of the festivities over st. patrick's weekend. we come with the message of hope but also a message of -- of threat opposed to the good friday agreement by the brexit who by some in the torey

establishment who say it can be discarded with. i suppose we issue a rallying cry to all of those people right across america, people who were instrumental in delivering a peace process in ireland, were instrumental in delivering the good friday agreement, we're saying we now need to defend that very agreement, its principals of equality and inclusion. the very things sustaining peace. with say clearly brexit poses a real danger to that agreement. we delivered that message directly to mrs. may in london, her government are well aware of it. and i suppose we're also asking people to keep faith with us as you know, christiane, our country, our island is partitioned since the 1920s. and as irish republicans it's our political mission to reunify the country peacefully, do it democratically and to build a new ireland. so i suppose that the message is

mixed inasmuch as we are talking about the real political threats that need to be met head on but also the massive political opportunities that are out there, and the big historic mission now that i believe we can complete in our political lifetimes to reunite a country. >> right. >> peacefully and create a bright new future for one and all. >> well that is a clare message with a lot of hope attached to it. let's not forget as you pointed out that it was the united states which as much as the parties involved in the british government of tony blare under president clinton who forged that historic good friday agreement. you're here now. what do you make of not being invited to the white house? it's strenke to me that unlike your predecessor jerry adams, the former president, the recently resigned president of -- or retired president of shinfein has gotten an invitation today you don't. why not. >> look the invitations are

issued by the white house and it's a matter for themselves to make decisions as to who might be invited or not. i will be at the speaker lurjen. i've had an extensive range of engage mts with political people. i meet with friends of ireland up on the hill tomorrow morning. we are very -- we are very busy and very active. jerry will be in the white house tomorrow. and injury it's most appropriate given that it's the 20th anniversary of the good friday agreement. and to be honest with you, christiane, just given the political challenges that we face, i certainly don't feel that i've been snubbed or anything like that. i guess it's a matter for the white house if you're seeking an explanation to forward that to you. but i would say this -- and we have met today with the state department as to say we'll we'll meet with others. the challenge in ireland is immense. but for the united states ireland i believe remains almost

the jewel in the crown if i can use that term, a massive foreign diplomatic triumph for the united states of america. and we are -- we are mineful of the role of successive administrations. we wish america always to be constructive. and i believe that's the intention of this administration as with others. but i guess we're asking people at this stage now to step up and to demonstrate that by way of deed. so there is talk of a special envoy being appointed. i very much hope that that happens. i heard george mitchell speak so eloquently last evening in the library of congress, so movingly, so passion knitly about the process of building peace. >> he knows it probably better than anybody except for you in that country having been the key negotiator. but i wonder you just said you met at the state department. and we've been talking about the changing of the guard there. did you actually meet with rex tillerson? is he still on the job?

>> no. no. indeed we didn't. and we were -- we were busily examining issues that for me are domestic matters. i have to say, though, you conhelp but feel that there was a changing of the guards under way. and of course that's a matter for this administration. it's not really a matter for me to comment on, except to say that i hope that any administrative changes won't delay or won't compromise what i believe can be a very positive influence and a very positive intervention by the -- by this government. >> maryou mcdonald, i said to put to you the we'll jerriy adams figure. he spent his career during the troubles and eventually was one of the leaders of the peace process. and i did say in the introduction that you and your fellow leader mitchell a term s

chucky alore apparently it means our day. but for many it is known as an expression the ira used, a expression of potentially militant nationalism. was that deliberate? >> well, i did issue those words. i did say chucky aurlaoire. that's the iish for our day will cop. people know full well that in saying those word that has the original willing in the james joyce portrait of a young man it has auspicious literary pedigree. in using the word i talk directly to the building of a new ireland. you are right to say that i have no connections direct connections with the conflict. i'm a dublin woman, from what is

called the south. my south and deputy leader mitchell oneil represent a new generation of republican leaders. and of course we're findful of the past, mindful of the fact that we have a job in terms of building reconciliation. but our eye is firmly on the future. and to be honest with you, if you care to examine the speech that i made when i became leader, you will see a manifesto, an ambitious manifesto for reaching out for healing and change. i say that as a republican woman. and i reserve the right to use use republican language. that slogan is far beyond the reach of any single group. that's a term commonly used by irish nationalists. irish republicans and all about building the future that's what we are about now. >> all right. mary lou mcdonald. newly elected president of shinfein. thajs for joining us and happy

frts patrick's to you this weekend. >> many happy returns. >> and just a final word from us before we go. exactly one month ago an all too familiar horror played out in another american school we a 19-year-old boy stormed into the marjory stoneman douglas high school in parkland, florida, killing 17 students and faculty with a military style assault rifle, the ar-15. but the student reaction has been anything but familiar or typical. this time they turned the grieve into a clarion call and mass action for stricter gun control. they have been staging protests, visiting state houses, attending congressional meetings. and today on this one month anniversary they have staged a massive national school walk out around this country. they spilled out of thousands of schools all over from coast to coast, from north to south, in protest, for 17 minutes to honor each of the 17 people who were

killed. they are disappointed that president trump has walked back what seemed to be solidarity in the immediate aftermath of issues like the age limit for buying the weapons and stricter background checks. but last week at least the florida governor rick scott signed legislation on a state level, including raising the minimum age or buying firearms from 18 to 21, and allowing some teachers to be armed. and that's it for our program tonight. thanks for watching amanpour on pbs. and join us again tomorrow night. >> announcer: amanpour on pbs was made possible by the generous support of rosalind p. walter.

♪ ♪ ♪