-- i agree with pat and eleanor to some degree president obama shouldn't have said there to jeffrey goldberg. i think he regrets it. but he has understandable and legitimate points of grievance in terms of european allies saying one thing and doing another and not pulling their weight on defense. britain is better than most but not good enough. germany is the worst example. but the agree they play games and complaining that the united states must do more but with britain a big point of contention is with china and asia investment bank where the british government is more closely aligned with china than the obama administration would want. on the british side more annoyed about the real point of grievance about the falklands where the administration through john kerry seemed to suggest that was open to negotiation. i think this will be washed away. >> libya is a special frustration because he elected to get us out of wars in afghanistan and iraq. this was a war he got us into with the best of intentions trying to do something to save people from being massacred by qaddafi. he was overthrown b

the palestinians palestinians ae israel -- she has a news in the atlantic in response 0 to the jeffrey goldberg article. ambassador is the founding director of the indiana university center for the study of the mideast and also proffer of the practice of interhandle law and diplomacy in the school of law here at iu. ambassador was appointed ambassador and deputy permanent representative to iraq to the u.n. in 2004. prior to his diplomatic appoints the ambassador served as a legal adviser to the iraqi minister for foreign awares during the negotiations for u.n. security council resolution 1546 which recognized theroo assertion of iraq of its sovereignty. also the principle legal are drafter of iraq's interim constitution, the law of its -- of the state of iraq for the transitional period and author of the fundamental rights. last but not least, richards fontaine is the president of the center for new american security. he served as a senior adviser on senior fellow in 2009 to 2012 and previously a important policy advicer to juror nonmccain for five years and has worked at the state department,

charlie: there's a famous article in the atlantic by jeffrey goldberg talking about the obama doctrine. it suggests that you have been advocating a more aggressive action in syria and in the middle east than the president is prepared to take. can you clear that up for me? have you recommended more military use and more engagement? kerry: it is entirely inappropriate for me or other people to be talking about the advice we are giving a president while we are still serving and giving the president advice. the president has a right to know that the conversations we have remain confidential. i honor that. charlie: you talk about philosophically. that thecle points out president really fears getting engaged. john kerry: the president doesn't fear it. he is a very tough decision maker. he asks really tough questions. i have been impressed by that. he goes right to the nub of the issue. what theto figure out consequences and effects are decisionbe of any consequenc that he makes. put to the have not president to the full breadth of some of the options that might be available. charlie: what is

. >> jeffrey goldberg, national correspondent for the atlantic who interviewed barack obama on his foreignolicy tried to explain the president's approach. >> he refers to the washington play book, the washington playbook is something happens in country "x" and therefore we have to send 50 cruise missiles to deal with that problem and what he wants to do, he says, is break washington of the habit every problem overseas comes with a potential military solution. >> it was clear he had a new take. but the question remained, what would president obama actually do? he was against the war in iraq. but his military people warned against a hasty withdrawal. >> it was really important that we try to maintain a military presence there in order to make sure that the gains that had been achieved with a lot of blood by the united states, as well as iraqis, that those gains could be maintained. >> leon panetta was president obama's secretary of defense from 2011 until 2013. >> that's why the pentagon supported maintaining a presence there. >> the key to preserving an american military presence in iraq wa

. >> jeffrey goldberg, national correspondent for the atlantic who interviewed barack obama on his foreignolicy tried to explain the president's approach. >> he refers to the washington play book, the washington playbook is something happens in country "x" and therefore we have to send 50 cruise missiles to deal with that problem and what he wants to do, he says, is break washington of the habit every problem overseas comes with a potential military solution. >> it was clear he had a new take. but the question remained, what would president obama actually do? he was against the war in iraq. but his military people warned against a hasty withdrawal. >> it was really important that we try to maintain a military presence there in order to make sure that the gains that had been achieved with a lot of blood by the united states, as well as iraqis, that those gains could be maintained. >> leon panetta was president obama's secretary of defense from 2011 until 2013. >> that's why the pentagon supported maintaining a presence there. >> the key to preserving an american military presence in iraq wa

. >> jeffrey goldberg, n nional correspondent fofor the atlanti who intervieiewed barack obama his soreign policy tried to explain the president's approach. >> he refers to o the washingto play book, t the washington playbookok is something happensn coununtry "x" and therefore we have to send 50 cruise missisil to deal with that problelem and what he wants to do, he says, is break washingtonon of the habit every proboblem overseas comes with a potentialal military solutionon. >> it wawas clear he had a new takeke. but the question remained, w wt would presidenent obama actuall do? he was againstst the war in ira. but his s military people warne aiainst a hasty withdrawal. >> it was really importatant th we try to maintainin ailitary presesence there in order to ma sure that the gas s that had been achieved d with a lot of blood byby the united states, a well as iraqis, that those g gas could be maintntained. >> leon panetttta was president obama's sesecretary of defense frfrom 2011 until 2013. >> that's why the pentagonon supported maintainining a presee there. >> the k key to preser

. >> jeffrey goldberg, national correspondent f "the atlantic" who interviewed president obama on his foreign policy tried to expl explain the president's approach. >> he refers to the the washington playbook, and the washington playbook is something happens in country x and therefore we have to send 350 cruise missiles to deal with ta problem, and so what he wants the do to break washington of the habit that the every problem overseas comes with a potential military solution. >> so it is clear that he had a new take, but the question remained, what would president obama actually do? he was against the war in iraq, but his military people warned against a hasty withdraw. >> it is really important that we tried to maintain a military presence there in order to make sure that the game he gained th been ap a-- that had been achie by a lot of blood could be m maintained. >> leon panetta was the secretary up until 2011. >> the key to maintain a key presence in iraq was to maintain a stay-behind-force. the president had to take the lead. >> the only chance for an agreement would have been h

bret: jeffrey goldberg whoreigno interviewed barack obama on his foreign policy tried to explain the president's approach. >> he refers to the washington playbook, something happens in country x and therefore we have to send 50 cruz missiles. what he says is he wants to break washington of the habit that every problem overseas comes with a potential military solution.al bret require was clear he had a new take. a but the question remains, what would president obama actually do. >> it was important that we m tried to maintain a military presence there in order to make sure that the gains that had been achieved, a lot of blood by the youth as well as iraqis, that those gains could be maintained. reporter: leon a northeast was president obama's secretary of defense from 2011 to 2013. >> that's why the pentagon supported the processes. bret: the key was to negotiate a stay-behind force. the president would have to take the lead. >> the on chance we would have had for an agreement would have been his intensive involvement personally, and that didn't happen. >> so december 18, 2011, the la

. >> jeffrey goldberg, national correspondent for the atlantic who interviewed barack obama on his foreigntried to explain the president's approach. >> he refers to the washington play book, the washington playbook is something happens in country "x" and therefore we have to send 50 cruise missiles to deal with that problem and what he wants to do, he says, is break washington of the habit every problem overseas comes with a potential military solution. >> it was clear he had a new take. but the question remained, what would president obama actually do? he was against the war in iraq. but his military people warned against a hasty withdrawal. >> it was really important that we try to maintain a military presence there in order to make sure that the gains that had been achieved with a lot of blood by the united states, as well as iraqis, that those gains could be maintained. >> leon panetta was president obama's secretary of defense from 2011 until 2013. >> that's why the pentagon supported maintaining a presence there. >> the key to preserving an american military presence in iraq was to n

-saudi relationship in an interview with "the atlantic"'s jeffrey goldberg.oining me now is a reporter who has reported extensively from the middle east. her nude look is called "on saudi arabia,". a," i am pleased to have her back on this program. talk to me in the beginning about where is the relationship as the president arrives there. it is not in a very good place. i know that the saudi's and the americans like to say that we have a close relationship, but the distrust of saudi arabia now, of the u.s., which has been building at least since we 2003, againstn their strong advice, has now become so eroded. they simply do not trust the u.s.. charlie: a series of other events that took place, too. the redline in syria. >> even before that. in their minds, the president abandoned a long-term ally, president will barack -- president mubarak in egypt. then there was the redline in syria, where if assad crossed it, we would do something, and then we erased the red line. most recently, and most importantly, the nuclear deal with iran, which they were el,ays skept

. >> jeffrey goldberg, national correspondent for the atlantic who interviewed barack obama on his foreignolicy tried to explain the president's approach. >> he refers to the washington play book, the washington playbook is something happens in country "x" and therefore we have to send 50 cruise missiles to deal with that problem and what he wants to do, he says, is break washington of the habit every problem overseas comes with a potential military solution. >> it was clear he had a new take. but the question remained, what would president obama actually do? he was against the war in iraq. but his military people warned against a hasty withdrawal. >> it was really important that we try to maintain a military presence there in order to make sure that the gains that had been achieved with a lot of blood by the united states, as well as iraqis, that those gains could be maintained. >> leon panetta was president obama's secretary of defense from 2011 until 2013. >> that's why the pentagon supported maintaining a presence there. >> the key to preserving an american military presence in iraq wa

what is notable at the atlantic6p]u jeffrey goldberg conducted with the president recently hinted at quote, his most urgent priority for the remainder of his presidet killing the so-called caliph of the islamic state. abu back kerr ago balliww&#á"tt. apparatus in obama's last year. the killing of usama bin laden. a key tenet of the president's strategy is killing9+ú7 cabinet, if you will, of isis. greta? >> jennifer, i asked colonel warren the other day añ if they knew al bag -- al baghdadi was alive. here is what he told me. >> do you have any idea whether al baghdadi the number wynn one guy is alive or any information where isu2qu@ he at all? and taking him out would mean what? >> we do believe he ish p alive. we are actively hunting him. when we do kill him this will be yet another significant below to the organization. >> you know, i was hoping when i asked that question, obviously he is not going to tell me where is he. but it's a binm ladennesque situation where they have some idea where he is and we're going to get him. >> well, it's interesting, greta, today he actually said

jeffrey goldberg has recently route served -- observed a piece in "the atlantic" magazine on the obama doctrine and that he obama has come to a number of duck tailing in the united states as well and has come to a number of duck tailing conclusions in the world and america's role in it. the first is that the middle east is no longer terribly thertant to american -- world's interest. the second is that there would still be little that an american president could do to make it a better place. the third is an innate american desire to sort problems that manifest themselves most drastically in the middle east. that would lead to warfare and the deaths of u.s. soldiers and the eventual hemorrhaging's of u.s. credibility and power." this newo make of trajectory and some might say refreshingly ideological view? evidence ofirical america's involvement or out thevement bear president's retrospective articulation of his strategy and doctrine? what is likely to endure and likely to change in this calculus will change with the new president in office in 2017.y of to help us answer these questions

-saudi relationship and interview with jeffrey goldberg. joining me is karen elliott house, former publisher of "the wall street journal" and author of "on saudi arabia: its people, past, religion, fault lines and future." she continues to write about the country, continues to visit the country and is one of the respected analysts who understands saudi arabia and knows the people of influence there. very pleased to have her back on the program. welcome. >> thank you, charlie. >> rose: talk to me in the beginning about where is the relationship as the president arrives there. >> it's not in a very good place. i know both the saudis and the americans publicly like to say we have a close, long relationship, but the distrust of saudi arabia now of the u.s., which has been building at least since we invaded iraq in 2003 against their strong advice, but it has now become so eroded, they simply do not trust the u.s. >> rose: and a series of other events that took place, too. first of all the red line in syria. >> well, even before that, in their m

i want your reaction to something that president obama told jeffrey goldberg, quote, the notion that somehow russia is in a stronger position now in syria or ukraine than they were before they had invaded ukraine or before he had to deploy military forces to syria is to fundamentally misunderstand the nature of power in foreign affairs or in the world, generally. what do you think? the biggest intelligence failure since 9/11 is enable to predict leadership plans and intentions of the putin regime in russia. i can understand why, for after the georgian invasion, you know, we thought diplomacy network, but after the invasion of crimea, that should have been a red line, and we immediately should have moved quickly in to bolster our nato allies. but instead we continued to negotiate with the russians, continued to talk to the russians, and then they invaded eastern ukraine, we missed that. we completely missed entirely when they put a new base, new base with aircraft into the mediterranean, into syria. we missed it. we were blind. the intelligence community has continued to get this wron

. >> rose: as you know there is a famous article in the atlantic magazine by jeffrey goldberg talking about the obama doctrine. one of the things it suggests is that you have been advocating a more aggressive action in syria and in the middle east than the president is prepared to take. can you clear that up for me? have you recommended more military use, more engagement? >> i think it is entirely inappropriate for me or other people to be talking about the advice we are giving a president while we are still serving and giving the president advice. and i think that the president has a right to know that the conversations we have remain within us, the memos we write remain between us and i honor that. >> rose: okay. but you can talk about philosophically when you look at the middle east, that article point out that the president really fears getting engaged and he -- >> the president doesn't fear. >> rose: okay. fair enough. use your own words. >> well, i didn't support -- the president is very -- is a very tough decision maker. demanding. he asks really good and really tough questions

and i don't think there's any other way to read the recent jeffrey goldberg article in the "atlantic," "the obama doctrine," which i would urge everyone to read. i don't think there's any other way to read it than to say that the president has decided that the middle east is just not -- that a stable order in the middle east is not a vital u.s. interest. the third principle is that the defeat or the weakening of isis is our strategic goal in syria. and that that goal takes precedence over any other goal. the fourth principle is that iran and russia are partners in the fight against isis. and if they're not behaving today as our partners, they're going to behave as our partners tomorrow. the time and time again secretary kerry and the president have suggested if you listen carefully, you can hear the footsteps of president putin, he's just about to turn the corner and come in here in order to work with us to get rid of bashar al assad. meanwhile, therefore, we can give up any demands about assad, any serious demands about the composition of the syrian government or concessions to the o

look at "atlantic" magazine, jeffrey goldberg interview. he slammed the saudis.ted obama, long referred to them as so-called ally of the u.s. he is also questioned also often harshly the role that america's sunni-arab allies to foment anti-american terrorism. ritated that foreign policy orthodoxy compels him to treat saudi arabia as an ally. i think he is po'd. at riyadh and he is going to release this. >> i think he is looking for excuse to do it. ultimately the bottom line, president obama has switched sides in the middle east. we used to be allied with the sunnis and israel and now we're allied with iran. eric: kt, decision we're told within maybe 60 days certainly. could be embarrassing if it is before the trip but probably after. we'll see what happens. good to see you. thank you. martha? martha: interesting stuff. go to jon scott to find out what is coming up on "happening now" today. hi, jon. >> good morning, martha. donald trump crying foul saying rules are stacked against him with delegates. he could learn a few things from the last gop contested convent

sanctions, which ould have intensified discord, and as obama had said in the atlantic article with jeffrey goldbergwhich some of us had interpreted a long time ago, you go , he wasn't prepared to enrichment, but he was prepared to go to war and same with the israelis. from the iranian poi of view, after saddam had been nicely emoved from the scene and what's ook over iraq, their problem? it could only be something that could attack them because of a nuclear weapon program. more over, what they're very eenly aware of and there's an incredibly intense loathing between iran and saudi arabia, more intense than anything i've ever experienced, whether it kind of debraces them in the united states, india, pakistan, nothing compared to the iranians and the saudi. themselves ans see as vastly superior to saudi arabia in every possible way, and say the only thing that saudi arabia could do would be to get nuclear weapons if we did. if we don't get them, the world saudi arabia from getting them. i totally agree with sig on it. i appreciate the spirit of your question. i think france is a great whom e of a cou

in the atlantic piece that you mentioned, jeffrey goldberg's series of interviews with the president, when the president says that saudi arabia -- that there is, in fact, at least baghdad, at least damascus and parts of lebanon are part of the influence. the arab or perfection gulf, at least the arabian peninsula is part of it. >> we are certainly -- -- the obama administration is not interested in removing iran's allies in syria. it doesn't seem to have any policy at all in lebanon, which but it is possibly the proxy war against yemen, drawing them much more to iran than they were when saudi arabia started bombing yemen, for no obvious reason that i can discern. i think this will be the lasting legacy. it's an unfortunate legacy. with all due respect i think we'll disagree on the obama administration policy in the middle east. as far as it being a 21st century docktrine when you described it, robin, i thought of a 19th century -- sorry, early 20s century. so this doctrine has been around at least colonel lawrence. who can disagree with a man played by peter o'toole? >> my friend, who

and i don't think there's any other way to read the recent jeffrey goldberg article in the atlantic, the obama doctrine which i would urge everyone to read. i don't think there's any other way to read it than to say that the president has decided that the middle east is just not -- that a stable order in the middle east is not a vital u.s. interest. the third principle is that the defeat or the weakening of isis is our strategic goal in syria. and that that goal takes precedence over any other goal. the fourth principle is that iran and russia are partners in the fight against isis. and if they're not behaving today as our partners, they're going to behave as our partners tomorrow. the time and time again secretary kerry and the president has suggested if you listen carefully, you can hear the footsteps of president putin. he's just about to turn the corner and come in here in order to work with us, to get rid of bashar al-assad. meanwhile, therefore, we can give up any demands about assad, any serious demands about the composition of the syrian government or concessions to the oppos

written by jeffrey goldberg. mr. oldberg who had enormous access with the president for i think well over a year, traveled with him, air force one, all over, numerous interviews, he takes us, jeffrey goldberg in his article, on a trip across the globe. through the eyes of president obama. and i would encourage all of my colleagues in this body to read that article. as i mentioned, mr. goldberg has significant access to the president, but the tour across the world leaves us no doubt that the president not only views himself as the smartest man in the room, he's the smartest man in the world. and mr. goldberg -- in mr. goldberg's words, president obama -- quote -- "has found world leadership wanting. global partners who often lack the vision and the will to spend political capital and purr -- in pursuit of broad progressive goals and adversaries who are not in his mind as rational as we are." the president assesses the various strengths and weaknesses of our allies, and in his view only german chancellor angela merkel m