President Obama Interview BBC News Special

BBC conducted an exclusive interview where Barack Obama discussed the

UK's special relationship with the United States, and also his wife

Michelle. It is fair to say

your visit has created a stir, People say, "OK, we have a special

relationship, yet that could involve The special relationship is not

contingent on any particular issue. There are emotional and cultural

and commercial and strategic bonds between our two

countries that are unmatched by any As a practical matter,

what we are doing with respect to trade is negotiating with big blocks

of countries. Negotiating trade deals are

difficult and challenging. We recently completed a deal in the

Asia-Pacific region. Our next step is to try to negotiate and EU -

inactivate agreement, and the point I was simply making is that for

those who suggested that if we could not be entangled with the Europeans,

our special relationship is going to mean that we can cut the line and

get a quick deal with the United States and it would be a lot more

efficient, and that is not how we think about it. I don't think that

how the next ministration will think about it because our preference

would be to work with this large block of countries. The more central

argument that I was making is that it is our belief that a strong

United Kingdom helps the United States because we are so close. As I

indicated yesterday, it is my firm belief, I think backed up why the

evidence, that a United Kingdom which is in the EU will have more

influence, better leveraged on its viewpoint or effectively, and that

will benefit jobs and businesses here in the UK.

It is the phrase "back of the queue" which has offended some people

Was that the intention? No.

It was simply a response to the argument that I've heard from

others who are proposing to leave the EU that somehow America would be

able to do things more quickly with the UK than if they were in the EU.

I was indicating that would not be the case in this narrow issue

Let's say Britain leaves and attempt to negotiate a trade deal,... My

simple point is that it is hard to negotiate trade deals. It takes a

long time. The UK would not be able to

negotiate something with the We would not abandon

our efforts to negotiate a trade deal with our largest trading

partner, the European market, but rather it could be five years

from now, ten years from now before So maybe not right to the back

of the queue, I think the broader point is that

if you are interested in trade, we are on the cusp of getting a trade

deal done with the European Union. If I am a business person or a

worker in Britain, and I'm looking at the fact that I already have

access seamlessly with a massive market, one of the wealthiest

markets in the world, that accounts for 44% of my exports,

the idea that I will be in a better position to export and trade

by being outside of that market and not being in the room setting the

rules and standards by which trade You have been very clear,

the special relationship is more Trade is important,

but it is much more than that. We have been focusing

on intelligence-sharing, given the real threat from terrorist groups

around the world. Is it possible to say today that

if there were an exit from the EU, those elements of the special

relationship would not be affected? They would not be affected

in the sense that our intelligence We also have to make sure that

continental Europe is safe in order to keep us safe. The fact that the

UK is involved in conversations about how we upgrade information

sharing in on parental Europe, the influence that it has in debate in

Europe around how we approach intelligence, law enforcement, how

we break down some of those things that prevent us preventing the kind

of horrific crimes we have seen in Brussels and Paris, together we will

be less effective than we are currently worthy get this great

ally, who engages in unmatched cooperation with us in the room

negotiating it, things as simple as making sure that passenger lists are

shared. It took a lot of years for us to be able to negotiate that with

the European Parliament and the EU. Our strongest advocate for getting

that done was the UK, and it was extremely helpful. That in turn

makes us both safer because it is not as if by exiting the EU you are

going to stop terrorists from travelling from Europe to the UK any

more than we are going to stop Europeans from visiting the United

States. For all of those people watching trying to calibrate the

arguments you have offered on several levels, if they are

wondering, OK, if there is a British exit from the EU, how will have the

macro that have the biggest impact on the racial chip, what will be the

most noticeable impact? It is the impact that it has on the UK that is

relevant, not on the special relationship. On the bond? The bond

between our two countries is not breakable. The issue is that

precisely because we share so much, we see the world through such a

common prison. We want to make sure that our partner, one of our most

important partners in the world, if not the most important partner,

maximises its leveraged and power, and that is the core of my argument.

Our ability to do things together will not be changed.

What we do believe is that the United Kingdom will have less

influence in Europe, and as a consequence, less influence

globally, and since we rely heavily on the UK as a partner globally,

on a whole range of issues, we like you having more influence.

We like you being at the table being able to influence other countries

who may not be able to always see things as clearly, from our suspect

this, as our British partners. Some people watching

put a much higher price on the bond They will say, "The President is

very clear, the special relationship will not be damaged by any decision

on coming in or out of the EU. If that is the case, we should not

be concerned about coming out." That is how they will

probably relay the argument. If the countries closest to you

that care about you the most, the countries with whom you co-operate

most frequently, those who you have a special relationship with, are

suggesting to you that you might be better off staying

in this relationship with Europe, Ultimately there is going to be a

decision for the British people to make, and we respect that. But, in

the same way as in our personal lives, if we are making a big

decision, we should probably pay attention to the people who we have

counted on, who we have stood by, who we have a history with. We

should pay attention when they say, I think this is the right thing to

do. My hope is that this is something that would have some

influence on how voters think. I don't anticipate that anything I

have said will change the position of those leading the campaign in one

direction or another, but for ordinary voters I thought it would

be relevant to hear what the president of the United States, who

lives the British people and cares deeply about this racial chip, has

to say. Can we talk about the remaining nine months of your

presidency because you clearly still have big ambitions and you made that

clear in your meeting earlier today. There is a sharp focus again

on some of the really dangerous If you eyebrows were raised when you

expressed frustration regarding how some European leaders have responded

to the challenge in Libya. I think we were all distracted. That portion

of my comments, I'm sure got attention here. What may be got less

attention was my statement that one of my regrets is not fully

anticipating the degree of concentration and focus that would

be required after the campaign to make sure that Gaddafi was not

killing his own people in Libya, so this was something I think we all

share some collective responsibility for. I continue to believe it was

the right thing to do. Had we stood by passively, Gaddafi would have

killed enormous numbers of his own people and Libya would have been

embroiled in a continuing war that would have been even more disruptive

and damaging. But, what is also true is that we now have to focus on that

country stabilising itself and having a government that can

actually function and we can interact with. This government is

beginning to come together, and prior to coming here I was in Saudi

Arabia, where many of the entries I was meeting with had had influence

with various factions within Libya, and my message to them was, give

this government a chance. Isolate the extremists, allow moderates from

all the various groups to come together. It is in all of our

interests that Libya has a functioning state, and we should be

less concerned at this point with perfection in Libya, and more

concerned with sounding something up where people can provide basic

services, we can begin training their police and border security. It

has enormous ramifications over the long-term for Europe. It speaks to

one part of the migration crisis that has been taking place, but also

it is a critical component of our overall campaign to defeat Isil. If

your range of options in Libya includes a monetary option of some

kind, are you concerned in the European context, for example, that

the parliament has shown little appetite to be engaging in that way.

How would that affect your thinking in terms of the options you have?

Syria has been a heartbreaking situation of enormous complexity. I

don't think there are any simple solutions to Syria, and those who

pretend that there are probably have not been paying a lot of attention

to the details. It is my view that it would be a mistake for the United

States, or Great Britain, or a common nation of Western states, to

send in ground troops and overthrow the Assad regime. But I do believe

that we can apply international pressure to all the parties,

including Russia and Iran, who is essentially are propping up Assad,

as well as those modern oppositions that exist and may maybe fighting

inside Syria, to sit at the table and broker a transition. That is

difficult, and in the interim, we continue to strike Isil target in

places like Raqqa, and to try to isolate those portions of the

country, and lockdown those portions of the country that are sending

fighters into Europe. There is going to be a military component to this

to make sure that, even as we try to bring an end to the Civil War, we

are also engaging in the counterterrorism activities that are

necessary. In order for us to solve the long-term problems in Syria, a

military solution alone, and certainly ask deploying ground

troops, is not going to bring that about.

There are plenty of voices in Europe who would say part

of the reason Europe has been facing such a big migration crisis

is the lack of assertive response or engagement, not least from the US.

You can't say, "We don't want to do anything in Syria,

our Parliament won't ratify any actions in Syria,

but we want the US to do something about it."

One of the challenges during my presidency is to encourage

everybody to recognise that whether we like it or not,

This relates to Brexit, Nato, the migration crisis, counterterrorism

efforts, public health issues like Ebola virus, which is a problem

in the United States where people have debates about immigration from

places like Mexico - it would be tempting for a lot of people to

believe we can pull up the drawbridge and carve a moat around

ourselves and not have to deal with problems around the world.

But we don't have that luxury, and if these problems are transnational

in nature, then they require a transnational response, and it

requires us to build international institutions and support regional

and international structures that are not perfect, can often be

frustrating, by definition require us to then take into account, well

here is what the French think on that, and here is what the Germans

think on this or the Japanese, they may not always align perfectly with

our views about what we think needs to be done. On the other hand, in

the absence of such cooperation and alliances, we are far weaker, and we

won't solve these problems. That is true in Syria, but it is also true

with a whole host of other issues we will deal with for decades to come.

Lots of us have followed with great interest and enjoyment a major

documentary series here on British television, Inside Obama's White

You convey the frustration with being unable to

deliver some things principally because of Congress's attitude.

For the last nine months that you have, what, realistically, would you

say to our viewers you can achieve, possibly not in a legislative sense,

There are a couple of things that have international ramifications.

The Paris agreement around climate change is a huge achievement,

So I will be making sure the next nine months that I am working with

other leaders internationally to put that into full force and effect.

Prosecuting the campaign against Isil is critical, and although I

don't anticipate in the next nine months it will be finished, because

unfortunately even a small pocket of extremists, if they are prepared to

die themselves, can still wreak havoc on our cities.

But I think we can shrink the environment in which they

operate and take on strongholds like Mosul and Raqqa that are the

There is some wonderful work we're doing internationally on public

health, building from what happened with Ebola virus and now Zika virus

in Latin America, trying to create public health structures in

countries around the world, recognising that that is not just

charity, it is in our self interest, because disease might rise rapidly

in a globalised world, and we have a chance in the next nine months to

have a global health security infrastructure,

We have something called Power Africa, where we are trying to use

the private sector resources and private capital to help electrify

a subcontinent that has been growing very rapidly but still lags

There are a range of things internationally,

including an agreement on a trade deal with the EU, which

may not get ratified by Congress before I leave, but if we have that

done, the next president can pick that up rapidly and get that done.

This whole myth of lame-duck so far has not proved to be the case.

I won't get everything done, but I will get a bunch done that will make

Being driven around by the Duke of Edinburgh,

which is a courageous thing, and the First Lady at your side.

Give us a sense of what the First Lady has

I can't separate anything I have achieved from the partnership I have

First and foremost, she is the best mother I know, and my daughters are

So I can take very little credit beyond executing some

of the plans she has, but she is also proving to be an extraordinary

public figure in her own right in a very difficult job,

because the First Lady does not have clear and defined roles.

What she has been able to do in changing first the conversation

in the United States and globally around children's health issues and

childhood obesity, and now what she is doing with the emphasis on girls'

education and making sure that our policies are aligned with

the basic wisdom that countries that do not educate their girls and

I could not be more proud of her, and I think it is fair to say that

anything good I have done, she gets a share of the billing.

She is not somebody who has access to millions of staff and billions of

dollars, and yet she has changed how people think of these things. I

could not be more proud of her. Anything good that I have done, she

gets a share of the billing. Mr President,

a great honour to talk to you.