:00:00. > :00:11.Now on BBC News, it's time for HARDtalk.
:00:12. > :00:22.Welcome to HARDtalk with me, that Zeinab Badawi. My guess is you is
:00:23. > :00:26.Democratic Party insider, Jake Sullivan, a key adviser to Democrat
:00:27. > :00:29.such as Hillary Clinton, when she was Secretary of State, as well as
:00:30. > :00:34.on the campaign trail, last year. Donald Trump has attracted a lot of
:00:35. > :00:38.criticism at home and abroad over his rhetoric and style of
:00:39. > :00:42.leadership. But is he not proving more effective in important foreign
:00:43. > :00:51.policy issues like the fight against extremists, than the previous
:00:52. > :01:10.democratic administration? -- Democratic.
:01:11. > :01:21.Jake Sullivan, thank you for joining us. As a key adviser to Hillary
:01:22. > :01:24.Clinton, can give be objective about the Trump administration? Not
:01:25. > :01:28.entirely objective. I would have to put my bias on the table. I spent
:01:29. > :01:32.two years trade to stop him from getting into the Oval Office. But I
:01:33. > :01:36.think a lot of the things that we predicted during the campaign about
:01:37. > :01:40.his lack of it as though others have borne out over the last six months.
:01:41. > :01:43.So I have tried to take a step back and tragedy is fair-minded as
:01:44. > :01:47.possible and assessing what he is doing. But the zeitgeist was or with
:01:48. > :01:53.within, wasn't it? He was much more in June with what the voters'
:01:54. > :02:00.proteas were. I would argue that he had a lot of a Shawville, but when a
:02:01. > :02:04.came to what they cared about, I think it came to what they cared
:02:05. > :02:12.about, I think I do more with Hillary Clinton and her approach. --
:02:13. > :02:21.tuned in with their priorities. So can be seen as a battle between 70
:02:22. > :02:31.with the policies and somebody who could appeal to voters. Just turn
:02:32. > :02:35.into a stream must -- just turn into extremist, Donald Trump is much more
:02:36. > :02:42.assertive on terror than resident Obama ever was. He is more assertive
:02:43. > :02:46.on Twitter than President Obama ever was. He certainly speaking much more
:02:47. > :02:50.loudly. But is the carrying the biggest it? Be truly bigger stick. I
:02:51. > :02:57.would say that the fight against Isis in Iraq and Syria is an
:02:58. > :03:02.extension of the above policy, not a fundamental change in policy. -- the
:03:03. > :03:11.truly. Has he added more firepower? Yes, but has been on a slow path
:03:12. > :03:15.savaged by President Obama. -- started by. You mention Afghanistan.
:03:16. > :03:21.He dropped the "Mother of All Bombs", as it was known, in April,
:03:22. > :03:26.on a site in Nangarhar, and it is the largest non- nuclear, the most
:03:27. > :03:29.powerful non-nuclear weapon available. That would sound as
:03:30. > :03:33.though he was very much more assertive than President Obama. The
:03:34. > :03:37.dropping of a single bomb on a tunnel complex in rural Afghanistan,
:03:38. > :03:41.I don't think is a good indication of the whole policy that he is
:03:42. > :03:46.pursuing. It is true that he did that. Would rack Obama have done it?
:03:47. > :03:51.He never took the "Mother of All Bombs" of the table. If an
:03:52. > :03:56.opportunity had made itself available, a bomb that President
:03:57. > :04:00.Obama had in his time, he would have used it. The target presented itself
:04:01. > :04:04.or President Trump, and so use it, but I do see that as a departure
:04:05. > :04:08.from American doctrine. President Obama seem to be pretty desperate to
:04:09. > :04:13.get out of Afghanistan. Five years ago, there what 100,000 American
:04:14. > :04:19.troops there, now that it is below 10,000. And we have seen a rise in
:04:20. > :04:25.security incidents in Afghanistan is far more than since 2007, and the
:04:26. > :04:30.last year and a quarter or so. It is true that President Obama troop down
:04:31. > :04:34.from 100,000 to under 10,000, but before he left office, he fixed
:04:35. > :04:40.another. He said he was not earned right down further, that they would
:04:41. > :04:44.keep troops there. Not to take a whole territory, but to train and
:04:45. > :04:47.buys Afghanistan the security forces. Now Donald Trump is talking
:04:48. > :04:52.about adding a few thousand more, but to carry out the day mission.
:04:53. > :04:56.But he was too said Maureen, rather than drawdown, as Barack Obama did.
:04:57. > :05:00.That was the more assertive. It is interesting, because what Donald
:05:01. > :05:05.Trump is talking about doing is adding more troops, but he is asking
:05:06. > :05:11.our Nato partners to step up and add at least half of them. So even he
:05:12. > :05:14.realises that simply insert a huge numbers of American troops into
:05:15. > :05:18.Afghanistan is not a winning strategy. In that way, I think his
:05:19. > :05:21.campaign rhetoric, and what is realised about the realities of this
:05:22. > :05:26.fight, there is a gap between them. If you want to argue that Donald
:05:27. > :05:30.Trump is different to Barack Obama in foreign policy, you will get no
:05:31. > :05:34.argument from me. The point I am making is that when it comes to the
:05:35. > :05:41.fight between Isis and extremist groups, Donald Trump is carrying
:05:42. > :05:45.forward Barack Obama's strategy. -- the fight with Isis and extra
:05:46. > :05:48.mysteries. Under the key issue that President Obama pursued during his
:05:49. > :05:54.time, the Iranian nuclear deal, resident Trump said during his
:05:55. > :05:58.campaign that he would care and other net -- he would turn up on day
:05:59. > :06:05.one. And he is not. That should please you. That does. But our
:06:06. > :06:09.military and partners is in the region, as does the Israeli security
:06:10. > :06:13.establishment, they realise that this deal improve security in the
:06:14. > :06:18.region. Psion have is the continuity on this issue and then carrying it
:06:19. > :06:21.forward. But I do worry that some of the Stosur Donald Trump is taking
:06:22. > :06:31.the could make a conflict with the reigning state more likely. And that
:06:32. > :06:35.would put American lives and stick -- at risk. Looking at Bashar Assad,
:06:36. > :06:43.the President there, very much an ally of Iran, but he has been
:06:44. > :06:52.applauding Donald Trump for his intervention. This following the
:06:53. > :06:56.chemical attack with hundreds dead. Was it a good thing that did it?
:06:57. > :07:00.Batting was a good thing. But it is a good thing that President Trump
:07:01. > :07:07.decided to respond to the chemical weapons attack by the Assad regime,
:07:08. > :07:11.striking the airbase from which the chemical weapons were launched. The
:07:12. > :07:15.batting was that it was not tied to any broader strategy and Syria
:07:16. > :07:20.whatsoever. If you breast Donald Trump today on what his solution is
:07:21. > :07:23.to be Syrian civil war, which is the reservoir from which much of the
:07:24. > :07:28.extremism in the region is flowing, he would not be up to tell you. I
:07:29. > :07:32.think after six months, that will be a problem. He has done something is,
:07:33. > :07:37.though. He targeted, he launched the cruise missiles on the Syrian
:07:38. > :07:40.government attack. His imposing sanctions on individuals of the
:07:41. > :07:49.scientific support centre, which is involved in the production and
:07:50. > :07:54.supplying arms to the ethnic Kurds. So easy is to be quite strong on
:07:55. > :07:57.Syria. Is interesting the Kurdish point, because that too was a
:07:58. > :08:02.decision that resident Obama left for him. There was a big that
:08:03. > :08:05.President Obama were strongly considering doing, that he wanted to
:08:06. > :08:09.let President Trump decide on. Donald Trump decided to arm the
:08:10. > :08:15.Syrian Kurds. That is to fight Isis, a worthy an important cause, to rust
:08:16. > :08:20.Isis from their capital, Raqqa, and to deny the property from which they
:08:21. > :08:24.could lodge a tax on the waves. But that is not about underlined the
:08:25. > :08:28.Syrian civil war, for which the administration still has no real
:08:29. > :08:32.answer. But on the cruise missiles launched, following the chemical
:08:33. > :08:36.attack, Michael Hayden, the former CIA director, Cena somebody quite
:08:37. > :08:51.balance, he said that the response was general will -- genuine and add
:08:52. > :08:55.rubble. He said he should have -- he said that President Obama should
:08:56. > :09:17.have done that, after, for instance, the two attacks in 13 elected 2013.
:09:18. > :09:20.-- in 2013. Obama didn't do nothing. And not forgetting the Syrian
:09:21. > :09:27.civilians in the country. The fact is, at the end of the day, the
:09:28. > :09:33.Syrian region broke that deal, Celts stock of chemical weapons, and the
:09:34. > :09:40.writing to the United States to do, once they could, was too big a deal.
:09:41. > :09:44.-- kept some stock. The drum makes these intemperate comments and act
:09:45. > :09:47.in a rational way, but it actually seems that you are agreeing that he
:09:48. > :09:52.does take advice from professionals, from people in the know? I think he
:09:53. > :09:57.took advice on the narrow decision of the serious try, which has not
:09:58. > :10:01.been followed by any serious Syria strategy. And when you look at other
:10:02. > :10:03.decisions that he is taken, he is completely ignored the advice of
:10:04. > :10:07.every professional around him. His decision to withdraw from the Paris
:10:08. > :10:13.club agreement is just one important example of where his economic
:10:14. > :10:18.advisers, is to make advisers, they all said that this was done. --
:10:19. > :10:23.climate. He went away and did it anyway, and I think he did this were
:10:24. > :10:27.knee-jerk political reasons. As you know, action on climate change is at
:10:28. > :10:31.both federal, state, and local level. And Michael Bloomberg, the
:10:32. > :10:36.former mayor of New York, says we can do a lot of things that business
:10:37. > :10:40.level, local level, state level, to meet our targets. The United States
:10:41. > :10:47.is a big, diverse, resilient country. We will move forward in
:10:48. > :10:54.this. I think it is folly to say that what comes out of Washington
:10:55. > :10:57.doesn't matter at all. Of course it does. There would be a parent still
:10:58. > :11:00.it wasn't for presidential leadership and it wasn't for
:11:01. > :11:03.president Obama going out and getting the Chinese on-board and the
:11:04. > :11:07.Indians on and rallying the Europeans. That is how we got here
:11:08. > :11:14.in the first place. And there would be the next step up the double of
:11:15. > :11:23.ambition without it. -- ladder of ambition. It really matters that
:11:24. > :11:28.presidential leadership is lacking on this issue. Nikki Haley, that the
:11:29. > :11:33.US Ambassador to the United Nations, suggested that Donald Trump would be
:11:34. > :11:37.responsible on climate change. She said that just because the US got
:11:38. > :11:40.out of a club, doesn't mean they were not there to be responsible.
:11:41. > :11:45.Everything about them domestic policies are part has been a revival
:11:46. > :11:49.of that statement. Not only did they would withdraw from Paris, but they
:11:50. > :11:52.rescinded President Obama's actions which would clean up our energy
:11:53. > :11:57.fleet and move towards more renewable energy, and improved full
:11:58. > :12:01.efficiency standards in cars. Trump rode all about back. I'm waiting to
:12:02. > :12:05.see what the meat is behind what Nikki Haley as saying. It has so
:12:06. > :12:10.far, we have not seen. He has not withdrawn from the 1992 convention
:12:11. > :12:15.framework of the change. So will have to see. But you said the
:12:16. > :12:18.campaign trail that Donald Trump is temperamentally unfit and
:12:19. > :12:26.unqualified to be the nation's commander in chief. But he has been
:12:27. > :12:30.coveted by key military figures, such as the former Nato commander,
:12:31. > :12:34.which the maker has said that he is able to take advice from the
:12:35. > :12:39.first-class national security team is assembled. Article is hoped in
:12:40. > :12:42.the early days that when he picked real luminaries, excellent
:12:43. > :12:46.professionals, like General Motors, as his secretary of defence, and
:12:47. > :12:53.General McMaster, as is natural security adviser. But this was
:12:54. > :12:56.somehow help make better security decisions. -- National Security
:12:57. > :12:59.Adviser. But you cannot advise the President who is fundamentally not
:13:00. > :13:04.normal. I think he would object to that description, but anyway... He
:13:05. > :13:08.might object to it, but you can see any way that he makes decisions, the
:13:09. > :13:13.way that he lashes out, the whether the attacks and the way that he
:13:14. > :13:17.tries to essentially belittle and divide, that this is not a normal
:13:18. > :13:21.circumstance, and it is really incumbent on all of us to call it
:13:22. > :13:28.out as such. The point on these national security advisers... As it
:13:29. > :13:34.is said to have foreign policy, it is a continuation of Obama here or
:13:35. > :13:42.there, actually, the actions don't quite match the intemperate
:13:43. > :13:48.rhetoric. -- as you said just there. A dozen subways. If you take a look
:13:49. > :13:52.back at Donald Trump is a broader font piracy, you can take it Paris
:13:53. > :13:56.Agreement as one, you can take what he went and did in Europe, where he
:13:57. > :14:01.stood before the 9/11 Memorial, which was the one-time in the
:14:02. > :14:09.history of their lives, where article five, the defensive
:14:10. > :14:13.mechanism of Nato was triggered on our behalf, and basically harass
:14:14. > :14:20.them, and refuse to reaffirm America's commitment to make
:14:21. > :14:28.commitment. -- America's commitment. What did he say? General Motors said
:14:29. > :14:36.what they world if we withdraw within our borders, and the Americas
:14:37. > :14:42.would do the right thing. I think we have two listen to what is... EZ one
:14:43. > :14:47.thing, then he resented that. So you can't judge what happens in the
:14:48. > :14:51.Trump administration by white Donald Trump himself, necessarily, says.
:14:52. > :14:55.You need to look more in a holistic fashion. The president of the United
:14:56. > :15:00.States, showing up in Europe, stepping into Nato headquarters in
:15:01. > :15:04.Brussels, and conspicuously declining to a firm America's
:15:05. > :15:09.Article five commitment, at least one person is watching closely. That
:15:10. > :15:13.is V Putin. And those were several consequences. And nothing James
:15:14. > :15:16.Mathison is by days later can iron ring that Bell. At this point,
:15:17. > :15:20.Donald Trump is that a clear message to our allies and our adversarial is
:15:21. > :15:25.that our commitment to our Nato allies is in doubt. That is
:15:26. > :15:28.dangerous. Because if it could lead to more instability in Europe, and
:15:29. > :15:32.if it could lead to possible conflict, there, it would ultimately
:15:33. > :15:34.be the United States admitted that they would have becoming a sort that
:15:35. > :15:44.out. You imply that he did not want to
:15:45. > :15:49.upset the Russians. I did not talk about his motives although I do
:15:50. > :15:54.think there are a number of questions about how he has followed
:15:55. > :15:58.the wish list of Vladimir Putin. Regardless of his motive for doing
:15:59. > :16:02.that in Brussels, Vladimir Putin was watching and that is what he will
:16:03. > :16:06.have taken away. You mentioned the Russians and, of course, whether the
:16:07. > :16:10.Russians were involved or not over the hacking, hacking bird Hillary
:16:11. > :16:16.Clinton e-mail is, that was something that was a major issue at
:16:17. > :16:20.the time. Another major issue of course was the use of Hillary
:16:21. > :16:24.Clinton's Private e-mail account to conduct her State Department
:16:25. > :16:34.You were advising her. You used her Private e-mail accounts to talk to
:16:35. > :16:41.her about national security issue or State Department matters. Do you
:16:42. > :16:45.think that was wise in retrospect? Hillary has said it was a mistake
:16:46. > :16:48.for her to use a Private e-mail server and I think all of us
:16:49. > :16:54.involved would have done it differently. At the time it did not
:16:55. > :16:56.seem out of step with what most other cabinet secretaries, senators
:16:57. > :17:01.and senior figures were doing. At the time it did not occur to us that
:17:02. > :17:05.would be a challenge in the future. Now that we have looked at it in the
:17:06. > :17:09.cold light of day, of course we wish we had done differently. Why did you
:17:10. > :17:16.use a Private e-mail account to talk to her about State Department
:17:17. > :17:19.matters? It was the e-mail she was using. She had taken it from being a
:17:20. > :17:25.senator, transition did to Secretary of State. Previous Secretaries of
:17:26. > :17:29.State had used Private e-mail account. John Kerry was the first to
:17:30. > :17:33.Secretary of State to have an official e-mail account. This was
:17:34. > :17:37.how it was done at the State Department at that point in time.
:17:38. > :17:40.Once you get into the bright lights of a presidential campaign, things
:17:41. > :17:47.look different. So it was convenience? She said that
:17:48. > :17:53.repeatedly, for her to have one account and one device. Again, she
:17:54. > :17:57.underscored repeatedly that it was a mistake and she wishes she had done
:17:58. > :18:01.it differently. That being said, the amount of attention put on this
:18:02. > :18:06.issue, of the type of e-mail account that she was using in comparison to
:18:07. > :18:09.the policy issues and all of the other major questions before the
:18:10. > :18:14.American people last year, was astonishing and completely reckless
:18:15. > :18:18.on the part of the press. Do you think it cost her the presidency?
:18:19. > :18:23.She seemed to think that the entire controversy and the FBI
:18:24. > :18:27.investigation cost the presidency. It is always hard to identify any
:18:28. > :18:35.variable in something as complex as this. I will say this. Nate Silver,
:18:36. > :18:40.the premier statistician who looks at American presidential elections
:18:41. > :18:47.ran an analysis after November eight and determined that Jim Comey's
:18:48. > :18:49.rhetoric in late October... The FBI director who wrote a letter
:18:50. > :18:54.reopening the investigation into Hillary Clinton was only ten days to
:18:55. > :18:58.go in the election, he determined that letter had a material impact
:18:59. > :19:05.that was the difference between winning and losing.
:19:06. > :19:07.And James Comey of course then quite unceremoniously sacked
:19:08. > :19:10.by Donald Trump as director of the FBI.
:19:11. > :19:12.Right, he was sacked because, in the President's own words,
:19:13. > :19:15.he thought that Jim Comey shouldn't be pursuing this Russia
:19:16. > :19:23.He did that privately to the Russians in the Oval Office,
:19:24. > :19:27.He did that privately to the Russians in the Oval Office,
:19:28. > :19:29.and that was the meeting he had with Sergei Lavrov,
:19:30. > :19:32.the Russian Foreign Minister, and also Sergey Kislyak,
:19:33. > :19:34.the Russian ambassador to the United States.
:19:35. > :19:37.Now, there's been a lot of made about what Donald Trump said
:19:38. > :19:39.to them, or not, about US intelligence in the fight
:19:40. > :19:44.And it seems as though it's the media who is taking the lead
:19:45. > :19:46.on criticising Donald Trump on this, not the Democrats.
:19:47. > :19:50.I think what the media is doing is digging to get to the bottom
:19:51. > :19:55.It's not so much criticism as it is almost every day
:19:56. > :19:57.they are coming out with some new information.
:19:58. > :20:00.A new meeting between a Trump official and a Russian official that
:20:01. > :20:09.Are they the official opposition now, not the Democrats any more?
:20:10. > :20:12.They're the ones who are taking the lead, as I said,
:20:13. > :20:14.in being the opposition to Donald Trump?
:20:15. > :20:18.As you know better than anyone, as you know just from this very
:20:19. > :20:20.interview, the media's job is to ask the hard questions.
:20:21. > :20:24.Isn't it also the job of the Democrats, the official
:20:25. > :20:32.In fact, if you look at some of these hearings where prominent
:20:33. > :20:35.Trump administration officials have had to come forward and be held
:20:36. > :20:36.accountable in the Congress, Democratic senators
:20:37. > :20:39.and Democratic House members have been asking the tough questions
:20:40. > :20:42.and have been putting the case to the American people that
:20:43. > :20:45.on the issue of Russia, on the issue of the broader question
:20:46. > :20:51.of corruption in this administration, with respect
:20:52. > :20:53.to China, Russia and other countries, that there are real
:20:54. > :20:56.questions we have to get to the bottom of.
:20:57. > :20:58.So who is taking the lead for the Democrats?
:20:59. > :21:06.On the Russia issue specifically, the two key people are Mark Warner,
:21:07. > :21:17.You have the midterms coming up next year.
:21:18. > :21:20.I think President Obama is going to have a very important
:21:21. > :21:23.voice in this over the next two years.
:21:24. > :21:25.Obviously, he's taken a step back because as the most recently
:21:26. > :21:28.departed president, he wanted to give President Trump
:21:29. > :21:30.an opportunity to hit the ground running.
:21:31. > :21:32.Vice President Biden will be an important voice.
:21:33. > :21:35.Secretary Clinton has started a PAC where she is helping to support
:21:36. > :21:37.a lot of Democratic groups and Democratic leaning groups.
:21:38. > :21:43.Can I just ask you, all three will be active players.
:21:44. > :21:45.President Obama obviously couldn't run again for office.
:21:46. > :21:47.Do you think Joe Biden might, or Hillary Clinton?
:21:48. > :21:52.As for Vice President Biden, you would have to obviously ask him.
:21:53. > :21:57.What I would say is that he has just set up a PAC to be able to support
:21:58. > :22:02.I think he's going to be devoting all his energy in the next two
:22:03. > :22:06.years, not to thinking about 2020, but to thinking about,
:22:07. > :22:09.how do we take the house of Representatives back in 2018?
:22:10. > :22:14.Do you think he might run for president, Joe Biden?
:22:15. > :22:16.I have got completely out of the business of speculating
:22:17. > :22:22.The Mayor of Chicago, the senior Democrat Rahm Emanuel,
:22:23. > :22:25.when asked about this kind of thing on CNN said,
:22:26. > :22:26.Hillary Clinton has got lots of energy.
:22:27. > :22:30.But you're saying categorically she would not run in 2020?
:22:31. > :22:32.It's not my place to say anything categorically.
:22:33. > :22:35.Have you talked to her about it, for instance?
:22:36. > :22:38.I haven't talked to her about 2020 because it's not even
:22:39. > :22:42.What is in the realm of contemplation right now
:22:43. > :22:44.is what she can do to help young people especially,
:22:45. > :22:49.but progressive groups be able to really effectively operate
:22:50. > :22:54.in opposition to Trump, and then to win seats that will help
:22:55. > :22:57.us take back both the House of Representatives at the federal
:22:58. > :22:59.level and state houses at the state level.
:23:00. > :23:03.Michael Moore, the very well-known American director,
:23:04. > :23:06.says one thing the Democrats don't understand is that Trump
:23:07. > :23:12.He suggests Oprah Winfrey, chat show host.
:23:13. > :23:17.Somebody that people love, is what he says.
:23:18. > :23:19.Donald Trump was the outsider, the anti-politician,
:23:20. > :23:26.I wouldn't rule out someone who doesn't have a career
:23:27. > :23:28.in politics running for president and being really good.
:23:29. > :23:31.You can also not have a career in politics, run for president
:23:32. > :23:35.and be really bad, and I think we're seeing that play out
:23:36. > :23:39.And there are some tremendous public servants who have served in politics
:23:40. > :23:44.So I wouldn't rule out people who have served in public office,
:23:45. > :23:48.and I wouldn't rule out people who haven't.
:23:49. > :23:52.I think we should have a free for all, and then let Democratic
:23:53. > :23:55.primary voters decide who the best standard bearer will be in 2020.
:23:56. > :23:59.Jake Sullivan, thank you very much indeed for coming on HARDTalk.