Stephen Sackur speaks to Bill Richardson, former Clinton cabinet secretary and one time US North Korea emissary. What is Trump's brand of disruption doing to US foreign policy?
Browse content similar to Bill Richardson, former governor of New Mexico. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!
Line | From | To | |
---|---|---|---|
Now on BBC News,
it's time for HARDtalk. | 0:00:01 | 0:00:04 | |
Welcome to HARDtalk. On Stephen
Sackur. We will be presented with | 0:00:11 | 0:00:20 | |
foreign policy choices that could
define, from's presidency. A meeting | 0:00:20 | 0:00:26 | |
with Kim Jong-un is looming, so to a
decision on whether to dump the | 0:00:26 | 0:00:30 | |
nuclear deal with Iran. Never far
from the surface, how to handle | 0:00:30 | 0:00:36 | |
relations with Vladimir Putin's
Russia. My guest is one-time US | 0:00:36 | 0:00:43 | |
North Korea emissary Bill
Richardson. What is trump's brand of | 0:00:43 | 0:00:48 | |
disruption doing to US foreign
policy? | 0:00:48 | 0:00:51 | |
Bill Richardson, welcome to
HARDtalk. Thank you, nice to be with | 0:01:17 | 0:01:25 | |
you. I want to tap into your wide
experience in Washington, inside and | 0:01:25 | 0:01:33 | |
Administration and as a congressman
and a former UN ambassador for the | 0:01:33 | 0:01:37 | |
United States. When you look at
foreign policy-making in America | 0:01:37 | 0:01:41 | |
today, how are the big strategic
decisions being made? Well, | 0:01:41 | 0:01:48 | |
unfortunately, I think they are
being made on the flight, on the | 0:01:48 | 0:01:52 | |
spur of the moment by the President,
by tweets, and I don't like the | 0:01:52 | 0:01:57 | |
disarray. I am a traditionalist. I
think diplomacy is a very important | 0:01:57 | 0:02:04 | |
statecraft and I worry that we don't
have a national security team in | 0:02:04 | 0:02:09 | |
place that the President, while
making a right decision to meet with | 0:02:09 | 0:02:12 | |
Kim Jong-un, might not be prepared,
that he is listening to his | 0:02:12 | 0:02:21 | |
political instance as opposed to
what is in the best foreign policy | 0:02:21 | 0:02:24 | |
of the United States. I am very
unsettled, yet, at the same time, on | 0:02:24 | 0:02:29 | |
this North Korea issue, I think the
right approach was a face-to-face | 0:02:29 | 0:02:33 | |
meeting, but I wonder if we will be
prepared. I am intrigued that you | 0:02:33 | 0:02:38 | |
actually approve of the notion that
too many people, shocking notion of | 0:02:38 | 0:02:44 | |
a trump Kim Jong-un summer. Before
we get there, tell me in your | 0:02:44 | 0:02:49 | |
experience, what does it say that
Rex Tillerson for example only | 0:02:49 | 0:02:53 | |
learnt of that summit, we
understand, by reading it on | 0:02:53 | 0:02:59 | |
Twitter, he only learned of his own
dismissal by reading about it on | 0:02:59 | 0:03:03 | |
Twitter. What does that say about
the way the President operates? | 0:03:03 | 0:03:07 | |
Well, it says that it is an
undisciplined approach. It says that | 0:03:07 | 0:03:13 | |
the sleek, Tillotson and the
President did not have personal | 0:03:13 | 0:03:16 | |
chemistry. I think Tillotson was
more moderate, he wanted to stay in | 0:03:16 | 0:03:21 | |
the Iran nuclear deal, he wanted
diplomacy with North Korea a lot | 0:03:21 | 0:03:25 | |
earlier, he wanted to be tougher on
Russia, and they just didn't mesh. | 0:03:25 | 0:03:29 | |
The chemistry wasn't there. It's
very important for a president and | 0:03:29 | 0:03:33 | |
his chief foreign policy adviser to
basically have confidence in each | 0:03:33 | 0:03:38 | |
other. That didn't happen. But I
just think the unceremonious way | 0:03:38 | 0:03:43 | |
that Tillotson was dumped, the in
ceremony is way decisions are made | 0:03:43 | 0:03:47 | |
on personnel, White House staff,
there are reports that the National | 0:03:47 | 0:03:52 | |
Security adviser may be next. I know
him, he is a capable man and I worry | 0:03:52 | 0:03:59 | |
that the President just wants to
have around him individuals that | 0:03:59 | 0:04:03 | |
will not disagree with him, that
will just reinforce his views, which | 0:04:03 | 0:04:08 | |
in many cases, I believe are not
internationalist views, not the best | 0:04:08 | 0:04:14 | |
in the interest of the United
States. We are going to talk plenty | 0:04:14 | 0:04:17 | |
about North Korea. I want to start
the substance with Russia, partly | 0:04:17 | 0:04:21 | |
because it is a huge issue in the
UK, as a result of the nerve agent | 0:04:21 | 0:04:27 | |
attack on a former Soviet agent, Sir
J Scrip in a town in the UK along | 0:04:27 | 0:04:35 | |
with his daughter. -- Sergei
Skripal. It has accused -- was used | 0:04:35 | 0:04:40 | |
tension. Going back to Tillotson and
his firing, he chose, after his | 0:04:40 | 0:04:46 | |
firing, to brew pointedly made these
remarks about Russia. He said, much | 0:04:46 | 0:04:51 | |
work remains to respond to the
troubling behaviour and actions of | 0:04:51 | 0:04:54 | |
the Russian government, and he
warned that Russia could face yet | 0:04:54 | 0:04:57 | |
greater isolation. Do you think that
Tillotson was pushing Donald Trump | 0:04:57 | 0:05:05 | |
to confront Britain in a way that
Donald Trump simply doesn't want to | 0:05:05 | 0:05:09 | |
do? Yes, I do think he was trying to
push the President in the right | 0:05:09 | 0:05:16 | |
direction, which was to stand with
you guys, you are our main ally, and | 0:05:16 | 0:05:21 | |
the evidence is overwhelming, that
this nerve agent was deposited by | 0:05:21 | 0:05:26 | |
the Russians. You have concrete
proof. And we stand behind you. Yes, | 0:05:26 | 0:05:34 | |
the press secretary should, the
Secretary of State should, but I | 0:05:34 | 0:05:38 | |
haven't heard the President himself
say, we stand with Great Britain, | 0:05:38 | 0:05:43 | |
with the Prime Minister, with the
enormous evidence, and Russia should | 0:05:43 | 0:05:47 | |
stop. They have interfered in our
election, there has been substantial | 0:05:47 | 0:05:53 | |
demonstrations of that involvement,
certified by our intelligence | 0:05:53 | 0:05:59 | |
agencies, so Russia, you should stop
doing this. You should stop doing | 0:05:59 | 0:06:03 | |
this to our allies, to the United
States, stop getting involved in | 0:06:03 | 0:06:07 | |
elections throughout the world,
which they are doing. I didn't hear | 0:06:07 | 0:06:10 | |
that from the President. So I think
Tillerson was nudging him and | 0:06:10 | 0:06:15 | |
obviously we still haven't heard it.
I want to see the President. I want | 0:06:15 | 0:06:19 | |
to see him succeed. I want him to
stand behind our allies like you | 0:06:19 | 0:06:24 | |
guys, that are facing this real
dilemma in your foreign policy with | 0:06:24 | 0:06:28 | |
an important state actor. Several
points come out of what you've just | 0:06:28 | 0:06:32 | |
said. It should be said newly
re-elected Vladimir Putin described | 0:06:32 | 0:06:36 | |
allegations that the Russian state
was behind the attack on Sergei | 0:06:36 | 0:06:43 | |
Skripal of nonsense. We need to put
that on the record. Also, are you | 0:06:43 | 0:06:47 | |
being fair to Donald Trump? He did
ultimately come out and issue a | 0:06:47 | 0:06:52 | |
joint statement alongside the UK,
Germany and France, condemning the | 0:06:52 | 0:06:57 | |
outrageous attack in the UK. Just
last week, the US expanded its | 0:06:57 | 0:07:03 | |
sanctions against targeted
individuals in Russia. When you | 0:07:03 | 0:07:06 | |
compare trump with Obama, is trump
doing so much less on Russia than | 0:07:06 | 0:07:10 | |
Obama did? Well, in my view, he's
not doing enough. Yes, he made that | 0:07:10 | 0:07:18 | |
joint statement. But I want to hear
him also with our election. It is | 0:07:18 | 0:07:23 | |
very strong evidence by our
intelligence agency of enormous | 0:07:23 | 0:07:29 | |
involvement in the election. Maybe
he didn't decide the US presidential | 0:07:29 | 0:07:33 | |
election. I have yet to hear the
President in very strong terms | 0:07:33 | 0:07:37 | |
condemn what Russia did. The
President himself. And, yes, all | 0:07:37 | 0:07:42 | |
right, we are making joint
statements, but I want to see that | 0:07:42 | 0:07:46 | |
outrage because Vladimir Putin was
re-elected, some say with 107% of | 0:07:46 | 0:07:52 | |
the vote. I saw that. Maybe he will
now recognise that he has got to be | 0:07:52 | 0:07:59 | |
a world leader again, that it's
responsible in the next six years. | 0:07:59 | 0:08:04 | |
But their continued interference in
family activities around the world | 0:08:04 | 0:08:10 | |
and elections, it is
incomprehensible. Yes, Russia wants | 0:08:10 | 0:08:14 | |
to get restored as a major power
again, but not at the expense of | 0:08:14 | 0:08:19 | |
human rights and people and possible
nerve agent killings and Syria, | 0:08:19 | 0:08:25 | |
conspiring with Assad. Maybe now,
Putin will change. I doubt it, but | 0:08:25 | 0:08:29 | |
that is my hope. Don't you think
Democrats need to be careful right | 0:08:29 | 0:08:33 | |
now? The way they are pushing the
notion that Donald Trump stands not | 0:08:33 | 0:08:37 | |
just accused, but in many democratic
rights, guilty of collusion with the | 0:08:37 | 0:08:41 | |
Russians over the last potential of
election, -- presidential election, | 0:08:41 | 0:08:47 | |
isn't that hamstring in the US
administration's ability to really | 0:08:47 | 0:08:51 | |
direct a coherent Russia policy
right now? Well, what is important | 0:08:51 | 0:08:58 | |
here is this muller investigation
needs to keep its course. Let him | 0:08:58 | 0:09:07 | |
come up with whatever the facts are.
Two, I think it is important that | 0:09:07 | 0:09:12 | |
we, as Democrats, not just attack
the President. Let's find the facts, | 0:09:12 | 0:09:19 | |
but at the same time, let's, with a
message that eluded us in the last | 0:09:19 | 0:09:24 | |
election. And I think elections in
the United States are moving our | 0:09:24 | 0:09:28 | |
way, in Pennsylvania, we won an
election in a district that | 0:09:28 | 0:09:32 | |
President Trump won by 20%. We won
that. So the public is turning | 0:09:32 | 0:09:38 | |
towards a Democrat slowly, but we
have to just be positive about our | 0:09:38 | 0:09:43 | |
vision. We need an economic message.
People want to make more money, they | 0:09:43 | 0:09:48 | |
want higher wages, they want the
working class to do better. I think | 0:09:48 | 0:09:53 | |
that escaped us. But I think on this
Russia issue, I don't think the | 0:09:53 | 0:09:59 | |
Democrats are wholesale saying there
was collusion. I think there is | 0:09:59 | 0:10:02 | |
enormous suspicion about it, this is
why this investigation, Mr Muller | 0:10:02 | 0:10:07 | |
needs to be concluded. The present
needs to stop attacking that | 0:10:07 | 0:10:12 | |
investigation. After some extremely
strong condemnation by tweet from | 0:10:12 | 0:10:15 | |
Donald Trump about investigation
over the weekend, there are any | 0:10:15 | 0:10:21 | |
speculation that the President might
even fire Robert Muller. If he did, | 0:10:21 | 0:10:25 | |
what would that produce in
Washington? One senator said it | 0:10:25 | 0:10:30 | |
would start the end of his
presidency. I don't know. I think it | 0:10:30 | 0:10:34 | |
is up to the Republicans who, I
would hope, looking at our past | 0:10:34 | 0:10:41 | |
history, Watergate, would say this
is untenable. This shouldn't happen. | 0:10:41 | 0:10:45 | |
And that this would read contested
enormously. Democrats would, but | 0:10:45 | 0:10:51 | |
remember, Republicans have a
majority in the house and Senate. | 0:10:51 | 0:10:55 | |
Also, the American people I think
would find this enormously troubling | 0:10:55 | 0:11:00 | |
and it would be demonstrations in
the streets like you've never seen | 0:11:00 | 0:11:04 | |
if this happens. I'm not sure it's
going to happen. I don't know what | 0:11:04 | 0:11:08 | |
the President is going to do, but is
of the earthly in a very contested | 0:11:08 | 0:11:12 | |
fight with Robert Muller, not just
publicly, but I hope he is not | 0:11:12 | 0:11:18 | |
plotting to terminate him. I think
that would be a huge mistake for | 0:11:18 | 0:11:22 | |
him, a disaster. I tell you what is
weird. We are talking about this and | 0:11:22 | 0:11:27 | |
it will unfold. At the very same
time coming back to foreign affairs, | 0:11:27 | 0:11:31 | |
the very same time that Donald Trump
is going to make to make key | 0:11:31 | 0:11:36 | |
decisions. Let's get to North Korea,
you are one of the very few | 0:11:36 | 0:11:40 | |
Americans who knows what it is like
to negotiate with North Korean | 0:11:40 | 0:11:44 | |
officials in Pyongyang. It intrigues
me that you say you approve of | 0:11:44 | 0:11:49 | |
Trump's decision to go one-on-one
with Kim Jong-un. Why do you think, | 0:11:49 | 0:11:55 | |
given Trump's character, that is a
good idea? Well, I have been | 0:11:55 | 0:12:00 | |
involved with this issue for many
years. I have been there eight | 0:12:00 | 0:12:05 | |
times, negotiating with the North
Koreans. I have never seen the | 0:12:05 | 0:12:08 | |
Korean peninsular so tense, so
troubled, soap potential of the | 0:12:08 | 0:12:13 | |
conflict, either missile. He threw a
game changer, which hopefully will | 0:12:13 | 0:12:24 | |
reduce tensions. My worry is that we
are setting unrealistic expectation | 0:12:24 | 0:12:29 | |
that we are going to expect North
Korea to Dean regularised. They are | 0:12:29 | 0:12:33 | |
not going to do that. That doesn't
mean we don't have these talks to | 0:12:33 | 0:12:39 | |
talk about freezing or slowing down
the missiles or nuclear activities | 0:12:39 | 0:12:43 | |
or conventional warfare are finding
ways to defuse tension. So I commend | 0:12:43 | 0:12:47 | |
him for the trip will stop what I
worry is that we are not ready with | 0:12:47 | 0:12:51 | |
a strategy. York position leaves me
puzzled because we know that the | 0:12:51 | 0:12:56 | |
North Koreans regarding meeting
President to president as on the | 0:12:56 | 0:13:02 | |
ultimate prizes for their diplomatic
strategy, so why give them a rise | 0:13:02 | 0:13:05 | |
when you say to me, look, we can't
expect them to eliminate the nuclear | 0:13:05 | 0:13:09 | |
weapons programme and they won't be
nuclear right. In essence, you are | 0:13:09 | 0:13:13 | |
saying we give them the prize and we
get really nothing substantial in | 0:13:13 | 0:13:17 | |
return. Well, we did get something
in return. We got them to agree that | 0:13:17 | 0:13:26 | |
we will continue our military
activities with the South Koreans. | 0:13:26 | 0:13:30 | |
They are not shooting any missiles
or any kind of nuclear activity. | 0:13:30 | 0:13:36 | |
They have made concessions to. I
agree. Meeting President President | 0:13:36 | 0:13:41 | |
is a major concession because it
legitimises what Kim Jong-un has | 0:13:41 | 0:13:45 | |
been doing, but at the same time, it
shows a boldness by our president. | 0:13:45 | 0:13:50 | |
My point is that the negotiations
should not just be about | 0:13:50 | 0:13:54 | |
denuclearisation. They should be
about freezing missile activity. | 0:13:54 | 0:13:58 | |
They should be about three Americans
detained in North Korea. They should | 0:13:58 | 0:14:03 | |
be about the remains of soldiers
from the Korean War, about | 0:14:03 | 0:14:07 | |
conventional weapons pointed out
South Korea, about chemical weapons | 0:14:07 | 0:14:11 | |
in North Korea sent into Syria,
about missile exports and you clear | 0:14:11 | 0:14:17 | |
exports that North Korea sent to
Pakistan and other world states. So | 0:14:17 | 0:14:21 | |
I think there is a lot more and
denuclearisation, if it happens, | 0:14:21 | 0:14:26 | |
should be a goal, but it has to be
very long-range. It will take a long | 0:14:26 | 0:14:30 | |
time. | 0:14:30 | 0:14:36 | |
Here is a question that taps into
the wave that your experience of | 0:14:36 | 0:14:41 | |
government works. If they happen, we
are expecting by the end of May, | 0:14:41 | 0:14:45 | |
which side you think is better
equipped to conduct the highly | 0:14:45 | 0:14:49 | |
complex, detailed negotiations? Is a
Trump administration which currently | 0:14:49 | 0:14:53 | |
has no ambassador in South Korea,
the Undersecretary of State | 0:14:53 | 0:14:58 | |
responsible for arms control and has
just lost the top State Department | 0:14:58 | 0:15:03 | |
North Korea expert, or is that the
North Koreans who had been thinking | 0:15:03 | 0:15:07 | |
about little else but how to get
into this place where they have | 0:15:07 | 0:15:11 | |
talks with the US President on the
other side? Which side is better | 0:15:11 | 0:15:14 | |
equipped? Well, I think we are
better equipped because we have | 0:15:14 | 0:15:19 | |
Japan on our side, we have South
Korea on our side, we have China | 0:15:19 | 0:15:22 | |
most of the time on our side, but
yeah, I do worry that we are not | 0:15:22 | 0:15:28 | |
prepared in terms of our personnel,
our strategy, but we do have 60 | 0:15:28 | 0:15:31 | |
days. Now I have negotiated with the
North Koreans, they are disciplines, | 0:15:31 | 0:15:37 | |
they do not think like us, they do
not believe in quid pro quo, they | 0:15:37 | 0:15:42 | |
believe in the cult of personality
and everything they believe in, | 0:15:42 | 0:15:45 | |
everything they say has to happen.
So there are going to be so very | 0:15:45 | 0:15:49 | |
tough negotiations but we do have
time. What I worry about is this | 0:15:49 | 0:15:53 | |
opening that you made about Iran,
May 12 is the deadline that the | 0:15:53 | 0:15:59 | |
President has to say whether we stay
in the deal. I hope we do the | 0:15:59 | 0:16:04 | |
because I think Iran has complied on
the nuclear agreement. It has been | 0:16:04 | 0:16:12 | |
terrible on terrorism, it has been
terrible on getting involved with | 0:16:12 | 0:16:15 | |
Syria and Yemen, but I do think that
if we pull out of it May 12 and we | 0:16:15 | 0:16:22 | |
are negotiating with the North
Koreans, the North Koreans are going | 0:16:22 | 0:16:26 | |
to say well, how can we negotiate
with an American president is an | 0:16:26 | 0:16:29 | |
ex-president might pull out of
another nuclear deal? So I am very | 0:16:29 | 0:16:34 | |
concerned about that too. Well,
let's talk about that Iran decision | 0:16:34 | 0:16:39 | |
because it seems to me again the
Democrats had to face a difficult | 0:16:39 | 0:16:43 | |
question here. The problem with the
deal going back to 2015 was that | 0:16:43 | 0:16:47 | |
Barack Obama, in pushing the deal,
and it was a signature policy for | 0:16:47 | 0:16:51 | |
him, he never got a truly national
consensus around the deal. The | 0:16:51 | 0:16:55 | |
Republicans in the Congress almost
to a man and woman opposed it | 0:16:55 | 0:17:00 | |
vehemently. All of the Republican
candidate to run for president in | 0:17:00 | 0:17:05 | |
2016 said that they would trash the
deal, so in many ways it is no | 0:17:05 | 0:17:09 | |
surprise that Donald Trump, with a
mandate, it has to be said, is | 0:17:09 | 0:17:14 | |
following through on his promise to
undo what he says is the worst deal | 0:17:14 | 0:17:18 | |
in America's history. Well, I
believe that it makes sense to | 0:17:18 | 0:17:24 | |
preserve the nuclear deal, which is
15 years. Iran does not have a | 0:17:24 | 0:17:32 | |
nuclear weapon, serious deterrents
on their enriched uranium. Now, the | 0:17:32 | 0:17:39 | |
possible compromise might be a
missile deal that Europe, your | 0:17:39 | 0:17:44 | |
country, European allies, push Iran
that to limit or reduce that | 0:17:44 | 0:17:51 | |
terrible activity that they do with
their missiles. So... We did not | 0:17:51 | 0:17:57 | |
take my points, Bill Richardson, did
not take my point that Donald Trump | 0:17:57 | 0:18:01 | |
does have a mandate for this
particular element of his foreign | 0:18:01 | 0:18:04 | |
policy? Well, it is not exactly a
mandate. I think there were | 0:18:04 | 0:18:09 | |
Republican supporters, Rex Tillerson
wanting to keep it. Most of the | 0:18:09 | 0:18:13 | |
American foreign policy
establishment and Republican | 0:18:13 | 0:18:17 | |
senators think it should be kept. --
wants him to keep it. You know, it | 0:18:17 | 0:18:23 | |
is divided, there is no question and
I wish that we had gotten more with | 0:18:23 | 0:18:29 | |
Iran on their subversive activity,
their terrorism support, what they | 0:18:29 | 0:18:33 | |
are doing in Yemen and Syria, their
threats on Israel. Look, it could | 0:18:33 | 0:18:37 | |
have been maybe a better deal but
still, Iran has been complying with | 0:18:37 | 0:18:41 | |
the nucleoside and we do not want
two nuclear act is, North Korea and | 0:18:41 | 0:18:46 | |
Iran, on the world stage and that is
my worries is a van Zyl is | 0:18:46 | 0:18:51 | |
terminated. I understand that you
are saying that you know better than | 0:18:51 | 0:18:56 | |
I do that the deal, in terms of its
long-term outcome, it allows Iran to | 0:18:56 | 0:19:00 | |
begin again its nuclear enrichment
programme a full-scale, but in the | 0:19:00 | 0:19:06 | |
period between six and 13 years from
now, so it is not a finite and to | 0:19:06 | 0:19:10 | |
the large-scale uranium enrichment,
and at the same time, the Iranians | 0:19:10 | 0:19:15 | |
are allowed to continue missile
testing. So the many people in the | 0:19:15 | 0:19:20 | |
United States, and indeed the key
allies like those in Israel, it | 0:19:20 | 0:19:24 | |
looks like a deal that at best
simply kicks the can down the road. | 0:19:24 | 0:19:29 | |
Well, the problem, Stephen, is in
the midst of a possible negotiation | 0:19:29 | 0:19:35 | |
with North Korea, you have to admit
that the North Koreans are going to | 0:19:35 | 0:19:39 | |
say why should we make a deal with
the United States is on one | 0:19:39 | 0:19:42 | |
president to another they pulled the
plug on this deal? The timing is | 0:19:42 | 0:19:46 | |
very unfortunate, May 12. So... And
there is no possibility of delaying | 0:19:46 | 0:19:53 | |
that decision, as I am very
concerned. I just think that the | 0:19:53 | 0:19:56 | |
North Koreans, I know how they are.
They think of every avenue, they are | 0:19:56 | 0:20:01 | |
going to find a way to use this
potential disruption of the Ah Van | 0:20:01 | 0:20:05 | |
deal. And I am not a fan of Iran, I
did not openly support President | 0:20:05 | 0:20:10 | |
Obama's deal. -- Iran deal. I worry
now, at the timing and this | 0:20:10 | 0:20:19 | |
colossal, important decision to meet
with Kim Jong-un, but these two | 0:20:19 | 0:20:24 | |
decisions are going to hit each
other and it is not going to be | 0:20:24 | 0:20:28 | |
resolved in our interest, that is my
worries the President terminates the | 0:20:28 | 0:20:31 | |
deal. OK, I want to change tack a
bit and ask you something is very | 0:20:31 | 0:20:37 | |
personal to you. You are by Aung San
Suu Kyi in the unmarked to be part | 0:20:37 | 0:20:41 | |
of an advisory committee looking at
what had happened to the Mahindra | 0:20:41 | 0:20:45 | |
people and the exodus of so many of
those people across the border into | 0:20:45 | 0:20:49 | |
anger --. You agree to be part of
the committee, then it seems you had | 0:20:49 | 0:20:55 | |
a stand-up row with Aung San Suu Kyi
herself about some of the activities | 0:20:55 | 0:21:00 | |
of the Myanmar government and you
quit your post. -- Rohingya people. | 0:21:00 | 0:21:05 | |
How disappointed are you in Aung San
Suu Kyi right now? Well, I am very | 0:21:05 | 0:21:10 | |
disappointed in her. She has not
fulfilled, I think, her commitment | 0:21:10 | 0:21:15 | |
as a champion of human rights. I
have supported her for 30 years as a | 0:21:15 | 0:21:21 | |
public official with my foundation.
I did everything, we had a good, | 0:21:21 | 0:21:25 | |
strong relationship, and I'm
disappointed she is not speaking out | 0:21:25 | 0:21:30 | |
against own military on the human
rights situation with the Rohingya, | 0:21:30 | 0:21:35 | |
and this commission she set up, I
found out that she did not want any | 0:21:35 | 0:21:44 | |
frank advice. I wanted two
journalist released, I said you | 0:21:44 | 0:21:48 | |
should release them, this is
important. We do not have much time, | 0:21:48 | 0:21:52 | |
I want to be clear about one thing.
Do you believe she has become an | 0:21:52 | 0:21:56 | |
apologist for State ethnic
cleansing? Well, I will not say an | 0:21:56 | 0:22:02 | |
apologist. She has become an
accomplice because she has become a | 0:22:02 | 0:22:05 | |
politician that wants to stay in
office, she does not want to upset | 0:22:05 | 0:22:09 | |
the military that is extremely
powerful in the unmarked, but she | 0:22:09 | 0:22:12 | |
should because she is the head of
state. Final thought, and this takes | 0:22:12 | 0:22:18 | |
us away from foreign affairs to your
country. The president, and fail, it | 0:22:18 | 0:22:25 | |
has to be said, I do not know if you
are interested in running again, but | 0:22:25 | 0:22:30 | |
a lot of people are speculating
about whether Democrats are going to | 0:22:30 | 0:22:34 | |
find candidates capable of hitting
Donald Trump in 2020. He is a man | 0:22:34 | 0:22:39 | |
who liked him or loathe him dominate
the political scene. Frankly, there | 0:22:39 | 0:22:46 | |
does not seem to be anybody on the
Democrat side. How and where the | 0:22:46 | 0:22:50 | |
Democrats going to find someone to
beat Donald Trump? Well, the good | 0:22:50 | 0:22:54 | |
news is we have three years. The
good news also is I believe that it | 0:22:54 | 0:23:01 | |
is, Donald Trump is not doing well
with voters. He is going to be | 0:23:01 | 0:23:04 | |
fermentable but I think the
Democratic Party realises it cannot | 0:23:04 | 0:23:09 | |
just be a progressive, Liberal
Party, that we have to talk about | 0:23:09 | 0:23:13 | |
economic issues, like we did in
Pennsylvania, we are moderate, | 0:23:13 | 0:23:22 | |
conservative Democrat one, and we
have been winning in a lot of | 0:23:22 | 0:23:26 | |
elections recently. It is either
going to be candidates like Joe | 0:23:26 | 0:23:29 | |
Biden, or a new face, but the good
news is we have three years and I | 0:23:29 | 0:23:33 | |
believe that we will find a strong
candidate and Count me out. I am | 0:23:33 | 0:23:39 | |
done, but I think at the same time,
we have a real opportunity to win | 0:23:39 | 0:23:46 | |
short-term in these congressional
elections, I think within the house | 0:23:46 | 0:23:49 | |
of representatives, maybe not the
Senate, and then we recapture the | 0:23:49 | 0:23:52 | |
presidency. I believe that is what
is going to happen but we will see. | 0:23:52 | 0:23:57 | |
We will see indeed, but Will
Richardson for now, thank you very | 0:23:57 | 0:24:01 | |
much for being on HARDtalk. Thank
you, Stephen. | 0:24:01 | 0:24:04 |
Stephen Sackur speaks to Bill Richardson, former Clinton cabinet secretary and one time US North Korea emissary. The next couple of months will present President Donald Trump with foreign policy choices that could define his presidency. A summit meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un is looming, so too a decision on whether to dump the nuclear deal with Iran. And never far from the surface, how to handle relations with Vladimir Putin's Russia. What is Trump's brand of disruption doing to US foreign policy?