Interview: MEET THE PRESS' David Gregory Talks With Israeli P.M. Netanyahu
By: Caryn Robbins Sep. 17, 2012
Yesterday's MEET THE PRESS WITH David Gregory featured a network exclusive interview with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu; an interview with the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice; and a roundtable discussion with Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Rep. Peter King (R-NY); author of the new book “The Price of Politics,” Washington Post’s Bob Woodward; the Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg; and NBC News Chief Foreign Affairs Correspondent Andrea Mitchell. Read excerpts of the program below.
Rice: What happened in Benghazi was a “spontaneous reaction” to Cairo; then “opportunistic extremist elements” lead to escalationAMBASSADOR Susan Rice: Putting together the best information that we have available to us today, our current assessment is that what happened in Benghazi was, in fact, initially a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired hours before in Cairo, almost a copycat of the demonstrations against our facility in Cairo, which were prompted, of course, by the video. What we think then transpired in Benghazi is that opportunistic extremist elements came to the consulate as this was unfolding. They came with heavy weapons which, unfortunately, are readily available in post-revolutionary Libya. And it escalated into a much more violent episode.VIDEO: http://nbcnews.to/Ue1MI7David Gregory: In your view, would Governor Mitt Romney, as President Romney make Israel safer? Would he take a harder line against Iran than President Obama, in your judgment? BENJAMIN NETANYAHU: I’m not going to be drawn into the American election. And what’s guiding my statements is not the American political calendar, but the Iranian nuclear calendar. … But as the prime minister of Israel, knowing that this country, committed to our destruction, is getting closer to the goal of having weapons of mass destruction, then I speak out. And it’s really not a partisan political issue.Netanyahu on why a containment strategy won’t work: “Iran is guided by a leadership with an unbelievable fanaticism”
VIDEO: http://nbcnews.to/QhDpv1BENJAMIN NETANYAHU: I think Iran is very different. They put their zealotry above their survival. They have suicide bombers all over the place. I wouldn’t rely on their rationality. You know, since the advent of nuclear weapons, you’ve had countries that had access to nuclear weapons who always made a careful calculation of cost and benefit. But Iran is guided by a leadership with an unbelievable fanaticism. … We have to stop them. Don’t rely on containment. That is not the American policy. It would be wrong. It would be a grave, grave mistake. Don’t let these fanatics have nuclear weapons. It’s terrible for Israel, and it’s terrible for America, it’s terrible for the world. BENJAMIN NETANYAHU: There’s no bus. And we’re not going to get into that discussion, except to say one thing. We have a strong alliance, and we’re going to continue to have a strong alliance. I think the important question is where does the– the only bus that is really important is the Iranian nuclear bus. That’s the one that we have to derail. And that’s my interest, and that’s my only interest.Netanyahu on not meeting with Obama: “Our schedules on this visit didn’t work out.”BENJAMIN NETANYAHU: I’m always pleased and happy to have a conversation with President Obama. I think he’s met me more than any other leader in the world. And I appreciate that. We’ve had our discussions. Our schedules on this visit didn’t work out. I come to New York, he leaves New York. But we continue in close consultation. David Gregory:
Sorting out U.S. options in the Middle East. Consequences for the region and the political impact in November.Our roundtable joining us: The first muslim elected to the U.S. Congress, Democratic Representative from Minnesota Keith Ellison, The chairman of the homeland security committee, New York Republican Congressman Peter King, author of the new book “The Price of Politics,” the Washington Post’s Bob Woodward, the Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg, and NBC’s Chief Foreign Affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell.David Gregory:
Ambassador Rice, welcome back to Meet the Press.AMBASSADOR Susan Rice:
Thank you, good to be here.David Gregory:
The images, as you well know, are jarring to Americans watching all of this play out this week. And we’ll share the map of all of this turmoil with our viewers to show the scale of it across not just the Arab world but the entire Islamic world. And flash points, as well. In Egypt, of course, the protests outside the U.S. embassy there that Egyptian officials were slow to put down. This weekend in Pakistan, protests as well there, more anti-American rage, also protests against the drone strikes. In Yemen, you also had arrests and some death outside of our U.S. embassy there. How much longer can Americans expect to see these troubling images and these protests go forward?AMBASSADOR Susan Rice:
Well David, we can’t predict with any certainty. But let’s remember what has transpired over the last several days. This is a response to a hateful and offensive video that was widely disseminated through the Arab and Muslim world. Obviously, our view is that there is absolutely no excuse for violence, and that what has happened is condemnable.But this is a spontaneous reaction to a video. And it’s not dissimilar, but perhaps on a slightly larger scale, than what we have seen in the past with the satanic verses with the cartoon of the prophet, Mohammed. Now, the United States has made very clear, and the president has been very plain, that our top priority is the protection of American personnel in our facilities, and bringing to justice those who attacked our facilities– David Gregory:
Well, let’s talk about that. You talk about this as spontaneous. Can you san definitively that the attacks on our consulate in Libya that killed Ambassador Stevens and others there, security personnel, that was spontaneous? Was it a planned attack? Was there a terrorist element to it?AMBASSADOR Susan Rice:
Well, let me tell you the best information we have at present. First of all, there’s an F.B.I. investigation, which is ongoing. And we look to that investigation to give us the definitive word as to what transpired. But putting together the best information that we have available to us today, our current assessment is that what happened in Benghazi was, in fact, initially a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired hours before in Cairo, almost a copycat of the demonstrations against our facility in Cairo, which were prompted, of course, by the video.What we think then transpired in Benghazi is that opportunistic extremist elements came to the consulate as this was unfolding. They came with heavy weapons which, unfortunately, are readily available in post-revolutionary Libya. And it escalated into a much more violent episode. Obviously, that’s our best judgment now. We’ll await the results of the investigation. And the President’s been very clear: we’ll work with the Libyan authorities to bring those responsible to justice.David Gregory:
Was there a failure here that this administration is responsible for, whether it’s an intelligence failure, a failure to see this coming, or a failure to adequately protect U.S. embassies and installations from a spontaneous kind of reaction like this?AMBASSADOR Susan Rice:
David, I don’t think so. First of all, we had no actionable intelligence to suggest that any attack on our facility in Benghazi was imminent. In Cairo, we did have indications that there was the risk that the video might spark some protests. And our embassy, in fact, acted accordingly, and had called upon the Egyptian authorities to reinforce our facility.What we have seen with respect to the security response, obviously, we had security personnel in Benghazi, a significant number. And tragically, among those four that were killed were two of our security personnel. But what happened obviously overwhelmed the security we had in place, which is why the president ordered additional reinforcements to Tripoli, and why, elsewhere in the world, we have been working with governments to ensure they take up their obligations to protect us. And we’ve reinforced where necessary.David Gregory:
The president, the secretary of state, had talked about a mob mentality. That’s my words, not their words. But they’ve talked about the tyranny of mobs operating in this part of the world. Here’s the reality. If you look at foreign aid, U.S. direct foreign aid to the two countries involved here in Libya and Egypt, this is what you see. 200 million since 2011 to Libya. Over a billion a year to Egypt. And yet, Americans are seeing these kinds of protests and attacks on our own diplomats. What do you say to members of Congress who are now weighing whether to suspend our aid to these countries if this is the response that America gets?AMBASSADOR Susan Rice:
Well first of all, David, let’s put this in perspective. As I said, this is a response to a very offensive video. It’s not the first time that American facilities have come under attack in the Middle East, going back to 1982 in Beirut, going back to the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, or even the attack on our embassy in 2008 and Yemen. This has–David Gregory:
Or Iran in 1979.AMBASSADOR Susan Rice:
This has happened in the past. And so I think that we should misunderstand what this is. The reason we provide aid in Egypt and in Libya is because it serves American interests. Because–(OVERTALK)David Gregory:
But our Americans are not being served if this is the response.AMBASSADOR Susan Rice:
It serves our interests to have Egypt willing and able to maintain its peace treaty with Israel. It serves our interests for Egypt to continue to be a strong partner. Now let’s be clear. The government, once President Obama called President Morsi, immediately in Egypt the security forces came out and have provided very significant protection. Same in Tunisia, same in Libya, same in Yemen. And all of these leaders have very forcefully conveyed their condemnation of what has transpired.David Gregory:
But there were conflicting messages from the Morsi government. In Arabic, they encouraged protests. In English they said, “Stop the protests.” This from ally that we give over a billion dollars to?AMBASSADOR Susan Rice:
What has happened, in fact, is that the Egyptian government has come out and protected our facilities. Our embassy is open today. Things are calm. And Morsi has repeatedly been clear in his condemnation of what has occurred. We are in these partnerships, David, over the long term. We think that, despite this very bumpy path we’re on and the very disturbing images we’ve seen, it’s in the United States’ fundamental interests that people have the ability to choose their own governments, that these governments be democratic and free. That’s in our long term best interest.David Gregory:
You know that this–AMBASSADOR Susan Rice:
We need to reinforce that with our assistance.David Gregory:
We are in the middle of a heated presidential campaign. There are different foreign policy visions. That’s why we wanted to dedicate the hour to this today, to really understand these different views. Mitt Romney spoke out this week. He criticized the administration, talked about whether the United States was apologizing for some of the initial response to this. These were his comments this week.David Gregory:
Our embassies did not stand up for free speech in this initial response to this violence. And the Republican charge is that it’s weakness on the part of this administration that invites this kind of chaos, that the administration has not been tough enough on radical extremists that are beginning to take root in these countries. How do you respond to that?AMBASSADOR Susan Rice:
First of all, I think the American people, and certainly our diplomats and development experts who are putting their lives on the line around the world every day, expect from our leadership unity in times of challenge. And strong, steady, steadfast leadership of the sort that President Obama has been providing.With respect to this, I think, vacuous charge of weakness, let’s recall. I think the American people fully understand that this is an administration led by the president who said, when he ran for office, that he would take the fight to al-Qaeda. We have decimated al-Qaeda. Obama bin Laden is dead. He said we would end the war responsibly in Iraq. We’ve done that.He has restored relationships around the world. I spend every day up at the United Nations, where I have to interact with 192 other countries. I know how well the United States is viewed. I know that our standing is much improved. And it’s translated into important support for strong Americans positions, for example–David Gregory:
Was it inappropriate for Governor Romney to level the criticism he leveled?AMBASSADOR Susan Rice:
I’m not going to get into politics, David. That’s not my role in this job. But I think the American people welcome and appreciate strong, steady, unified leadership, bipartisan, in times of challenge. And for those men and women in our diplomatic service, including those we tragically lost, they look to our leadership to be unified and responsive.David Gregory:
Let’s talk about another area where the administration’s on the defensive in terms of leadership in the world. And that is the nuclear threat from Iran. Another area of tension between the United States and Israel. In just a couple minutes, we will show our interview with the prime minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, and our viewers will see that. One aspect is how close Iran is getting to becoming a nuclear power. I asked him about that. I want to show you a piece of the interview and get your reaction to it.
BENJAMIN NETANYAHU: I can tell you, David, that Iran has been placed with some clear red lines on a few matters, and they’ve avoided crossing them. So I think that, as they get closer and closer and closer to the achievement of the weapons grade material, they’re very close. They’re six months away from being about 90% of having the rich uranium for an atom bomb, I think that you have to place that red line before them now, before it’s too late.GREGORY: As a prime minister of Israel, has Iran crossed your red line?BENJAMIN NETANYAHU:
Well, the way I would say it, David, is they’re in the red zone. You know, they’re in the last 20 yards. And you can’t let them cross that goal line. You can’t let them score a touchdown. Because that would have unbelievable consequences, grievous consequences, for the peace and security of us all, of the world, really.David Gregory:
What is President Obama’s line in the sand, the point at which he says to Iran, “Don’t cross this with your nuclear program or there’s going to be a military consequence?”AMBASSADOR Susan Rice:
David, the president has been very, very clear. Our bottom line, if you want to call it a red line, President’s bottom line has been that Iran will not acquire a nuclear weapon. And we will take no option off the table to insure that it does not acquire a nuclear weapon, including the military option.David Gregory:
The prime minister says–AMBASSADOR Susan Rice:
But–David Gregory:
–they are acquiring.AMBASSADOR Susan Rice:
He’s talking about a red zone, which is a (UNINTEL) concept–David Gregory:
No, he’s talking about how close they are to actually becoming a nuclear power, having the development capacity to become a nuclear power.AMBASSADOR Susan Rice:
They’re not there yet. They are not there yet. And our assessment is, and then we share this regularly with our Israeli counterparts in the intelligence and defense community, that there is time and space for the pressure we are mounting, which is unprecedented in terms of sanctions to still yield results. This is not imminent. The window is not infinite.But let’s be clear. The sanctions that are now in place reached their high point in July. The Iranian economy is suffering. It’s shrinking for the first time. Negative 1% growth. The amount of production of Iranian oil has dropped 40% over the last several months. Their currency has plummeted 40% over the last several months. This pressure is, even to use the Iranians’ own words, “crippling.” And we think–David Gregory:
But can you say that President Obama’s starting to keep Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, almost at the end of his first term, is succeeding or failing?AMBASSADOR Susan Rice:
David, what is clear is Iran does not have a nuclear weapon, and that Iran is more isolated than ever internationally. The economic pressure it is facing is much greater than ever. When President Obama came to office, the international community was divided about Iran. And Iran was internally very united.The exact opposite is the case today. The international is united. We just had another strong resolution out of the IAEA board of governors. And the internal dynamics in Iran are fracturing, and the leadership is divided. We are committed, and President Obama is committed, to preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. It is not a policy of containment.But David, the most difficult and profound decision that any president has to make is a decision to go to war. And this president is committed to exhausting pressure, economic pressure, and diplomacy, while there is still time, before making a decision of such consequence.David Gregory:
Ambassador Rice, the debate continues. Thank you very much for your views this morning.AMBASSADOR Susan Rice:
Thank you.David Gregory:
Now, to this looming nuclear threat from Iran from the Israeli perspective, it renewed tensions between the Obama administration and Israel this week. Earlier, I spoke with the prime minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, about where things stand and whether he is trying to influence the outcome of our presidential campaign.David Gregory:
Prime Minister, welcome back to Meet the Press.BENJAMIN NETANYAHU:
Thank you, good to be with you, David.David Gregory:
I want to talk specifically, before we get to the questions of what’s happening more broadly in the Middle East and the turmoil there this week about the threat from Iran. You spoke about that this week in this question of whether Israel has to take matters in its own hands. And you launched pretty pointed criticism at the United States. I want to play a portion of what you said.(BEGIN VIDEO)BENJAMIN NETANYAHU: The world tells Israel, “Wait there’s still time.” And I say, “Wait for what? Wait until when?” Those in the international community who refuse to put red lines before Iran don’t have a moral right to place a red light before Israel.
David Gregory:
Prime Minister, I want to understand very clearly what your views are. Is it your view that Obama administration is either unwilling or unable to stop Iran from become a nuclear power?BENJAMIN NETANYAHU:
Now first of all, President Obama and the U.S. administration have repeatedly said that Israel has the right to act by itself, against any threat, to defend itself. And I think that that remains our position. And for me, the issue is, as the prime minister of a country that is threatened with annihilation by a regime that is racing– a brutal regime in Tehran that is racing to develop nuclear bombs for their end, obviously, we cannot delegate the job of stopping Iran, if all else fails, to someone else.That was the main point that I was saying there, was directed at the general international community. A lot of leaders call me, tell me, “Don’t do it, it’s not necessary.” You know, the danger of acting is much greater than not acting. And I always say the danger of not acting, in time, is much greater.David Gregory:
But–BENJAMIN NETANYAHU:
Because Iran, with nuclear weapons, would mean that the kind of fanaticism that you see storming your embassies would have a nuclear weapon. Don’t let these fanatics have nuclear weapons.David Gregory:
But Prime Minister, let’s be clear. You were upset with this administration. The secretary of state, Hilary Clinton, had said in an interview that there were no deadlines by this administration in terms of what Iran should or shouldn’t do by a date certain. That’s what led to those remarks. And so my question still stands: is it your view that this administration is either unwilling or unable to stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapon?BENJAMIN NETANYAHU:
No. President Obama has said that he is determined to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons. And I appreciate that, and I respect that. I think implicit in that is that, if you’re determined to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons, it means you’ll act before they get nuclear weapons.I just think that it’s important to communicate to Iran that there’s a line that they won’t cross. I think a red line, in this case, works to reduce the chances of the need for military action. Because once the Iranians understand that there’s a line that they can’t cross, they’re not likely to cross it.You know, when President Kennedy set a red line in the Cuban missile crisis, he was criticized. But it turns out it didn’t bring war, it actually pushed war back, and probably purchased decades of peace with the Soviet Union. Conversely, when there was no American red line set before the Gulf War, Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. And maybe that war could have been avoided.And I can tell you, David, that Iran has been placed with some clear red lines on a few matters, and they’ve avoided crossing them. So I think that, as they get closer and closer and closer to the achievement of the weapons grade material, they’re very close. They’re six months away from being about 90% of having the rich uranium for an atom bomb, I think that you have to place that red line before them now, before it’s too late. That was the point that I was making.David Gregory:
As a prime minister of Israel, has Iran crossed your red line?BENJAMIN NETANYAHU:
Well, the way I would say it, David, is they’re in the red zone. You know, they’re in the last 20 yards. And you can’t let them cross that goal line. You can’t let them score a touchdown. Because that would have unbelievable consequences, grievous consequences, for the peace and security of us all, of the world, really.David Gregory:
That seems to be a newer development from your way of thinking, that they are now in a red zone. And to use a sports metaphor, you won’t let them cross the goal line. Is Israel closer to taking action into its own hands?BENJAMIN NETANYAHU:
We always reserve the right to act. But I think that if we are able to coordinate together a common position, we increase the chances that neither one of us will have to act. Iran is very cognizant of the fact of its degrees of freedom. And as the IAEA report says, not only have they not stopped, they actually rush forward. They’re rushing forward with their enrichment program. And I think it’s very important to make it clear, then, that they can’t just proceed with impunity.David Gregory:
Your criticism, your calling on President Obama to set this red line, comes in the middle of a heated presidential campaign. You understand the American political system very well. You’re very sophisticated in that regard. In your view, would Governor Mitt Romney, as President Romney make Israel safer? Would he take a harder line against Iran than President Obama, in your judgment?BENJAMIN NETANYAHU:
God, I’m not going to be drawn into the American election. And what’s guiding my statements is not the American political calendar, but the Iranian nuclear calendar. You know, if they stop spinning the centrifuges and took time out for the American elections, I wouldn’t have to talk. And I wouldn’t have to raise this issue.But as the prime minister of Israel, knowing that this country, committed to our destruction, is getting closer to the goal of having weapons of mass destruction, then I speak out. And it’s really not a partisan political issue. And I think it’s important for anyone who’s the president of the United States to be in that position of preventing Iran from having this nuclear weapons capability. And I’m talking to the president. I just talked to him the other day. We’re in close consultations and trying to prevent that. It’s really not a partisan issue, it’s a policy issue. Not a political issue.David Gregory:
Well, but it may not be a partisan issue. You’ve known Mitt Romney a long time. The reality is, tell me if you disagree, that Governor Romney, just in interview this week, said that his position is very much the same as President Obama. They are both committed to preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. Not just as an impartial observer, as the prime minister of Israel, do you agree with that, that both the president and his challenger have the same view with regard to preventing Iran from going nuclear?BENJAMIN NETANYAHU:
I have no doubt that they’re equally committed to preventing that. It’s of vital American interest. It’s an existential interest on my case. So this isn’t the issue. We’re united on this across the board.David Gregory:
Why can’t Iran be contained, just as the Soviet Union was? There are those in your country and in the United States who believe that a containment strategy would actually work.BENJAMIN NETANYAHU:
I think Iran is very different. They put their zealotry above their survival. They have suicide bombers all over the place. I wouldn’t rely on their rationality. You know, since the advent of nuclear weapons, you’ve had countries that had access to nuclear weapons who always made a careful calculation of cost and benefit. But Iran is guided by a leadership with an unbelievable fanaticism.It’s the same fanaticism that you see storming your embassies today. You want these fanatics to have nuclear weapons? I mean I heard some people suggest, David, I actually read this in the American press. They said, “Well, you know, if you take action, that’s a lot worse than having Iran with nuclear weapons.” Some have even said that Iran with nuclear weapons would stabilize the Middle East, stabilize the Middle East.I think the people who say this have set a new standard for human stupidity. We have to stop them. Don’t rely on containment. That is not the American policy. It would be wrong. It would be a grave, grave mistake. Don’t let these fanatics have nuclear weapons. It’s terrible for Israel, and it’s terrible for America, it’s terrible for the world.David Gregory:
Prime minister, one more question on the American election. You have been accused this week by pundits in this country of trying to interfere in this presidential election, siding with Governor Mitt Romney. Now Governor Romney, for a year, and he said it in his convention speech, has said, quote, “President Obama has thrown allies like Israel under the bus.” Do you agree or disagree with Governor Romney’s charge? It’s a serious charge.BENJAMIN NETANYAHU:
Well, you’re trying to get me into the American election, and I’m not going to do that. The relationship between Israel and the United States is a bond of– it’s just a very powerful bond. It was. It is and will be. It will continue to be. And I can tell you there’s no leader in the world who’s more appreciative than me of the strength of this alliance. It’s very strong.There’s no one in Israel who appreciates more than me the importance of American support for Israel. It’s not a partisan issue. In fact, we cherish the bipartisan support of Democrats and Republicans alike. This is critical for us.David Gregory:
But prime minister, with respect, if I may just interrupt you.BENJAMIN NETANYAHU:
And I think it’s critical that we take–David Gregory:
I think this is a very important point. Because you say you don’t want to interfere in the election. There are tens of millions of Americans who are watching that speech, who hear that rhetoric, who hear that charge, who may not understand the complexities of this issue. You are the leader of the Jewish people. You say this is not a partisan issue. You get billions of dollars from direct foreign investment from this country, hundreds of millions of dollars from American Jews and Christians alike from this country. It seems to me, for you to remain silent on whether this administration has thrown Israel under the bus is tantamount to agreeing with the sentiment. So where do you come down on that specific charge against President Obama?BENJAMIN NETANYAHU:
No, there you go again, David, you’re trying to draw me into something that is simply not the case, and it’s not my position. My position is that we have strong cooperation, and will continue to cooperate, with the best of allies. And Israel is the one reliable ally of the United States–David Gregory:
So President Obama has not thrown Israel under the bus?BENJAMIN NETANYAHU:
–until yesterday. So there’s no bus. And we’re not going to get into that discussion, except to say one thing. We have a strong alliance, and we’re going to continue to have a strong alliance. I think the important question is where does the– the only bus that is really important is the Iranian nuclear bus. That’s the one that we have to derail. And that’s my interest, and that’s my only interest.David Gregory:
Final question on the broader Middle East. In what we’re seeing this week, this anti-American, and indeed, anti-Israeli rage throughout the Middle East attacking our embassy, killing a United States ambassador, as you well know, what has been unleashed? And what can the United States and its allies specifically do to contain it?BENJAMIN NETANYAHU:
Well look, I think people focus on the spark. The spark, reprehensible and irresponsible film is a spark. But it doesn’t explain anything. I mean it doesn’t explain 9-11. It doesn’t explain the decades of animosity and the grievances that go back centuries.In fact, there’s a tinder box of hatred here from a virulent stream of Islam that takes modern Muslims and Arabs and attacks them first, but seeks to deprive all of us of the basic values that with have. They’re against human rights, against the rights of women. They’re against freedom of religion. They’re against freedom of speech and freedom of expression.They’re against all the things that we value. They’re against tolerance. They’re against pluralism. And they’re against freedom. And they view not your policies, but you, the very existence of the United States and its values, and by extension, Israel, they view that as an intolerable crime. And we have to understand that. We have to deal with it.And we have to be in close support. Because, in this vast expanse of land, you can understand why they’re so antagonistic to us. Because, for them, we are you, and you are us. And at least on this point, they’re right.David Gregory:
Finally, prime minister, did you feel snubbed not getting a face to face meeting with President Obama in New York during the upcoming U.N. meetings? Would you like to have that face to face encounter? Would it be helpful to your relationship at this point?BENJAMIN NETANYAHU:
You know, I’m always pleased and happy to have a conversation with President Obama. I think he’s met me more than any other leader in the world. And I appreciate that. We’ve had our discussions. Our schedules on this visit didn’t work out. I come to New York, he leaves New York. But we continue in close consultation. We have urgent business, Israel and America, to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons. I think it’s important to delineate a red line for Iran so we’re not faced with a conundrum of what to do if we don’t place a red line and we just proceed to the bomb.David Gregory:
Prime Minister, thank you very much for your time.BENJAMIN NETANYAHU:
Thank you to all of you.David Gregory:
And we’re back with our political roundtable. Joining me: national correspondent for The Atlantic, a journalist who has spent his career covering the Middle East, Jeff Goldberg, NBC’s chief foreign affairs correspondent, Andrea Mitchell, associate editor for The Washington Post and author of the new groundbreaking book The Price of Politics, Bob Woodward, chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, Republican Congressman Peter King of New York, and the first Muslim elected to the U.S. Congress, Minnesota Congressman Keith Ellison. Welcome to all of you.These are very difficult times for this country and for the Middle East. There’s a question I think that Americans have of what is going on here. Why is this happening? And it’s happening, Jeff Goldberg, in a heated presidential debate. And so you have accusations and response. And we’ve seen that play out already in the course of this hour.Liz Cheney, the daughter of the former vice president, launched a very serious attack that indeed Governor Romney amplified on, as she wrote in The Wall Street Journal. I want to show it to our viewers and get discussion about it here.“In too many parts of the world,” she writes, “America is no longer viewed as a reliable ally or an enemy to be feared, nor do our adversaries any longer fear us. Ask the mobs in Cairo who attacked our embassy, our the Libyan mobs who killed our diplomats at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, ask the Iranians, who make unhindered daily progress toward obtaining a nuclear weapon.”JEFFREY GOLDBERG:
Well, I mean a couple of trigger points. The first is, you know, to be fair, 9-11 happened during the Bush administration, and the Bush-Cheney administration. So it’s not as if Muslim radicals feared the United States during that period, not when they were killing thousands of American troops in Iraq, certainly.The larger point is that, you know, there’s a tendency, especially seven weeks out from an election, to turn everything that happens in the world into an election issue. There’s some very, very deep and troubling things going on in the Middle East that have very little to do with what a president does or doesn’t do. I mean let’s be fair about this.You have a complete upheaval in the Middle East. You don’t have American policymakers being able to shape the way Muslims think about the world, about modernity, about the United States. So to blame the president for an attack on these embassies, I think, is a big much.David Gregory:
Congressman, as a Republican here, a supporter of Governor Romney?REP. Peter King:
Yes.David Gregory:
Is this American weakness that brought this on? Is that the Republican view? Is that what the view of President Romney would be?REP. Peter King:
Well, my view is it was a large component of it. It’s been this President’s policy, President Obama’s policy has been confusing. It’s been apologetic. And it’s been misguided. From the day he started his apology tour back in 2009, when he was, no matter what people say, apologizing for America, somehow suggesting that we’ve been anti-Islam, and so he became the president, throughout the fact– even talking about Iraq, the way he took our troops out of Iraq without even getting the status (UNINTEL) agreement. He was given a glide path in Iraq.And yet, he pulled the troops out, brags about the fact the troops are out, gives a definite date for getting out in Afghanistan. What he’s doing by that is telling our allies they can’t trust us. And he’s also telling (UNINTEL) that the U.S. is not a real (UNINTEL) ally. And the fact that you were to have the prime minister of Israel, on this show, explaining his relationship with the president of the United States at a time of such turmoil in the Middle East, we’ve never had a situation like this, where there’s been such a disconnect between U.S. president and the Israeli prime minister. And the fact that he won’t even meet with him at the U.N., while is going to meet with President Morsi, sends terrible signals.David Gregory:
Well, to be fair, the prime minister of Israel did not describe that as a snub in that interview.(OVERTALK)David Gregory:
Just saying, okay. Congressman, your response.REP. KEITH ELLISON:
Well, it’s ridiculous. The president has been consistent. He’s been steady. And he’s had real progress and policy wins in the Middle East. I mean this is a seriously deeply rooted phenomenon, the Arab Spring, that is going to be unfolding for a long time. And the last thing we need is to start making quick, emotionally charged decisions. We need consistent, steady leadership like the president has shown.David Gregory:
But there is a policy component, Andrea and Bob, to this. New York Times writes about it in an analysis piece this morning. I want to put a portion of that on the screen, because it does provide some context here. The upheaval over an anti-Islam video has suddenly become Mr. Obama’s most serious foreign policy crisis of the election season, and a range of analysts say it presents questions about central tenets of his Middle East policy. Did he do enough during the Arab Spring to help the transition to democracy from autocracy? Has he drawn a hard enough line against Islamic extremists? Did his administration fail to address security concerns?Andrea Mitchell:
Well first of all, I think we have to concede that George HerBert Walker Bush’s relationship with the then-prime minister of Israel was arguably much worse than what we’re seeing now. So Republicans, as well as Democrats, had a difficulty, Congressman, in the past, with Israel. That–REP. Peter King:
We’re talking at the post-9-11 world.Andrea Mitchell:
But that’s–REP. Peter King:
There’s never been a relationship like this.Andrea Mitchell:
That said, I think there can be a legitimate criticism that this president has not handled the Israeli-Palestinian issue well. But the Arab Spring has been a much greater, much broader troubling issue that, arguably, not any American president could handle very effective. But that is not the argument. That is not the policy argument that Mitt Romney has made.Mitt Romney– the criticism of Mitt Romney is coming largely from many Republicans whom I talk to, foreign policy experts, who say that, in the middle of the crisis, when the State Department did not know where Ambassador Stevens was, when the body was missing, that he came out with a written statement and doubled down on it the next morning, and that it was not presidential, it did not show leadership. That is the criticism.REP. Peter King:
Well, when he put out the statement, he didn’t know that the ambassador had been shot.Andrea Mitchell:
Well then, he should not have put out a statement.(OVERTALK)REP. Peter King:
That’s exactly the problem.(OVERTALK)REP. Peter King:
I mean if you don’t know something, how can you–(OVERTALK)REP. KEITH ELLISON:
I mean what about Reagan? Reagan said, “You know, when we have a crisis like this, we should all come to as Americans and not sort of divide up politically and try to seek a–(OVERTALK)REP. Peter King:
President Obama waited three days after the (UNINTEL) bomb before he made a statement. And then he came out and said this was a sole–(OVERTALK)David Gregory:
All right, let me get Bob–(OVERTALK)BOB WOODWARD:
–way to look at this neutrally. And I just don’t think the charge of weakness will stick. I mean Obama’s been tough on these things. Let’s be realistic. The extremists in the Middle East who are causing all of this trouble are extremists. And no Republican, no Democratic president, is going to be able to control them.The question is what’s the policy and what’s the response? And you deal, in the intelligence world, and you ask the experts about this, and they’ll say, “You never know. Ten people are going to come together and take over an embassy, shoot someone,” and so forth. So the idea that government has the puppet strings here is–(OVERTALK)David Gregory:
Where are the extremists who are protesting about the fact that Muslims are being killed in Syria every day? Because you don’t see those protests. Is this about the United States or is it about them?JEFFREY GOLDBERG:
It’s about everything. I mean the truth is it’s about everything. It’s unfolding. It’ll be unfolding for a generation. And you’re right, I mean you don’t see that level of anxiety directed at Syria. In the last week, hundreds of Syrian Muslims have been killed by the Syrian regime. And you don’t see Syrian embassies being attacked.(OVERTALK)JEFFREY GOLDBERG:
Obviously, if you’re– you know, we talk so much about the Arab Street, how the Arab Street feels about America. We have to start talking about the American Street, too. Because this is going to have consequences for these governments that we support. You know, Americans see these countries that we provide billions of dollars to not protecting our embassies. And they’re eventually going to say, the American people are going to say, “Enough already with this.”David Gregory:
Congressman?REP. KEITH ELLISON:
This is a good time to realize that the so-called “Arab Street” is not one monolithic thing. You have some people in, say, Libya, for example, who are holding up signs apologizing for what happened to Chris Stevens.David Gregory:
Right. We have some of that, yeah.REP. KEITH ELLISON:
And we need to understand that this is not– everybody’s not on the same side. You have some radicals–Andrea Mitchell:
Yes.REP. KEITH ELLISON:
–who want to push back some–(OVERTALK)REP. KEITH ELLISON:
–from the old regime, some extremists, who want to exploit the situation. And you have people who want a democratic society. They’re both contesting for who’s going to come out. And the United States should stay on–(OVERTALK)REP. Peter King:
Romney appeals to the wrong people in the Middle East by somehow exalting this whole idea of the video being the cause of the riot.REP. KEITH ELLISON:
It’s a spark, it’s not a cause.REP. Peter King:
Okay, but for us to be saying somehow putting that on an equivalence with American policy, or to say that our policy in this country can be determined by a fantastic Christian minister in the south or radical Islamist mobs in the Middle East, then I think the president can do more.Andrea Mitchell:
I agree with that.REP. Peter King:
The president should be dealing–(OVERTALK)David Gregory:
But Congressman, is it responsible for Mitt Romney to say that a President Romney could have stopped this from happening, really?REP. Peter King:
I think it’s responsible for him to say that he would set a policy which would not be as confusing as this one. Why (UNINTEL PHRASE) President Morsi? Why didn’t the next day the president even mention President Morsi? He came to, did not say a word about the fact that our supposed ally, he doesn’t even know if he’s an ally or not, is getting a billion dollars to not defend our embassy in Cairo.(OVERTALK)REP. Peter King:
The president didn’t mention that.REP. KEITH ELLISON:
But when the president called, Morsi listened.
(OVERTALK)REP. Peter King:
–President Obama made his statement, he did not even mention the failure of leadership in Egypt.Andrea Mitchell:
But Congressman, you’re absolutely correct. I think that it is easy for the administration to try to point to the film. There is a much broader issue, as Jeffrey and Bob have been pointing to. The world is changing. And it is changing too rapidly for any American leadership to figure out what to do. There is going to be a big argument over foreign aid. You know that. And whether or not that is even a sensible argument is another question.REP. Peter King:
Right.Andrea Mitchell:
They have a big problem with Morsi. Morsi needs economic aid. He has, I’ve been told, reached out to the New York Economic Club. He wants to give a speech here in ten days.REP. Peter King:
Right.Andrea Mitchell:
He knows he needs the IMF. He knows he needs the United States. But he is trying, at the same time, to placate the radical elements–David Gregory:
Let me–Andrea Mitchell:
–in the (UNINTEL).BOB WOODWARD:
But the core problem is there are angry people out there. And you can’t identify them. And the idea that you’re going to have a government policy to deal with angry people in a way that will suppress them just is–(OVERTALK)David Gregory:
Let me get a break in here. We’ll come back with the roundtable. More on this. The political impact right in the middle of the campaign. More with our roundtable right after this.(COMMERCIAL OMITTED)David Gregory:
We’re back with our roundtable. Some context here. Look at this polling from CNN-ORC. “Better at handling foreign policy, a big advantage for President Obama as we go into these presidential debates.” Jeffrey Goldberg?JEFFREY GOLDBERG:
You know, I was troubled by something that Susan Rice said before, which is that, talking about how people are offended by this movie, and sort of apologizing for this film, I think, look, there’s a perpetual grievance machine working in the Middle East. Bob
Comments
Videos