tv Fareed Zakaria GPS CNN February 5, 2017 10:00am-11:01am PST
this is gps, the global public square. welcome to all of you in the united states and around the world. i'm fareed zakaria. on the show today -- >> the world is in trouble, but we're going to straighten it out, okay? >> the travel ban and the backlash against it. breitbart chief steve bannon's new role on the national security council. all that with a democrat and republican. former secretary of state madeline albright and stephen hadley. then we'll tackle the legal dimensions of the travel ban. is it constitutional? will it go all the way to the
supreme court? slurs and desecration. anti-semitism seems to be on the rise in europe and the united states. i will talk to france's bernard about what he is witnessing and why it's happening. but first here's my take. after his spat with mexico, after the travel ban, last week donald trump did something unexpected. he put in place a policy which i agreed. he placed a smart check on federal regulations. in fact, while i find much of trump's world view alarming, i agree in the main with some important points of his program, tax reform, infrastructure investment, deregulation, civil service reform. the larger question i keep asking myself is does donald trump want someone like me to agree with him? the trump white house has decided the best way to deal with any institution that might
stand in its way is to try to delegitimize it. that th has led toward a ferocious attack toward the media which the president now says is the opposition party. his chief strategist urges the media to keep its mouth shut and just listen for a while, unquote. sean hannity, the fox news host who has become an unofficial spokesman for the white house describes the media as a bunch of overpaid, out of touch lazy millionaires that has nothing but contempt for the people that make this country great. at this point one could note that if we are to listen to america, almost 3 million more americans did vote for hillary clinton than for donald trump. as for which of these groups makes america great, i'm not sure what criteria to use, but if it's generating wealth and contributing to the gdp, it's not even close. the 500 counties won by hillary
clinton produced 64% of economic output while the 2,600 counties won by president trump produced just 36% of gdp. the much maligned urban elites may be out of touch but they still pay its bills. a few years ago, the economists compared how much each american state contributed to the federal coffers with the funds they received from washington. the basic pattern is simple. it's blue states, which voted against trump in 2016 that fund the red states that voted for him. this is not the way i think we should look at america. we're living through times in which economics and technology separate us. some people in places prosper while others languish. the goal should be to use politics as a mechanism to bring us together through good public policy and enlighten public discourse. the truth is there's no real americans and fake americans, just americans.
there is real news and fake news. most presidents begin their tenure by trying to reach out to their political opponents signaling they want to represent those that didn't vote for them as well as those that did and try to bring the country together. donald trump has made almost no effort in this regard. simply asserting that the country was divided before he was elected and absolving himself of any responsibility for unifying it. the challenge for the media must be to ensure that we don't mirror trump's own attitude of hostility. we cannot absorb and reflect that negativity. we are not the opposition. we are a private institution explicitly protected by the constitution that's meant to hold government accountable and to provide real information to the citizenry. i hope to do that in a trump tenure. along the way, when i have to, i
will disagree vigorously with the president. just as important, when warranted, whether he likes it or not, i will agree with him. for more go to cnn.com/fareed and read my washington post column this week, and let's get started. on a friday night james robart temporarily blocked president trump's executive order banning travel and immigration from seven muslim nations. in response, donald trump, of course, tweeted. the opinion of this so-called judge, that essentially takes law enforcement away from our country is ridiculous and will be overturned. as it turns out, not yet. overnight the ninth circuit court denied an emergency appeal by federal government lawyers to overturn the decision.
what happens next? how to make sense of this mess? to discuss it joining me here in new york is a presidential historian who teaches at nyu and in washington, a constitutional law scholar. jonathan, take us through this just procedurally so we understand what's happening. as i understand it, these are federal judges but now it gets appealed where, to the full -- first they have to issue real rulings. then there has to be an appeal to the full bench of the circuit courts and then to the supreme court? take us through. >> what the ninth circuit technically did is said we're not going to issue an emergency order that you're seeking to stay the lower court. that's not too surprising because the other side had not been heard. what they ordered was expedited argument. they told the washington state
attorney general to put in his opposition in a very short period and then for the united states government to file their papers by monday. at that point, the court is prepared to rule on the merits, theoretically. there is an issue here. this is a temporary restraining order, a tro. those are not normally appealed. those types of things are disfavored. it's possible for the court to say we don't want to rule on this letter. the lower court hasn't given us a written opinion. because this is such a matter of great national importance, the court could reach the merits. robart's decision could be reviewed without a written opinion. >> let us understand it procedurally. that would be a circuit court reviewing a federal judge's opinion. at that point does it go to -- i
guess i'm trying to get at is how soon could this get to the supreme court and is that inevitable? >> depends on the parties. they could try to appeal from the panel decision to the full court or instead of going for the inbank, they could go directly to the supreme court. depends on which party the loser is on the appellate stage. because it's a tro, it's a bit odd. this is normally not the course that an appeal takes. they could seek a full court from the ninth circuit if they lose or they could go directly to the supreme court. that's obviously going to happen very quickly. the ninth circuit judges gave both parties a very, very small window to file with them so they can look at this and render a decision. >> tim, what do you make just politically of the president of the united states tweeting in response to this judge's decision? >> every presidency starts with
problems. there's always course corrections. the really great presidents are the ones who make it seem like the mistakes were made by other people. by tweeting, as he does, president trump is taking away from himself the firewall, the mystery, the aloofness that has helped his predecessors skirt responsibility. it's hard to predict him. he may find himself regretting the fact he's always removing the plausible deniability. the fact the u.s. military pushes back about torture and water boarding and then he tweets he still believes in torture. the fact that the independent judiciary pushes back and he goes against the judge, attacks
the judge. if he's not careful, he's going to find himself with a king lere problem where he is ranting and raving against the weather and seems to have no control over the actual policies followed by his administration. >> i think about the first point you made. you look at president eisenhower or president reagan, they had this teflon appeal but partly because they had this sense of aloofness and they could blame any bad decision. that was bad advice i got. >> ronald reagan, he had an almost unworkable white house system where you had three chiefs of staff, baker, dever and meeks. he managed and had trouble with his budget director and yet he managed to convey the sense of confidence and leadership despite the course corrections. despite the mistakes in first
year of government. that's where we get the term teflon president. trump has to be careful because if he continues to act this way and has tantrums, public tantrums on social media, it will be hard to explain that the corrections aren't anything against his own wishes. if it looks like he's losing his own battles inside the administration, he looks weak and incompetent. >> fascinating. stay with us. we'll talk about the substance and merits of the case but also does this all remind you of a president named richard nixon and his uses of power? tim was the former director of the nixon presidential library. he'll tell us.
with my moderate to severe crohn's disease,... ...i was always searching for ways to manage my symptoms. i thought i had it covered. then i realized managing was all i was doing. when i finally told my doctor, he said humira was for people like me who have tried other medications,... but still experience the symptoms of moderate to severe crohn's disease. in clinical studies, the majority of patients on humira saw significant symptom relief... ...and many achieved remission. humira can lower your ability to fight infections... ...including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers,... including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions,... ...and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb,... ...hepatitis b, are prone to infections, ...or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. if you're still just managing your symptoms,
ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, remission is possible. (sfx: park rides, music andoooh!d sounds) when your pain reliever stops working, your whole day stops. (sighs sadly) try this. only aleve can stop pain for 12 hours. plus, aleve is recommended by more doctors than any other brand for minor arthritis pain. aleve. live whole. not part.
tomorrow's the day besides video games. every day is a gift. especially for people with heart failure. but today there's entresto... a breakthrough medicine that can help make more tomorrows possible. tomorrow, i want to see teddy bait his first hook. in the largest heart failure study ever, entresto was proven to help more people stay alive and out of the hospital than a leading heart failure medicine. women who are pregnant must not take entresto. it can cause harm or death to an unborn baby. don't take entresto with an ace inhibitor or aliskiren. if you've had angioedema while taking an ace or arb medicine,
don't take entresto. the most serious side effects are angioedema, low blood pressure, kidney problems, or high potassium in your blood. tomorrow, i'm gonna step out with my favorite girl. ask your doctor about entresto. and help make the gift of tomorrow possible. you can count all the ingredients in real milk on three fingers. and you can count all the ingredients in flavored almond milk on ten fingers and five toes. we're back with tim and jonathan turley.
jonathan, i want to ask about the merits of this case. you were on the show last week. your basic argument is the president had broad authority to limit immigration. when i looked at it, what i'm struck by is the federal governments argument, the trump administration's argument seems to derive from a 1952 statute. it seems to me that congress passed the immigration and naturalization act to override that 1952 law and say you cannot discriminate on people on the basis of their nationality. you can't have a blanket ban on a whole category of people like that. this executive order does seem unlawful in that sense. this is what the attorney general felt and a series of federal judges now seem to have felt. why doesn't the aclu have a strong case? >> there's compelling arguments on both sides.
please keep in mind even if a single provision is struck down by a federal court, there's long standing doctrine that they have to minimize a degree that they set aside executive order. the rest of the executive order could well be upheld. the law in my view does still favor president trump. a judge in boston seemed to reach that same conclusion. we have a division between these two courts. the problem with the 1965 law is that it really doesn't override the 1952 law. what it was meant to do is get rid of numerical quotas that favored europeans. it did, as you correctly noted, say that you cannot discriminate on the basis of nationality. the problem is threefold. the law has no applicability to refugees. it applies to visa holders. the law was amended again to say
procedural changes do not fall under discrimination provisions. they crafted this as a vetting procedure change. finally, it's important to keep in mind that non-citizens outside the country don't have standings to raise many constitutional questions. that would be a barrier for many of them. what does that mean at the end of the day? it means there's compelling arguments on both sides. i do believe that president trump has the upper hand in terms of the president, but it's also important to keep in mind this is procedurally a little bit wicked. a tro is not how we look at these issues on the court of appeals. >> it does feel like this is likely to go to the supreme court. tim, i want to ask you a point. shades of nixon. it was a point that nixon said if the president does it, then it cannot be illegal. people forget nixon was a highly skilled lawyer.
he was expressing this view that the president has broad latitude. >> he does in national security policy. remember cheney got a lot of criticism for the unitary executive theory. the problem for trump is he has a unitary government theory. he doesn't recognize the three branches of government. richard nixon knew there was three. in the end, he attempted sneaky end runs. in the beginning he tried to lead while maintaining respect for the branches of government. the challenge for president trump and his team is to figure out a way to work within the american constitutional system. in the end, richard nixon couldn't. it didn't happen fast. richard nixon's great crimes against the constitution took about a year and a half to start. >> bottom line, what does this tell us? look at this as an historian. >> the bottom line this tell us that our institutions are strong in the united states. if this were some kind of banana republic, president trump would have no pushback from any
institution. the courts would have just fallen or he would have removed a judge. the u.s. military pushed back on torture. for people around the world, this is a test of our institutions and so far the american institutions have passed the test. this was a great week for the u.s. constitution. >> fascinating conversation. next, former secretary of state madeline albright. former national security advisor stephen hadley assess the first two weeks of president trump's foreign policy. the decisions, phone calls and the tweets. what powers the digital world. communication.
that's why a cutting edge university counts on centurylink to keep their global campus connected. and why a pro football team chose us to deliver fiber-enabled broadband to more than 65,000 fans. and why a leading car brand counts on us to keep their dealer network streamlined and nimble. businesses count on communication, and communication counts on centurylink.
there's so much to talk about with my guest mad line albright and stephen hadley. she was secretary of state under bill clinton and mr. hadley was the national security advisor under george w. bush. what do you make of this first two weeks of trump's foreign policy? what's your general reaction? >> well, i have to say, my
general reaction is it's been fairly chaotic. that it's unclear in terms of what some of the bilateral diplomacy that's taken place. what the effect has been in terms of the telephone calls and also the tweeting. also, i think, in many ways, the big issue from a foreign policy perspective has been the immigration question which i have to say was not -- was really unprepared and didn't look into the unintended consequences of it and was based on untruths. i'm having some trouble with this first few days of the the trump presidency. >> steve, teething troubles or more than that? >> i think the role out of some of these executive orders has not been as smooth as it should have been. the mechanics were not worked out. it's pretty clear. i think you need to step back
and ask what was the trump administration trying to do. we have to recognize this was a populist movement. a political insurgency that captured the white house. we haven't had this happen before in our history. i think what they wanted to do in this first week or two is through the executive orders, roll out a set of policies that were consistent with the program on which they campaigned to send the message to those who supported the administration that they were true to their word and they really were going to shake up the situation in washington because that's what they feel they were elected to do. i think the mechanics left a lot to be desired, but i think what they were trying to do was get out the policies. send the message to the country, business will be done differently and send a message to those who rallied to mr. trump's cause that they are true to the commitments and the issues that he raised during the campaign. >> madeline, lot's been said
about the bans. let me ask you about the next big one strikes me as the idea of putting iran on notice. i was always taught in graduate school, two things are very expensive in international relations, threats when they fail and promises when they succeed. if you put iran on notice, what does it mean exactly? >> well, i think that's the real question. by the way, i can't visualize my friend steve hadley running into the press briefing and saying we're putting iran on notice. that's more than mechanics. i do think that the question here is what does it mean because they're talking about some more sanctions. congress is also talking about that and saying nothing is off the table. i think the question is what is really meant by this, have they coordinated some plan?
is it about the missile firings? where are they on the nuclear deal? a number of questions that were not answered in that rather rapid entrance by the national security advisor into the press briefing room. >> steve, do you think there's a kind of return to normalcy taking place. if you look at statement on israel, the israeli settlements, the statement is the kind of statement the white house has made for 40 years. we don't think settlement activity helps the peace process. on russia you look at nikki haley, very tough condemning russian aggression. are we now beginning to see a kind of return to normalcy or consistency in foreign policy? >> well, i think we're seeing some modifications to some of the statements that were made during the heat of the campaign. i think that's been a process that's been going on for a number of weeks.
president trump has modified some of his statements, particularly, about things like alliances and nato. of course his cabinet appointments have made in their confirmation hearings statements that are in line with orthodoxy. i wouldn't go too far about that. two examples. on iran they campaigned they wanted to push back against iranian activity in the region. i think what lieutenant general flynn was doing was putting that marker down in response to that missile test that it is going to be a different attitude toward iran with this administration. they began to give content to that. on the settlements it's interesting. his formulation was they're not a barrier to peace, which is a formulation they have used before and is different from
what, for example, the obama administration said. then they talked about no new settlements and no expansion of existing settlements beyond build up areas, beyond their current boundaries. that is a formulation that goes back to a formula of settlements that we developed during the bush administration that the obama administration rejected, going for a much more ambitious freeze. within the context of that statement there's a suggestion of a new approach given what we've been doing for the last eight years. i would hope a return to the approach we had under the bush administration. >> both of you stay with me. we're going to come back. next we're going to talk about the fact that steve bannon now has a seat at the table on the national security council. is that appropriate for man whose job is purely political? we'll discuss that and more when we come back.
the last thing you want is to end up paying for data you don't use. now verizon introduces the one plan that's right for you. switch, and for just $55 get 5 gigs on america's best network. that's the right amount of data at a great price. plus, get our best moto droids for $15 a month or less. finally, all the data you need, on the network you want. verizon. so we sent that sample i doff to ancestry. i was from ethnically. my ancestry dna results are that i am 26% nigerian. i am just trying to learn as much as i can about my culture. i put the gele on my head and i looked into the mirror and i was trying not to cry.
because it's a hat, but it's like the most important hat i've ever owned. discover the story only your dna can tell. order your kit now at ancestrydna.com. of your brain can make it hard to lose weight? contrave is an fda-approved weight-loss medicine that may help adults who are overweight or struggle with obesity lose weight and keep it off. contrave is believed to work on two areas of the brain: your hunger center... (woman) i'm so hungry. (avo) to reduce hunger. and your reward system...
(woman) ice cream. french fries. (avo) to help control cravings. across three long-term studies, contrave patients lost approximately 2-4x more weight than with diet and exercise alone. contrave is not for everyone. one ingredient in contrave may increase suicidal thoughts or actions in some children, teens, and young adults within the first few months. other serious side effects include seizures, increase in blood pressure or heart rate, liver damage, manic episodes, glaucoma and allergic reactions. do not take with opioids. reduce hunger, help control cravings. contrave. the #1 prescribed weight-loss brand. go to contrave.com. make sure it's ano make a intelligent one. ♪ the highly advanced audi a4, with available virtual cockpit.
stephen bannon, the president's chief strategist that's been wildly criticized for being white nationalist. as of last weekend he has a seat at the immensely important national security council meeting. at the same time that president trump put him on that committee, he took the same status away from the top intelligence official and the president's top military advisor. what is going on? let's bring back former secretary of state madeline albright. former national security adviser steve hadley. steve, you ran this group. is it significant, this is the first time, to my knowledge, that a political advisor has been placed at the table.
sometimes they have sat and watched the discussion but the first time an advisor like this has been put at the table. >> the precedents are mixed. karl rove asked to be part of the nse process under president bush. president bush said he didn't want karl at those meetings because he did not want to suggest that national security decisions were made based on domestic political considerations. mr. axelrod sat in on a variety of meetings. he didn't have a formal seat at the table but he certainly was in the room and was able to observe what was going on and comment. presidents do this differently. i think in defense of what president trump has done, mr. bannon is not just his political advisor. he is his chief strategist.
we need some strategy in terms of national security making. i'm less concerned about it than a lot of folks. i think it's a broad table that mr. trump has set. >> what do you make of it because it does strike me that some of the -- the actions of the administration, for example, the combative tone with australia on the issue of refugees. that does come out of steve bannon's world view which the president might share. it's been a combative populist view that views americans allies as much of a problem as its foes. >> i have many more problems with it than steve does. i think that it's a very unfortunate image because, clearly, mr. bannon is more than a strategic advisor. i think he's the person that's
pulling the strings and to have him be in this kind of meeting, especially the principals meeting where there's supposed to be pre-discussion and also a real sense of respect for dissent and having people in there that are experts as for instance the chairman of the joint chiefs and the intelligence people. it depends on the fairness and stature of the national security advisor. i think the questions about how these people all relate to each other is something that's very important and very different from mr. axelrod sitting in occasionally. i think the influence generally of mr. bannon is passing strange, if i may say so, given his background and his approach to national security policy, his admiration for lenon. a number of things that trouble me about him him in these all important national security meetings.
>> let me ask you about the policy that comes out of this process. when you look at something like this travel ban, the temporary ban, the seven countries. among them is iraq. you know very well because you negotiated the treaty with iraq. what that means is that iraqi army that's fighting isis and allied with the united states in coordination with american advisors is being told that they cannot visit the united states. people who are putting their lives on the line to fight isis and support american foreign policy are banned from visiting the united states. that seems like a pretty screwed up policy and there surely should have been a process that you said here are general objectives, but it's probably a bad idea to have a blanket ban on iraq given they are fighting isis with us right now.
>> i completely agree. terrible mistake to put iraq on that. this is a group of people that fighting and dying every day to fight isis for our common security. i think it shows the problem. the problem is in opening days of administration, the only entity of government that's actually staffed is the white house. you know you don't have cabinet secretaries in place. you don't have the deputy secretaries below them in place. when you do that and run it strictly as a white house operation, you're going to make mistakes. this one was a doozy. if it has been vetted around in a fully staffed state department, defense department, i can't imagine the defense department wouldn't have come in and said wait a minute. you don't want to put iraq on that list. it was clearly a mistake.
no question about it. it's the kind of thing you're going to have until this administration gets fully staffed and starts having a set of processes that are inclusive and includes the departments of agencies. the sooner that happens the better. >> i hope they have learned from the mistakes they made on all of this and there will be a process that does what steve has been talking about. these decisions are too important to be half managed in way and too many people's lives are affected by it. the question is have they learned. i was very surprised in listening to the press briefing how proud white house is about all the actions that they took this week. i would say they should be very nervous about many of them that they took that's created fairly chaotic situation. i so hope that steve hadley's advice will be taken on how this should be done. >> you had much bigger problems with the travel ban. i saw your tweet about volunteering to register as a muslim even though you're raised as a catholic and discovered you were jewish halfway through your life.
>> i really do think that this is not america where we ban people by religion and make it so difficult to come here. this is a country that's based on diversity, and you and i are proof of it. >> thank you. thank you both for a fascinating conversation. always a honor to have you on. up next, a new study says anti-semitism is on the rise around the world and in america. what is going on? we'll be back in a moment. s. wait for it. in about five minutes you get delicious, premium veggies, steamed to perfection. now! ♪ ahhhhhhhhhhh... mmmm heavenly, right? birds eye steamfresh. so veggie good. justice is spelled b-o-x. say hello to a powerful tool that gives you options to fit your budget. ♪
oh, i'm tied to this chair! ♪ dun-dun-daaaa! i don't know that an insurance-themed comic book is what we're looking for. did i mention he can save people nearly $600? you haven't even heard my catchphrase. i'm all done with this guy. box him up. that's terrible. when you have digestive sensitivities, life can feel like a never ending search for food that won't cause bloating, gas, or inner turmoil. try pronourish. a delicious nutritional drink that makes a great mini meal or snack that has protein and fiber. and pronourish has no gluten or high fructose corn syrup. and is low in fodmap ingredients that can trigger digestive sensitivities. the search is over. pronourish. nutrition you can feel good about. "how to win at business." step one: point decisively with the arm of your glasses. abracadabra. the stage is yours. step two: choose la quinta. the only hotel where you can redeem loyalty points for a free night-instantly
and win at business. not to be focusingo finaon my moderatepe. to severe chronic plaque psoriasis. so i made a decision to talk to my dermatologist about humira. humira works inside my body to target and help block a specific source of inflammation that contributes to my symptoms. in clinical trials, most adults taking humira were clear or almost clear, and many saw 75% and even 90% clearance in just 4 months. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. ask about humira, the #1 prescribed biologic by dermatologists.
at the marine mammal center, the environment is everything. we want to do our very best for each and every animal, and we want to operate a sustainable facility. and pg&e has been a partner helping us to achieve that. we've helped the marine mammal center go solar, install electric vehicle charging stations, and become more energy efficient. pg&e has allowed us to be the most sustainable organization we can be. any time you help a customer, it's a really good feeling. it's especially so when it's a customer that's doing such good and important work for the environment. together, we're building a better california. the editor of the arch conservative commentary magazine offered up the following analogy to "the new york times." the campaign turned over rock and a lot of stuff began crawling out from under it. he was referring to trump's bid for presidency and the
simultaneous rise of anti-semitism in america, especially online. the government is out with a study that details a worldwide rise in this brand of hate. by next guest says he's seen a similar rise in recent years in his country, france and europe, more generally. the genius of judaism is his eloquent new book. i wanted to hear his take on what was happening in america. i do want to note bernard talks about something called bds, which may not be familiar to all of you. it stands for boycott divestment sanctions. it's the rallying cry for those on the left who want to use those tactics to punish and put pressure on israel follow its occupation of what they see as palestinian lands. pleasure. >> thank you. >> you talk about the rise of anti-semitism in america. >> yeah. >> i've been surprised by it. tell me how you see it. why and how is it risen?
>> i saw in america, i'm sorry to say as a foreigner, please accept my witness. the witness as a friend of this country. two examples, on the left and on the right. on the right a lot of things which has been said and liberated during the last campaign. not necessarily by the president except that when he reminds, when he calls the jewish name of one of your colleagues, john stewart. it is not far this way of emasking a man. >> he did with -- jon stewart of the daily show. why don't you talk about your real name? >> why don't you speak about your real name? why don't you take pride of your jewish roots? not only that, around him, among his voters or part of his voters, there was something like
return of the repressed. on the left side, the campaign, the world campaign called bds and i want to say to the followers of this bds campaign, i want to tell them from the bottom of my heart, this is an anti-semitic campaign. this campaign takes its roots long time ago, 60 years ago in the fringes of the dying. the first time when boycott was recommended against israel, occupy territories of israel was by nazis escaping germany taking shelter in iraq or in syria, and building this campaign of bbs. it exists in france, around the world but has so much on the west coast of america.
this is to say this is not reserved to my country. >> what would you say to somebody who says, look, i don't think of myself as an anti-semite. i don't have any such feelings, but i don't like what israel does in the okccupied territories. i don't like israel's persistent persecution. i ask you because i know you have spoken eloquently in favor of a two-state solution. >> yes. to say this woman or man telling me that he or she does not like the policy of the state of israel, this is -- this means democracy. this means normal political quarrel, and you have inside israel a lot of brave female and
male militants who say that. no point. but i would ask to the person you are alluding to, do you think that there is space in the middle east for a jewish state or not? but the question is do we demonize? do we delegitimize? do we stigmatize israel as such? >> do you think that this explosion of anti-semitism, is it a flare-up that you think will die, or is it the sign of a new and worrying trend? >> it is the sign of a trend, and the real hope is not that it will vanish. the real hope is that the decent democracy will find a way to contain it. the real problem is not to
eradica eradicate. it's to resist. it's to oppose. and the great democracies like america, like france, are mature enough to build these walls. and this is one of the message which i tried to convey in "the genius of judaism." what are the ways of containment? the jews in the world are strong, strong with values, strong because of their memory, strong because the habit of study. this gives an incredible strength, which is stronger than -- and i often say in my country there is a debate to know if the jews have to leave france or not. my apply is always to say that those who have to leave, the jews took such a path to the building of the france. they built its political system, its language. those who have to leave are the anti-semites who want nothing about debuild and destroy this
president trump's travel ban on seven muslim majority nations has sparked protests across the u.s. and the world. it brings me to my question. roughly what percent of legal immigrants arriving in the u.s. are muslim? 40%? 25% 15% or 10%? this week's book of the week is michael lewis's "the undoing project." everything he writes is compulsively readable, and this book is no exception. it's the story of two men who remade economics, recognizing that human beings are highly irrational in how they understand the world. it's also what lewis calls a love story, shedding light on
the mysterious ways that a partnership works. as i say, it is compulsively readable. now for the last look. take a look at these russian troops clad in all white, conducting military drills in a remote northwestern region of russia. they aren't using typical training tools like tanks or choppers. instead, these soldiers are working with reindeer and huskies on skis, sleds and snowmobiles. it's not the first time the russians have conducted snowy exercises with these animal friends, but they may have increasing significance. you see, russia is currently engaging in the largest military expansion in the arctic region since the fall of the soviet union, reuters reports. moscow has invested heavily in its arctic infrastructure according to the state department with a fleet of ice breakers, newports, airfields, and other facilities, and the state department says the region is vital for the russian
economy. 20% of the nation's gdp and exports already come from the arctic. it's a region that contains an estimated 13% of the world's undiscovered oil and 30% of its undiscovered natural gas. so russia's recent actions there have not gone unnoticed. reuters reports america's new secretary of defense has called russia's arctic moves aggressive steps. it's a reminder that relations between moscow and washington have a ways to go before they truly thaw. the correct answer to the gps dhaj question is, d, the pew research center published some interesting facts about muslims and immigration last year. about 10% of legal immigrants coming to the united states are muslim of the 85,000 refugees who entered the united states in the fiscal 2016 year, about half were muslim. by 2050, pew projects, the american muslim copulation will
climb to 2.1% of the population. interestingly, about as many americans convert to islam every year as current muslims leave the islamic faith in america. thanks to all of you for being part of my program this week. i will see you next week. hello and thanks for joining us in the cnn newsroom. i'm boris sanchez in for fredricka whitfield. we're following some major stories today. the clock is ticking on the legal showdown over president trump's travel ban. this morning a federal appeals court rejected a request by the government to reinstate the ban, and now both sides have until tomorrow to submit briefs supporting their case before a panel of judges decides what then happens next. right now, this is the scene playing out in airports, those that were briefly barred from entering the country are now being greeted with cheers and hugs, many overcome with emotion after finally being allowed to set foot on u.s. soil.