tv Charlie Rose PBS September 25, 2013 11:00pm-12:01am PDT
>> rose: welcome to the program. tonight, a conversation with the new president of iran, hassan rouhani. >> the president said he gives you respect and recognition of iran's right to have mostful nuclear energy. that seems to be an answer to your concerns. >> well, the nuclear issue has turned into an issue of national pride. and a symbol of the perseverance of our the people. and i want to say that the people really have never
demanded anything beyond what the law designates. nothing over and above what is rightfully their. therefore the nuclear issue has become a symbol of development of sorts in iran. the modern know-how required to go hand in happened with this technology is a symbol for the iranian people. hand in hand we must move forward to ensure that the international is enforce and once we are abide by that i think everything's settled. >> rose: we talked with manuel barossa. >> because the economic situation seems to improve there's the risk of complacency. there's the risk of some governments say okay, we don't need to go on with reform,
that's serious complacency. complacency nationally, we don't need to make all of those reforms. they're not so popular and you may lose votes, that's a risk or risks at your level. after all why should we put together our competencies, why give you the central bank or give your commission more powers, that's a risk.
speech by president obama. >> it must be tested. while the status oh is iran's isolation the commitment to go down a different path will be good for the region and the world. and will help the iranian people meet their extraordinary potential. >> rose: the appearance of a moderate tone has made the world hopeful that there may be finally a chance for a break-through in negotiations about iran's nuclear program. there has been much speculation and expectation that the president of iran and the president of the united states would exchange happened shakes while both were here at the u.n. it did not happen but the tone on both sides is more constructive than it has been for some time and there are plans for negotiation to continue between the foreign minister of iran and the secretary of state for the united states. early this evening, i sat with the president of iran. here it is. mr. president, thank you. welcome to new york. tell me what you hoped to
accomplish on this visit to the united nations general assembly. >> in the name of god, the compassionate and the been to reflect the demand and the voice of the people of iran. and the opportunity that has been given to me here, to use that platform to express that voice better through the people and the officials here who have gathered in new york. and i do hope that i will succeed. >> rose: you've made a speech, the president has made a speech. there was no handshake, no bilateral meeting between you and the president. you suggested you didn't have enough time to plan for it. what's necessary for you to have a bilateral meeting with the
president? >> well, after all, we're speaking of two countries who have had no relations for 35 years. so it's clear that to begin talks require some preparation work. and whenever the prep work is completed, i believe that it's possible to have a meeting. perhaps if we had more time here in new york, we may have been able to coordinate what was necessary for that meeting to take place. we must all admit, i believe, that the principle of the meeting of the two sides is indeed important. but perhaps more important than that is the result of such a meeting. so we must make every effort so that the first high official meeting between the two
countries will definitely yield positive results. >> rose: are you looking for a grand bargain between the united states and iran, or are you looking specifically for some action you can take so that you can get a relief from sanctions? >> in principle, we think that and believe that the sanctions are illegal and in fact inhumane because they put pressure on our people. they put special pressure on people who are sick. they impact the life of children. and therefore, sanctions cannot be the answer. it is an incorrect path to take to begin with. >> rose: but the secretary of state, john kerry and the more
than minister of iran, mr. zarif will start a series of conversations. what are you prepared to allow the negotiated on the part of the government of iran? what's on the table? >> you are aware that the first issue that must be discussed is the nuclear file. and the settlement of the nuclear file will certainly pave the way for further discussions on other issues. a meeting that takes place tomorrow is with a foreign ministers of the p five plus one and the agenda for the talks is iran's nuclear file and the
subject of that file. >> rose: so before there will be some grand bargain, we need to the nuclear issue. are you prepared to rules the number of sent tra foodges for iran. >> while these are the details that should be examined further through the discussion that take place, what matters is that iran must be able to assert its rights, its legal rights, and i'm speaking under the international maranda law, right, and then on the other hand if there are any concerns specifically in our region about our program, it is iran's responsibility to also address
those concerns. as to the modality for that, that certainly will have to be discussed during the negotiations. but in any case, we don't iran to be an exception. we do not want discrimination against iran. we want iran to be seen just like the rest of all other countries that have nuclear programs as well as enrichment programs. >> rose: are you prepared before these negotiations get under way, to make sure that all the concerns of the iaea which have been expressed are net? are met? >> you see the world has been thinking about these issues for years, and that's precisely why all the international law that we talk about has been devised. for example the mpt which allows all countries to have nuclear technology without any deviation
and the safeguard preimminent for safe persons. the reason for the advisory board is for this reason and therefore any other rules and regulations paved the way for such supervisory role to take place, is indeed design to guarantee all the concerns that exist are addressed. that's precisely why iran took every step to assure everyone by signing the mpt to be a remember of the ia to carry out the supervisory role. and including the install the of cameras in all our nuclear plants which are recorded by the ai. therefore our nuclear activities are completely legal and we have nothing to hide. >> rose: how are you different from the previous president? what differences do you have that that are told. >> to discuss the full die --
dimensions of what you just -- the truth of these elections that took place as well as those who ran against me, we were all required to come up with a program for the people and elections sort of program. from the beginning i told people that i'm a person of moderation, that my programs will be moderate ones and so will my objectives i object to any radicalism or division and i think it was precisely those words that people voted for me. even in the economic field i insisted in moderation meaning that i said as far as it's not necessary, the government must actually pull back from controlling the economy and delegate more authority to the private sector and that should
expect to receive government assistance. in the realm of foreign policy i want to have constructive interaction and engagement in the world. in the cultural sphere those are culture authorities in the country to decide about the cultural field. therefore in the plan i drew up, i specifically tried to state what i mean by moderation. and the people of iran voted for this dialogue with me and i will remain committed to my pledge to the people to carry out all those programs. >> rose: it is often said in the western press that all the power is with the ayatollah and that you can only go so far. he's a friend of yours. both ayatollah's have been friends of yours. he must be backing what you are doing, otherwise you would not be doing it.
>> the constitution of iran actually defines the prerogatives of the president. his responsibilities in very no uncertain thing. the prerogative and responsibility of the supremely leader have also been categorized in the constitution quite clearly. we all follow the law and it's the constitution that defines exactly what needs to take place and what the frame work for our activities is. so within that framework, i tell you that i don't anticipate the president foreseeing any problems in his carrying out otherwise prerogatives. at least i haven't confronted any hurdles and i don't anticipate them. >> rose: you also know the revolutionary guard has spoken out and it was considered by some in the press as firing a shot across your bow.
saying don't go too far, watch out, moderation can only be going so far. >> the irc also has prerogatives that are clearly defined in the constitution. the irtc is a force just as its name suggests, some revolution guard corps protect the revolution and protect the islamist revolution and the country. and the irtc constitution speaking has its own responsibilities. and the commander of the irgc is a member of the supreme national security council where the president is also a member, where the defense minister is also a member. and that explains all the required coordination between these branches does take place in one unit.
therefore,+@ irtc has no intention of intervention in political affairs, which has also been stressed and declared by the supreme leader that the irgc must understand politics but it must not take sides or be a member or part of any political grouping or party. >> rose: tell us about you in terms of this election. you did not have the support of the ayatollah, there are other more conservative candidates. yet you won. what does that say about iran and its desire for something new, including a better relationship with the united states? >> well, after all, we all had our plans and we presented them to the people and we all had our supporters, our group of supporters, and those supporters had freedom to express their support for the candidates and
we had television debates, as you well know, during which we sort of expounded on that view as the rival candidate sunday and freely talk about a host of issues that people watch and heard. and so in the end they chose to follow the path that i present, the plan that i present, in other words, which is a plan of moderation. and also plan of prudence as well as hope. >> rose: the president said he gives you respect and recognition of iran's right to have peaceful nuclear energy. that seems to be an answer to your concerns. >> well, the nuclear issue has turned into an issue of national pride. and a symbol of the perseverance
of our the people. and i want to say that the people really have never demanded anything beyond what the law designates. nothing over and above what is rightfully theirs. and therefore, the nuclearer issue has become a symbol of development of sorts in iran. the modern know how required to go hand in hand with this technology is a symbol for the iranian people. so i think hand in hand we are must move forward to ensure that the international law is in force, and once we abide by that i think everything else is settled. >> rose: do you need 18,000 centrifuges in order to have sufficient peaceful use of nuclear energy? >> the number of centrifuges does not matter for us.
what matters is for us to provide the fuel for the nuclear reactor. you are aware of the fact that one nuclear reactor similar to what we have in buchor nuclear plan needs 30 pounds of enriched uranium. the first load it needs 90 tons of enriched uranium. so these are calculations, technical calculations that are over and beyond our here but we do not need centrifuges which are dependent on the entire field. >> rose: let me talk about syria. what is your interest in syria because clearly iran's support from syria and i just returned
from there had you been instrumental. iran, russia, hezbollah. >> you know that our relations with syria go back to a long time ago. you know the war we went through, one of the countries, one of the sole arab countries and given that iraq that was fighting iran and attacked iran was also an arab state, stood out and chose to support iran. and therefore, our relationship goes back to the hard time, the prime of war, the time of defense as far as we were concerned against iraq's invasion. also you know it rests in a region in part of the world that is extremely sensitive. the entire middle east is very sensitive these days. we have important interests as a result. one of our key interests is the stability of the region.
if the region is destabilized further, it will affect all of us and create a predicament for all of us. the entire region needs peace. the peace must prevail across the region. if there is war in one corner of the middle east, the heat of the war, the frames of the war reach all and breeds problems for us. we're also deeply concerned about the strengthening of terrorism in the region. it seems that all categories of terrorists groups have gathered in syria so our interest is to ensure that terrorism is not empowered. we deeply concerned by the civil war in syria. because this country is on the drinking of self destruction. not to mention the fact that the people of syria are suffering, innocent people are being killed. people do not have easy lives. it is a pain for any human being to bear what is happening in
syria. whatever we, power we have, whatever in our capacity and ability to halt this war in syria in my opinion will be important, in my opinion, for the rest of the world. the will actually help alleviate the suffering. if we can alleviate the suffering of the syrian people we all benefit from it. so ultimately we'll take measures to settle the members in our region and we believe that the only path is through democratization. in the fence of the votes of the people of syria and the ballot box must prevail other mely in defining the fate of the country. >> rose: do you believe syria will dismantle all of its economic weapons and hand them over. >> all our hope, i'll tell you, is that the entire stock piling of economic weapons is
eradicated across the world especially in our region. indeed very glad that syria has committed to the accession of cwc. because we ourselves as you recall are victims of chemical weapons. we feel the pain those weapons create. we've expensed it. >> rose: do you think happened on august 21? when chemical weapons, according to the united nations were used an attack on the syrian people in a rebel-controlled area and a rocket came from an area controlled of the regime. >> we categorically denounce the use of chemical weapons no matter who uses them. but in syria we, more work needs to be done to really ascertain
who did it, what equipment was used. you know that even before chemical weapons were used in the suburbs of damascus -- these chemical weapons were also used. previously around that time we had informed the u.s. officials that terrorists in syria have chemical weapons facilities in their hands. but as to who used them, i think it's fair enough to expect more work needs to be done. >> rose: a reporter, distinguished reporter here just had an article in the new yorker magazine talking about the head of the forces in iran. general -- he has made repeated trips to damascus. he's very much involved in that war. >> i'll tell you that our
military personnel go back and forth to syria. we have defense agreements with syria that go way back. it's quite clear to us that our military personnel and attache should be present at our embassy ease on a continual basis. they have always. and you know that military attaches are around in countries and more countries around the world has military changes. this does not mean i caution you that we have chosen to the enter the syrian war. in principle when a war regrettably happens in a country and takes the shape of a civil war, it is not our intention to be president of that civil war nor does it have any meaning to be president in a civil war. but at the same time in any country it could be that we have military attaches. >> rose: there's one issue that i need to clear up because it was talk board of director
this morning and even this afternoon after an interview with -- of cnn. raised the question of the hall calls and the question has meaning here because of your predecessor. and the question was asked, do you accept the fact that there was a holocaust in which more than or at least six million jews were killed. can you separate a recognition of that, not leave it to historians but accept a recognition of that and not let it be clouded by whatever feelings you have about the establishment of the state of israel in the middle east. >> in principle, we and i condemn the massacre carried out by the nazis in the world war ii. i also add is that many groups were killed by the nazis in the course of the war, jews in
specific, but there were also christians, there were muslims and so in principle, i'll tell you that my government, i condemn massacre. the killing of people, any group. i'll tell you that when an innocent person is killed, we never go about asking or inquiring whether they were jewish or christian or muslim. that's not our way creed. we simply say that we condemn any killing, any massacre, and therefore we condemn the massacre of the jewish people by the nazis as be also condemn the other massacres that took place in prison in the course of the war. >> rose: part of that is you do not want to deny that it took place because that is an insult to humanity. >> why would i want to deny it? why would i want to deny. i want to add to this debate, not only do i deny the criminal
acts of the nazis, we condemn it. at the same time, i really believe, because given we live in the middle east, we feel the impact of what took place in world war ii today in our region. we think that it's time to really separate from what's happening to a group of people now in the middle east who lost their -- going through torture that not even the jewish people want to see. we we're not opposed to neutsy we're opposed to any naziism that should take place in our world today by whoever in our world today. >> rose: do you agree with carry's efforts to bring about togetherness of the palestinians
and israelis. >> so far we don't see any signs of peace to be honest with you. the issue of palestine at the same time we think has to be decided by the palestinians, has to be decided by the people who live there, whatever they choose for themselves we'll support. we don't own palestine, as you know, but we do support their, you know, the fact that they have -- >> rose: you understand friendship. i have a friend by the name of john miller whose a colleague in journalism. he's a close friend of the family of robert leavenson. you've heard this before. i owe it to him to ask, do you know of his whereabouts as he may have gotten caught up in the judicial system of iran and whether he can be exchanged for someone else or whether there is a possibility because the family suffers not knowing where their
father and their husband is. could you help the leavenson family have that possibility? >> i wish, i wish i could help a family in suffering. but i really tell you that we have not, we do not know any information, have any information about this person. actually our intelligence services have said he is not in iran. as to where his whereabouts when he disappeared, i personally have no information on those details. but naturally when someone disappears, their family is suffering specifically. everyone must help, it's magic that everyone with us help. >> rose: thank you. >> thank you. >> rose: thank you for doing this. and i you obviously know this has been an important mission by you, the possibility of two great countries understanding
each other and having an opportunity to work together to do some common ground on those issues but divide them. i thank you indeed. i hope we all succeed in our mission. if they help promote our national interests and help us deliver the pledges we make to our people. >> rose: thank you. >> we have to start it together, with a realize we have to start it together and we did and we are doing it. >> rose: manuel barroso is president of the european commission which represents the interest of all 28 nations that make up the european union. europe is beginning to emerge from the grip of a death crises that's plagued the crises since 2010. the central european bank contributed largely borrowing costs for the most indebted nations with ease but remain. the victory in the general election opened the doors to the
renewed debate over the size and scope of protective measures to safeguard your economy. i am pleased to have jose manuel barroso at this table. well come. >> thank you. >> rose: you've been planning to do this and we finally got to do it. >> it's a pleasure to be here with you. >> rose: tell me, when you talk to other nations, you're asian, latin america. what is your message to them about the european commission? >> just now i was in the -- in russia, and it was the first time from several years where i did not receive lectures how and should i run the european union because in fact today there's much more confidence in europe. and in fact we received praise in the duration for the efforts to come out of this crises. i think it's true that now we have no longer technically in recession. we still have problems. i will not say that we are already out of the crises
because unemployment remains unacceptably high. but in fact i think we can say that we are in the right track. there are the signals of recovery are certainly encouraging. so my message is, as we have always said to you, from united states to china to japan, this is going to produce results. europe is a strong credible stable -- and you may trust your opinion because there is a fundamental resilience of the european economy. >> rose: and so this message is accepted and with a sense of confidence that thing are as you say they are. >> yes, i think so. look let's not forget that some time ago, probably one, two years ago, many people were batting on the implosion of the euro or disstable. probably some of your guests were predicting that greece exit and that did not happen. at that same time i was almost
feeling minority position explaining why from our point of view that was not going to happen. because of the interdependence in the european economy, because of the support of the country that are in a better position, that we're more vulnerable. and also because of external act fizzes of the most vulnerable countries, you have to recognize that. >> rose: but the euros remain in tack. >> in tact. and next year we are expecting another member to join the 18 member of the euro. >> rose: so what's remaining in terms on the political agenda, in terms of the long-held dreams of a political unity. >> , that has been a very serious stress test to all of europe because today in europe what happens is that in the coffee houses of athens people discuss the politics in general. in the popular talk shows in germany, they discuss about the public financial in greece. now everybody in europe understands that there is a much
bigger degree of inter dependence. but of course sometimes there are crises coming -- are also rising and that's a matter of concern for me. at the same time, if you look at the movements so far, all the steps have been for more integration, more integrated governsance. for instance now we have 1800 banks in your country. and 28 countries have agreed that supervisory role will be for european central bank. look, it's like in the united states. so we have in fact a country accepting an outside body makes the supervision of their financial system. so that's why i really believe that the integration is going to show that it's stronger than any forces of integration.
mainly also because of globalization. if you look at our military friends or powers like china and others, they will not have the leverage to deal with these other powers. but together, europe is still the biggest economy in the world in terms of gdp. and by far the biggest trade block. so there is a lot of things we can do together. so i believe that european dream will be kept alive. even in now you have to recognize that in a larger union, we have to allow for unity, at the same time for some kind of flexibility among the 28 members. >> rose: and merkel was re-elected. do you think she now on for another term i assume, would play a different kind of role and a more aggressive role since she doesn't face the political debate at home. >> i think an below -- she has been and i am a good witness of
this because i've been working with her since she became chancellor. in fact i knew her before she became chancellor of germany. she's along the government of the european and probably one of those devotes more time and energy to europe. so because she seems very much of germany linked to the future of europe. this is really true. >> rose: how does she see it. >> i mean, germany as they usually say, is too small for the world. but at the same time, with europe being the first market, can have certainly a very important role in the world as today germany has. today germany is the biggest surplus country in the world. and this is possible also because of this co-market that is european. and after the second world war, the germans, they really made a political commitment to europe that i believe is very sincere.
not only anglo america. >> rose: beginning with comrade adnauer. >> yes. in the debate now for the germany elections, angelo an -- anglo america was always in the future of the europe. at the same time there was a small, new party making a campaign against the euro. the opportunity through germany and they were not even able to reach the threshold to elect one member of parliament. i think it's important for our partners to understand. once again someone has kept this strong message in favor of europe. what able to be re-elected for the third time. >> rose: in fact, that's an interesting point because there have been fears that because of the aftermath of the economic crises, it would unleash super
nationalist forces that would provide a kind of difficult political environment. >> yes. >> rose: in terms of where those countries had been. and that seems not to have happened. >> not happen in germany. but i have to be honest. >> rose: it happened where. >> there are in some countries, actually forces and european forces that are going up. for instance in britain. >> rose: france. >> britain, the party that speaks about independence of britain meaning by independence britain leaving the european union. in greece, there's an extreme -- and also very much on the left some very aggressive forces against european union. and in france we have the traditional nationale. one important thing is that happened also before the crises. let's not forget that. to a large extent, the reason for these forces is anti-migration reflex. now they smack against europe but the subtext if i may say so.
>> rose: that's jobs isn't it. >> that's why as you know in times of crises, in times of unemployment, it's normal that extreme forces i think probably the united states things happen, extreme forces go up because of course they can manipulate the anguish, anxiety of people. and they come with a populist particular simplistic demonstrate gnawingic message. but i really believe that by far the mainstream moderates forces from the center-right will dominate the -- foreseeable future. >> rose: when the history's written, how much credit will go to the european central bank. >> that's because the european central bank halg a -- >> rose: guarantee. >> a guarantee. in europe we have already now some federal institutions. we have the backing for the european -- we have a commission that's independent from the member states. of course we all belong to a country but we are independent
from our governments and we have european central bank with also super national nature. and the european central bank is part of the institutions as being important as well. >> rose: in those countries that we're spending the most and the most economic trouble, some will argue it's cultural in terms of attitude about taxes, in terms of spending. and that you can't change that. >> i know these arguments about culture, but look, i also believe that people correct errors and with the behavior can't be changed by the consequences. what is happening now in south of europe for instance, it's amazing. i would say for science revolution going on. country that have chronic historically external deficits now they are balance or even in surplus because they've learned the hard way that i mean based
on -- if you give the right incentives, positive or negative, the countries are able to correct those behaviors. so if you look at the european history, in fact it was not only this country that had very high levels of depth, it has a crises and it's scandinavian typical well behaved country. germanyism years ago was considered the -- of europe, germany. and afterwards they made very important reforms in the european markets. i think the markets good and bad political choices have indeed an impact on the way countries behave. today in europe there is the real commitment to improve the comparements of europe. this is the issue.
because in the world of globalization we haven't understood we cannot go with debt that is not sustainable either public debt or private debt sometimes fueled by behaviors in the financial markets. i really believe that we are going to get out of this crises stronger and more competitive. and this fiscal policy is indeed having a very important positive effect of making the states reduce their expenditure, and also create new type of behavior also in the private sector. that's why i mention a kind of -- also in the private sector. looking more to exports, trying to reduce some costs making it more competitive. >> rose: and more productive and efficient. unemployment, why does it lag? >> you know, that typical and most departments will agree with
me that sometimes even growing, it takes some time for jobs to come. and we are trying to do everything to avoid what is called a jobless recovery. that's why you're creating new instruments also level. employment of unemployment policy remains basically in europe national competence. it's for our governments to make the labor market reforms that can make it easier for companies to hire young people. and also to have the kind of skills that we need in this economy. at the same time precisely because of dimension of the problem, we have now created some new facilities for use employment. namely supporting small medium size companies that can have trainingships or apprenticeships to young people who leave formal education. that's four months. and we are creating through the social fund also some kinds of
this mechanisms. but at the end, the way to have employment going back, coming back is precisely creating jobs and more competitive economy, innovation and that's what we are doing. >> rose: speaking of growth, what are the lessons learned about the balance between austerity and growth? >> the lessons are the following. unsustainable debt is bad. we cannot have growth artificial fueled by debt, public or private. >> rose: the central point is that in the end, it's growth that will bring it out. >> backly. >> rose: how do you make sure that you do that as early as possible. >> exactly. that's why mainly for the most vulnerable countries. we have the fiscal constant observation. because it's not to markets believe that those countries will be ready to come to prior surplus, to come back to gross. so it is extremely painful.
and the sacrifices made by people in greece, in portugal and spain, in ireland were really and are really admirable. but frankly i think there was no other way. now, it's impossible to know that some -- our policy is not just about fiscal observation. it is also namely about -- labor market reforms, internal market. so product reform, competitiveness, reduction of bureaucracy. innovation. so it's about -- also targeting investment namely for employment. so it's the policy, it's not just focused on fiscal cops valuation. even regarding fiscal conservation we recognized -- to do it as proposed to give more time for the fiscal adjustment. two years more to greece, to
portugal, to spain, to france. we have given more time because we're now looking not so much o the nominal deficit but the structural deficit taking into consideration the economic cycle. during that time also there was an evolution. i don't think today we can say that europe is dogmatic about the deficit. >> rose: there's the claim that you have constant reminders and certainly of recently is the efforts to deliver a banking union. you said it is first and foremost. and the urgent way to complete the union. where do you stand? >> we have now the agreement of all the members based on what we call the supervisory mechanism which means that the central bank will take debt responsibility, having the power to go and check the situation in any banking. but now the commission has put in july a proposal for the single resolution mechanism. i hope now members are ready to
accept it. indeed i consider this critically important. the banking union because it's a necessary condition for confidence to come completely to the financial sector in europe. in the beginning of next year, the european central bank will make a stop together at the european banking authority quality assets review. so in fact, we are doing now what we could not do before because we did not have the instrument that for instance in the united states you have. but now we have the instruments and i believe the will to make this banking union happen because for your area, it's critically important in terms of -- >> rose: speaking of the federal reserve here, what do you make of what chairman bernanke said recently that many people that there might be some reducing of the quantitative. >> we have welcomed this latest decisions of the federal reserve
and chairman bernanke. we believe it was good not only for americans but the global economy. i think it's right. >> rose: even though it was expected that, and it was a great debate within the federal reserve as it turns out and you well know. a close decision. but basically some people read it in this country, you know, as in a sense a moment of concern about the economical recovery. and perhaps there was more optimism than deserved. >> but i think it was considering the signals of the american economy and also the world economy, i think it was the right decision to take frankly. so we should not embark in too much optimism. we have to do it gradually. from that point of view we believe it was the right announcement to make. >> rose: what do you think what was happening in china when they look at different numbers than they've experienced. >> yes. the presence of china made it clear in a very i believe objective way that there are
some problems but they are able to control them. and that in fact, they are now ready to consider lower rate of growth but at the same time they are ready and they are starting to do it to change their system from a system basically grounded or supported by gross of exports to also the gross of internal demand. so there is some rebalancing taking place in china. they are going to do it as always they try to do in a progressive incremental way. but i believe they're aware of this and they, and they will be able to cope with it, which by the way i think is good for the global economy because the growth of the emerging economy is good for all of us. it's nice to see at this time to
develop the economies like europe who are no longer the focus of criticism. and also japan. but in fact, we all have an interest in the growths of the so-called emerging economies. that's why this idea of interdependence and managing the balances or imbalances. and also looking at the so-called spillover effect between different economies is important. interdependence is becoming much clearer before. it's one of the consequences of globalization. it was interesting to see the last incentive were the language is converging as well. >> rose: yes. >> before it was only us being the so-called west that was speaking about stricter reforms. now the emerging economies are also recognizing the need to make certain reforms. not only china or india, indonesia, brazil. they recognize that these are
also important. >> rose: because it's necessary for competence of out side people with their ability to have an effective rule of law. >> exactly. >> rose: and mechanisms for h >> certainly. i believe, i'm a strong believer in free economies and free societies. and i believe that if in longer term if i'm an investor, i prefer to put my money in countries that protected by rule of law, by sound legal practices and traditions. and that don't give us some kind of surprises. that is why i think that's an effort, that's an effort of the european or lets say american system. now other countries are also now even if sometimes they have doubts about democratic way as we see it. but they are interested in at least reinforcing the rule of law mechanism because they
understood this is critically important for investor's confidence. >> rose: so you told me a story today of recovery with a long way to go. and if you look at the globl economy and the dependence of markets and nations and the european commission, what could go wrong. >> many people ask me that question. i know charlie that you are an expert in these interviews. the first thing i want to say is the following. all of the doom sayers were wrong. of them sat here where i am now. he called sometimes this kind of intellectual blamer of pessimism. people want to show they are more intelligent because they are predicting worse case scenario. >> rose: you will get attention if you predict doom's day scenario. >> that's it. having said that i have to be
honest. there are risks and they are in europe. the most important down side risks are political. what die mean. i mean that precisely because the economic situation seems to improve, there is the risk of complacency. there is the risk that some governments say okay we don't need to go on with reforms. after all things are going well. and that's serious complacency. complacency nationally. we don't need to make all those reforms. they are not so popular and you may lose votes. that's a risk. or risks at the european level. after all why should we put together our competencies, why the european central bank can commission more powers we can't do ourself. that's a risk. another risk is the risk of -- because of course not entering in internal politics, i think it is important basically. and not to, that the change in government does not mean
fundamental change in policy. because we need this kind of reforms need to be sustained over tomorrow. we need some kind of staying power. and we know that in democracy and we all want to keep our democracies, some of these reforms are not popular in the short term. but they produce results in the medium term. so i see some down sides with the political side. having said this basically i am confident because the experience in europe has shown that we really need to make this kind of reforms. >> rose: thank you for coming. >> it was my pleasure. >> rose: thank you for joining us. we'll see you next time.