I see every day a speaker of the house who is increasinglyp losing her g the leadership of her conference. And hawkish Foreign Policy why not bring the troops home . You do not end a war by withdrawing from the battlefield. K many thes just Getting Started and could be the first republican madam speak or the next senator from wyoming. What does liz cheney say now . Firi line with Margaret Hoover is made possible by. Additional funding is provided by. Corporate funding is provided by. Representative liz cheney, welcome to firing line. Great to be here, mgaret. Thank you for having me. Its a delight. You came to prominence i think first in this country defending your dad, Vice President dick cheneys reputati in the context of the Obama Administration. S but you yourself hved in the state department in the Bush Administration. Ls you havefollowed your fathers footsteps to the house of representatives, where you have the same job that he had as conference chair. He yeah. Which makes you highestranking republican woman in history in the use of representatives. Youre also one of the partys strongest voices on Foreign Policy and national security. And itsot a theme that is new to you. I delighted in discovering that siyou wrote your college ton president ial war powers. Were going that far back . [ laughs ] tell me, as you look at the nationalsecurity position of thuUnited States today, do believe that were safer today than we were 2 1 2 years ago when President Trump was elected . Well, i think theres no atestion. I think if you loohe world rlat President Trump inherited, it was really a where president obama and those around blm had decided that the p in the world was america and that we eded to somehow limit america, and he took steps to tie americas nds, and i would say, for example, when you look at the Iranian Nuclear accord. That was an example situation where he really didve remendous benefits to the iranians, including cash, that they used further their terrorist aims and purposes, and so President Trump inherited a situation where a lot of rebuilding was necessary, and hes done th. So, people will hear you say that, and theyll also look ate adlines today, and the headlines today reveal a more bellicose posture that iran is taking towards theta uniteds. They reveal, frankly, a more belligerent posture than north korea is takinrds the United States. And the headlines, frankly, arent great when it comes to russia or, frankly, china. So how do you explain ple who feel that the world was safer under e Obama Administration, that President Trump has taken steps to make it more secure . We clearly had a situation during the obama years where you had cuts in our Defense Budget both because of the policy of the administration, also because of action in congress, and our adversaries, the russians and the chine, used that period of time to develop weapon systems, in some cases, that we cant defend against to make advances that we havent yet made. And President Trump n and he said, look, im not gonna go down the path anymore of cutting the Defense Budget in ways that are unsustainable and forcing our men and women in uniform tor e without the resources they need and of allowing our adversaries to contie to make advances. You look at Something Like whats going on in iran. You know, what you have in iran is a situation where they have been at war with us ever since 1978, and theyre in a situation where we know that they have continued to support terrorism around the world, continued their Ballistic Missile development, continued their Nuclear Weapons programs. People look at the joint the jcpoa, the Iran Nuclear Agreement and they say, oh, my gosh, somehow that made us safe and kept us stable, andt the ility is President Trump pulling out, what that agreement did was essentially give benefits to iran in a situation which they were not required, for example, to allow inspectors into any of their military facilities. This president is making clear that he is gonna stand up for our interests. Hes gonna stand up for amican security. And were not gonna be in a position where we are, frankly, appeasing our adversaries in the hope that their behavior will change because we know that wont keep us safe. So, were gonna get more to iran, but first id like to go back and talk about your role during the Bush Administration at the state department. You were the Deputy Assistant secretary for Near Eastern Affairs in the department of state, and one of the areas of focus was on democracy promotion as a tool for peacekeeping ound the world. And i wonder if you still support and believe that the promotion of democracy is an important tool for securing American Peace and support what the Bush Administration called the freedom agenda. I do. I do believeabsolutely, that those fundamental values of freedom and liberty on which we were founded are morally right and that those are values that we ought to do everything we can to hp to support and defend. And the critics of that, especially in the context of the last administration, will point towards ddle east and say that there are just some cultures that are culturally inhospitable to the ideas of democracy or the institutions that are prerequisites for democracy. What dyou say to that . I think thats racist. You know, i think if you look at its not just democracy. Democracy is a very importantn part of hueedom. Womens empowerment is a very important part of freedom, i believe, economic empowerment. What we know is that all of those elements of free societies are the ones that are successful and the ones that createum progress for beings, and i believe we have a fundamental oblition to help to not just defend those in the United States but our freedom and our success and our Economic Prosperity depends upon free societies around the world. Ur did you think its possible for democracy to fh in the middle east . I do. I mean, i think you have examples of that. Rt i mean, nly israel is an example of that. So i dont believe that somehow there are only people of certain races that want to be free. I think th that, as i said before, i think thats a racist way to look at it. Could demracy flourish in saudi arabia and in iran . I mean, i certainly think that people have the rightn all places and at all times to be free. And i think that when you look today at our relationship with saudi arabia, a lot of it it helps us to block iran. It helps us in terms of stability in the region. But i certainly think and when i was at the state Department Spent a lot of time talking to the saudis about how important it was that women not be treated as secondclass citizens. And i think those things still matter, and i think there are manyocieties, including the saudis, that have a long way to go in that regard. Ets talk about iran. You wrote a book with your dad in 2015, and one of the arguments you made about iran was that the next presidt, whoever he or she was, should immediately rescind the jcpoa, the nuclear deal with iran. Fastforwa to today. The president has recently decided to send an additional 1,000 troops to the region. Weve seen fiery flames on the sides of oil tankers, and iran has announced that its about to break the uranium stockpile, and its set by the nuclear deal. First of all, do y believe iran is behind the attacks on the oil tankers . Yes. Do you believe that the thing to do is to strike militaryia targets as reton . I think the president ought to be considering that and a mber of other options. When you look at what the iranians are doing, the sort of bottomline message of all of this, from the united and from our allies around the world, has to be that they will not be allowed to continue their support for terror. They wilnot be allowed to continue to pursue the kind of military action that results in attacks on commercial shipping in the straits of hormuz. That those kinds of behaviors, that kind of activity is not something that the civilized ptrld will stand by and ac and so the president , i think, has done the right thing. Look, what we want is to have maximum pressure, including through sanctions, as youve seen, so that thiranians recognize the behavior has got to stop. And i do think its very important for the iranians to know that we will defend thosepi sh lanes, that we will defend freedom of navigation, that we understand theind of activity theyre engaged in and that it wont be tolerated. On may 19th, President Trump tweeted, if iran wants to fight, that will be the end of iran. Never threaten the United States again. He is a risk of using bellicose rhetoric and not acting . Well, i think that President Trump is, in many, many ways, has donstrated his willingness to act. And i think that you see that both with respect to the nuclear deal. At you see ith respect to his decision, for example, when he was meeting with the North Koreans to say, you know what . Im gonna walk away from thebl i think hes been pretty clear in terms of the extent to whiche he is gonnnd this nation. So im i think actually the bigger risk for the United States comes if our adversaries miscalculate and they believe they can attack us without a response. What would a hot conflict withran look like . I guess i shy away from saying a hot conflict, a cold conflict. I thinyou have to deal with each individual situation as you find it, and the situation were in with iran today is onwhere they have american blood on their hands. T iranians have been engaged in what looks to me like a hot conflict with us for decades. Weve got to ensure that they emnt develop Nuclear Weapons. Weve taken the agt that basically said, youve got a pathway to Nuclear Weapons in a few years, was one, as ive said before, that i think was very irresponsible, and i think its good at weve stepped away from that. So, is the what should bei the straobjective of the United States visavis iran . Is it regime collapse . Is it regime change . Our strategic objective is tr get the behao change. Regime behavior change. I think the behavior needs to change. Iranians need to stop their support for terrorism. E anians need to stop their activities that result in the death of americans and our allies around the world. The iranians need to recognize that we wont be blackmailed into lifting the sanctions. General petraeus was on this program a couple of weeks ago, and he said the same thing. Regime behior change is what the strategic objective should be. But general petraeus wasnt sure that the objective is achievable based on what hes seen of the iranians. Based on what you know of the iranians, especially what yove written about in your book, that for 20 years, 40 years their ians have never negotiated in good faith is it possible to change that regimes behavior . Well, i think well find out. Ofd the security of the United States anur allies around the world depends upon the iranians not obtaining a Nuclear Weapon and recognizing that we wont continue to sort of stand by ile they support terrorism and their Ballistic Missile development and the other mali activities across the region. Lets go to north korea. North korea is, after 500plus days, back to testing Ballistic Missiles. I want to show you a clip of what President Trump has recently said. Do you think hes still building Nuclear Weapons . I dont know. I hope not. He promised me he wouldnt be. He promised me he wouldnt be testing. So you still trust him . Well, l i couldnt tell you that. It would be very insulting to him. But the answer is, yeah, i believe that he would like to do something. I believe he respects me. When he says that, when he says, he promised me he uldnt be testing, that he respects me, what is your reaction . Well, i think my reaction was to a separate part of what he said, which wasy basically, uld i tell you, george . The president is obviously engaged in an effort to get the North Koreans to stop developing their Nuclear Weapons, and so the last thing i would expect the president do would be to sort of lay all of the cards on the table for george stephanopoulos,ith all due respect to george stephanopoulos. Ys is there any part of it, though, when he that rings true to you, that President Trump actually means it when he says, well, he told me he wasnt gonna test, so im gonna take himt face value . Look, i think the president is negotiating. I think that its reallypo ant, with President Trump and with every president , to judge based on action. Th k at the end of the day thats what matters, and what President Trump has done is to say, im not gonna go down that path. So do you think that messaging is a decoy and actually the administration is pulling a hard line behind thees sc i think that President Trump, very wisely, is not sharing his negotiating strategy with george stephanopoulos. I mean, its not just george stephanopoulos, but what ,ould the administration then, to resolve the this question of a nuclearized north korea . Yeah, i think that its crucial that we understand that the North Koreans understand that we are demanding complete, verifiable, irreversible denuclearization of the peninsula. I think that its impofor the chinese to recognize that its not in their intere for a Nuclear North Korea to continue on the path that its on. That will cause destabilization in the region. I think its importa for the south koreans to know that the United States will stick by its commitments in the region. The japanese, the same. I think do need to be able to work with our allies in the region, all of whom recognize that north korea that is arm presents a grave danger to all of us. Is there anything they should be doing differently, the administration . Because i mean, what youve outlined is essentially what the Bush Administration tried to do with the sixparty talks, and yet we still are in this position where kim jongun is testing missiles again. I think that the difference is not being so anxious to get a deal that we accept a deal that esnt actually accomplish that goal. And i do think thats what happenedoo often. And i think thats where the president was right to say to the north koans, i am walking away. To walk away. Really, the most importantou lesson, ifook at the history here, is how much damage it does when the North Koreans convince the United States and the rest of our allies to accept a deal that accomplishes less than that, and then they get the benefits and they get the concessions, but they havent actually deliver on what we need to make us safe. I want to move on to russia. And a t has been made about President Trump and Vladimir Putin and the words they have foeach other. But id like to back up to the tievious administration because there was wide csm of the Obama Administration from many, including you, about the Obama Administrations russian reset policy. Yeah. So, i think that the Obama Administration and cretary clinton at the helm at the state department really sort of fell into this idea that if we somehow extended a hand, that that would fundamentally change the course of that country and of that regime. And i think the problem is that Vladimir Putin hes kgb. Vladimir putin is what he is, and he is running that nation with an effort to try to rebuild the russian empire hes been quoted saying that one of the worst tragedies of the 20th century was the fact that the soviet union crumbled. It and so, i thin very important for us to recognize they very clearly are adversaries. So, against that backdrop of president putins aspiration to reassemble russia as a majorce geopolitical fdo you think about what would happen if t russed to mimic the actions of the invasion of crimea and ukraine bh a nato ally, like estonia, and what would you support the administration doing in that case . Absolutely we invoke article 5. Nato is the singlemost successful military alliance in the history of mankind. Td it is an alliance that depends very much russians recognizing that we willat all times, come to th aid of nato members if theyre attacked i think that its important for to make sure that the russians understand that message so they dont make a miscalculation. In do you that there is a risk that they might not understand that because of some of the softer rhetoric that hasr come from thident towards russia and towards president p