From our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. Charlie you have held as many if you have held few have held as many highlevel positions in the Foreign Service as bill burns. He was deputy secretary of state from 2011 to 2014. Prior to that, he was undersecretary of Political Affairs and was u. S. Ambassador to both russia and jordan. He holds the highest rank of the Foreign Service of career ambassador and is the second serving diplomat in history to become deputy secretary. He retired last year and is president of the Carnegie Endowment for international peace. I am pleased to have him at this table for the first time. It is great to have you. Based on everything you know and as you see the world today, tell me what the threats are that you consider the most serious and immediate. Bill isil gets a lot of attention and is an important challenge for the united date and our Coalition Partners to focus on. There are a lot with aggression in the ukraine and the media challenge. There are a lot of overarching challenges. Climate change and what that can mean as a Genuine National security problem overtime. Over time. Cyber issues. Developing rules of the road not just in commerce but in National Security for dealing with that whole set of issues. And we are reminded of that with the of bowl the crisis most ebola crisis most recently. That is an area where there has been a great deal of progress over the last two administrations. President bush 43 launched and president obama has continued, making a huge difference in the lives of people in africa and around the world. Charlie is the middle east the highest or does it have a special place for you . Bill its a part of the world you never have the luxury of neglecting or ignoring. And i think, if you look at the challenge of disorder in the world, the old order we became accustomed to, a bunch of that is crumbling in the middle east today. You have the phenomenon of failed or failing states, out of which extremist groups like i sil emerge. Charlie lets talk about that. The failed states are possibly syria, libya, yemen they are the most dangerous and that can happen. If you are a failed state, you have possibilities of al qaeda or someone like that finding refuge and taking Power Sources well. Bill it is a region that is is is uncertain. Part of the challenge is puncturing of their image of success. There is not a place as uncertain as the middle east. Stopping them stopping al qaeda , it is important to demonstrate and expose the fact that they cannot succeed in governing in those areas of that they do control. It is like, kind of the eighth century playbook used by the leadership, delivering things the people want. People can find purpose and economic and political opportunities through other kinds of models. You need to show them these models. In iraq, it means appealing to the sunni Arab Community so they feel a sense of inclusion. And the Iraqi Government something they havent felt in recent years. And then its working with important partners whether it is jordan or tunisia, to develop compromise and help them succeed. Charlie another success story. Bill it is a grim terrain right now but its a reason to invest in those kind of aces and help desk places those kind of places and help them to succeed. Charlie the immediate threat of isis, whatever term we like to use, to stop their expansion into new territory. Bill and in iraq, there is clearly a strategy for beginning to first stop, and i think the momentum has been stopped. It is a huge challenge. There is bound to be a difficult struggle, but i think it is achievable. Charlie they will do it when they have the iraqi army on the ground . Bill it is a reasonable approach, i think. It will take time to rebuild and retrain the iraqi military. I am confident that it is possible to roll back those gains. That is the security dimension of the challenge, which is extremely important. But there is a political dimension. It involves giving sunni arabs more of a sense of participation in the political system. Charlie but we had a change of Prime Ministers, so that makes a difference. Bill i think it has. Large parts of the nonshia population i think the government is making a serious effort to be more inclusive. It will be absolutely essential. If there is to be enduring success against isis. Charlie i had the egyptian president here and it seemed, if all else fails, we have to stop isis and we should be prepared to provide troops in that effort. Our Coalition Partners prepared to do that because isis is that kind of emergency . Bill once they are trained and equipped, there is the potential to roll back. Syria is a much bigger challenge. I think it will be important to look to other Coalition Partners as well as turkey to see what kind of contributions they can make overtime. Charlie will they be prepared to do it . Bill i think they recognize the threat. It is an encouraging sign and i think it will require that kind of sustained coalition to succeed. Charlie it comes down to the ground troops, doesnt it . And in iraq, you have the iraqi army. I understood susan rice, she was here recently, but everyone knows now because of the language she used but it seemed the top priority in syria has to be isil. Then they can go back to whatever considerations they have for the government. Bill i think it is the immediate threat and the priority. But it is difficult to disentangle the two. It is a magnet for, the regime for foreign fighters and others who flocked to isil. It is difficult to see a more stable future unless you have a transition of leadership in damascus as well. Charlie it is diplomatic. Bill i think ultimately there will have to be leverage on the ground to produce the circumstances in which you might be able to make progress diplomatically. Charlie meaning what . Bill meaning that the regime will my be able to sustain itself the way it is right now. Whether the principal backers can see more clearly if they want to see a stable syria, a syria that is not a platform for all sorts of extremist groups. It you have to see progress towards that kind of transition. Charlie ok, let me understand that. You really are as good a diplomat as we can find. What you have to do is you have to meet the challenge and support moderate ranks and whatever you can do to make them the primary focus of your attention. And you have to deal with it in a diplomatic way. Are the russians and the iranians prepared to do that . And what do you have to do to encourage them to do that. Bill it is a good question and i am not sure at this point is either one can play that role. Without a transition for leadership, i think that syria will remain explosive. If you look at russia and their internal challenges, the threat of islamic extremists, they are ponderable and a lot of respects, so they should have an interest in this. But it is not evident right now that they share that feeling. Charlie with the, what do you think that his intention is with syria . Bill i dont think he has any sentimental attachment to us. I dont think he has been convinced yet. Charlie i think there was a point in time where he might lose, would russia have accepted him at that point . Bill there was a point in the winter of 2012 or 2013 where the russians were a little bit nervous about the future. The balance on the ground started to shift against the regime. But then, they intervened in the serious way. And that kind of moment passed. I think we can recreate it in the future. The human suffering in syria is so horrific. Half of the population is displaced. A huge challenge of reconstruction whenever that day comes. The sooner you have that traditional leadership, the better it will be. Charlie is it a battle of supremacy in the region . What is it . Bill i think it is competition with iran. I think with the assad regime on the outside, i think he felt betrayed. That entered into it as well. It is a combination of factors right now, but the animus and the determination is quite clear. Charlie you have met with the iranians, tummy what you think about them and their intent, the nature of their country and the possibility for regime change. All of that. Bill when you look at the challenge of this regime not so much hamas. But first and the point of view of american policy, when you look at iran or the nuclear issue, you have to embed it in a strategy and be clear about the fact that it threatens us and our friends in the region. But within that strategy, its extremely important to prevent the iranians to acquire the from acquiring a Nuclear Weapon because it would multiply exponentially any of the dangers mentioned in the region. I have been convinced that the best of the available alternatives is through a strong and negotiated settlement. I think it is possible to reach that kind of a settlement, but by no means a sure thing. Charlie why do you think its possible . Bill because we build up a fair built up a fair amount of leverage over the time. They have taken its toll on the iranian economy. I think in part we have demonstrated alongside the leverage a willingness to engage seriously, to work out with our partners, a settlement that would allow the iranians to have a Civil Nuclear program under sharp constraints. I think it is possible to achieve that kind of a settlement. Charlie turn it around. If you were iranian, other than your reputation in the world, why should they do it . Because they dont believe, i assume that they do not have a sophisticated sense that if we get weapons or cause for proliferation in the region, its not good for us. So we will forgo our effort. Bill it is hard to generalize. The Iranian Regime has lots of points of view. They have some hardliners that have a very suspicious view of these negotiations as well. Charlie who represents the hardliners . Bill a lot of people around the Supreme Leader. Charlie what about him . Bill i think he has always been suspicious and skeptical of negotiations. Suspicious of american motives. I think we helped demonstrate in the interim agreement that both sides can comply and deliver on the commitments. That has created a pretty Solid Foundation for the much more difficult discussions right now. There is going to have to be an understanding of a Long Duration with a clear sense of what the consequences are if there are violations. There are restrictions. Charlie can sanctions be snapped back . Bill it is possible. I think when there is a reasonable length of time. If iranian leadership ever tried to break out, there would be time to suppress that. If you have an iranian leadership that tries to do that, it is possible to constrain, in a very systematic way, irans program. And to deter it from seeking out seeking to break out of that program. It is a tall order. The president said it is probably less than 5050 and can be accomplished. Charlie i asked if this would be the crowning achievement, to susan rice, do you think it could be . Bill if the president along with our International Partners could produce the kind of strong agreements that he has outlined and i have tried to describe, i think it would be a significant achievement. It has to be embedded in a wider strategy for dealing with other aspects of iranian behavior. They still coldblooded late threaten our interest. We will push back against that and reassure our friends and partners in the region. Trying to produce that strong negotiated thing is best of our available alternatives. Charlie what is your understanding about the multiyear, perhaps 12 years, the terms of that they would be restricted by a number of centrifuges to go forward . How would that work . Bill well it is a process that is still being negotiated. Its important to produces longer duration as possible. A long time in which the rainy the iranian Nuclear Program was under Sharp International constraints and you have intrusive verification and isms to ensure against any kind of a breakout. Charlie what is the point of 12 years rather than bill the longer the better, in many respects. Charlie its a number they would accept, i assume. Bill and they have talked about double digits for some time. I think its a sensible starting point. What i think what you want to do is prolong that as long as you reasonably can. And ensure that that breakout is preserved over that time. Charlie if you are trying to do if they are trying to do something in secret, they could not achieve it . Bill the interim agreement was through 2013 and we managed to introduce some new verification inspection measures. Those are really important. A comprehensive agreement would have to build on that much more ambitiously. There is no perfect guarantee. But i think having those kind of intrusive transparency measures is going to be absolutely crucial. Charlie what would happen if there was an attack on their facilities . What would be the consequences of that . Would it delay their Nuclear Effort . Will it lead to some kind of action against people in the region and perhaps here . Bill all of the above. Experts have looked at this issue and concluded if you took military action, you could certainly set it back by two or three years, whatever length of time people conclude. But, you would probably also drive the program underground. It would probably reinforce or accelerate that position. And depending on the circumstance, you could also see a crumbling of what has then built up, the international coalition. Those with the economic pressure and sanctions. This with the time when you have no shortage of instability in the region already. There could come a time if we are not able to reach this kind of agreement under lots of different circumstances. When you look at the alternatives, the best of the available alternatives is clearly, in my view, the strong negotiated agreement. Charlie and you think they would be prepared to do that at some point . And they are certainly prepared to make a rational choice . Bill i think it is possible. Its not a certainty. There are gaps that need to be bridged between here and there. But i think it is possible and well worth the effort. Charlie what do we know about the ayatollah . Bill not a lot, is the honest answer. He is someone that has always been suspicious of the United States and built his worldview around animus towards the United States. It is difficult to consider a negotiated solution to the Nuclear Challenge when you have that kind of suspicion. Charlie does his opinion matter . Bill i think it does. I think the fact that he was elected president and was able to bring an a foreign minister that i believe is committed from the point of view of iranian interest to work on the agreement, i think it suggest that there is some space there on the iranian side. Charlie do you think they chose him because they wanted somebody who could speak the language communicate in that way. To presume he was a favorite of the Supreme Leader although i heard he was a he had some connection to the Supreme Leader. Under the ahmadinejad regime. Bill he is a skillful diplomat. They are very tough, what they are interested in, they want the best possible deal. And whether we can bridge that gap, i honestly dont know. As i said, i think it is worth testing because the alternatives have much bigger ones. Charlie what is the hardest thing to overcome and get it done . Bill there are a number of issues and its hard to disentangle. Probably the immediate lifting of sanctions on the front end and our point of view. You want to have a phased easing of sanctions over time. That is in return for performance. It is an important challenge to overcome during negotiations. The whole issue of enrichment capacity and how to get to that one year breakout, that we have talked about. It has to be negotiated in a very painstaking way to make sure that the rest of the international community, and we, we ensure that they are not any activities going on. It is compensated. Complicated. But it gives you hope that you can reach a conclusion. Charlie tell me about the rivalry between saudi arabia and iran. Obviously, two different branches of islam. Two powers. One has cultural heritage. And they are essentially enemies. Competitors, i believe. Bill there is a sunni and shia dimension and a persian and arab dimension that adds layers of complication. Charlie but its a competition to have the most influence in the region . Bill i think thats right. I think there has been a wider influence on hegemony in the region. I think that rivalry will be in that region for some time to come. However, the issue of the nuclear question is resolved. Charlie is there difference in terms of where the iranians are or is it safely how they measure the threat to them . Bill in terms of the analysis i think that over the last few years, there have been very intense consultations have gone on and my impression has been that there is a fair amount of common understanding of where the Iranian Program is. There is a difference of view and the Prime Minister has been very clear about this in public about what constitutes an acceptable threshold. I think the Prime Minister has made clear, Prime Minister netanyahu that any Enrichment Program at all is threatening. Charlie the imminent danger the potential danger. The commission has not made its decision. Bill when i left, that was certainly the analysis of the situation. Charlie they want to get there as fast as possible. Bill it could be. The only policy, is that they might make that decision. Charlie and what you want to do is restrain the ability and deter them. You have spoken with iranians, and you have Nuclear Weapons. Israel has Nuclear Weapons. They are not in the agreement. You are. Bill i think its an argument of selfinterest. Because ultimately, with any government in all the years i have been a diplomat, thats what y