Supporting obamas election, 10 years of intensity, working on some of the most intractable and challenging problems, there is a real part of me that is looking forward to getting a rest. Charlie close to power, the National Security advisor, person who presents the options to the president. Deal ofheres a great learned. Let me talk about what i learned about the role of National Security advisor. First and foremost, its my job to ensure that the deal of learned. Advice, analysis, recommendations provided to the president of the United States are well thought fact, andased in fairly reflect the opinions and recommendations of the level National Security. Youlie conflicts, understand there is a conflict in recommendation which i still often have. Andn it happens enough its vitally important that my colleagues at the principals cane and the president trust that i am not putting a filter on that or any spin, whatever is the ok view of the president s cabinet officials is fully and fairly represented to him. Charlie what were your impressions of Michael Flynn . Susan i cant say that i know him well. We have spent a number of hours together in our meetings, whereas i have been trying to make hard that we are make sure we are giving him the information he needs. Charlie you have some impression of his security, his intellect, his values and judgments . Susan its not appropriate for me to characterize my successor. Our meetings have been constructive. And, i think we are doing the business we were meant to do of affecting this handoff. From the National SecurityCouncils Point of view, we have been working since the beginning of the year, 2016, to prepare for this transition. Obviously without knowing to whom we would be handing off. I personally reviewed over 100 transition memos to general flynn and those on his team. In addition to that, at the lower levels, i prepared another 175 pieces of paper. Theres a huge volume of material that we have provided to them for their consumption, and on top of that, we sat down for many hours to talk through the challenges, to be responsive to their questions and concerns. Charlie you also know well what the president elect has been saying, whether nato is isolete, whether nato to with draw sanctions, if to with draw sanctions, if the russians will give him something. What indication does that give you about where the Trump Administration is going . Susan like most American Consumers of the news, we are all watching and listening and trying to figure out what this portends. In a number of areas quite frankly, weve heard different messages. Nominees, fromt the president elect himself at different times on different topics. I think we need to wait and see. Charlie what lessons do you want to impart to Michael Flynn . Susan necessity in running a transparent and honest process and serving the president elect, soon to be president , with the integrity and the fairness that this position requires. Secondly, it is essential to be a consumer of substance. There are no shortcuts in this business. Foreven if you are vehicle communication is a shortcut, substantive policy work that comes behind it has to be serious and rigorous. Ive also tried to impart the quality of the staff we are handing off to, the new team. The National Council that Security Council staff, career experts from around the different agencies that have been detailed for the white house, they are extremely knowledgeable, experienced, and effective. And ive been very proud to lead as we have tried to ready the next administration for the challenges they will face. I hope they will trust in the wisdom and experience of the foriegn service and military. Charlie what is your biggest nightmare . What has kept you up late . Choose whatever idea expresses the sense that as you sit here with me, this has worried me the most. Susan i have a number of worries. I wish i had one. This is a world where the nature of the threats is very diverse and the challenges are multiple. Let me list a few. I think anybody in my position would worry about a catastrophic attack on the homeland or on american personnel abroad. That is nightmare number one. And particularly, if it were god for bid to be combined with some sort of weapons of mass destruction, biological weapon, especially wmd, terrorism. , i think we need to be very concerned about the potential, deliberate or inadvertent, for russia to miscalculate and provoke a conflict in the european theater. Because russias actions have been increasingly aggressive, whether it is surveilling our diplomatic personnel and harassing them, making very unsafe approaches on air, and i in the whatutinsunclear p intentions are, especially after the annexation of crimea and the illegal occupation of ukraine, and the atrocities he has been party to in syria. I worry about russia. Probable but catastrophic scenarios, pandemic flu, is a major concern. North korea continuing to advance and perfect its Nuclear Missile program. Or even an unforeseen conflict between india and pakistan. Thatnuclear, armed nations are constantly skirmishing in kashmir. Russia. We talked about Latimer Putin said on tuesday he accused the outgoing u. S. Administration of trying to undermine president elect trump by spreading false allegations. He described it as part of an effort by president obama, he said the dossier alleging trumps sexual activities at a moscow hotel was fake and he charged as being worse than prostitution. Hes talking about your administration. Vladimir putin saying has told more lies than i can count. Whether about syria, ukraine, or about his role in any engineering of our elections. I dont take anything he says as gospel truth. In this case, its completely dishonest and counterfactual. President obama had no knowledge of, no role in this alleged and obviously, it is the consensus, high confidence of our collective 17 intelligence agencies that Vladimir Putin made a deliberate attempt to interfere with our elections. Thats the fact. Interfere with our election and make sure that donald trump was elected . Susan i dont think its possible to say make sure. By denigrating secretary Clinton Charlie so putin wanted to do whatever he could to benefit the election or add to or contribute to. Susan that is what our Intelligence Community has has charlie this goes to the heart of the democratic process. Have we retaliated in kind . Have we done something to putin, either facetoface or in china, that putin says, are not going to do that again because they will susan we have retaliated, and we have responded in a serious fashion. We said from the outset we will respond in a manner and time of our choosing, and all of it may be evident to the American People. It has begun. A significant element of it was announced at the end of last month, when the president the Russian Military intelligence and other russian intelligence agencies and their leadership for their direct role in trying to involve themselves in our election. He also expelled 35 russian intelligence officials, close down two very facilities they operated in the United States, put out in great detail the forensics that showed how russia conducted these attacks, and a variety of significant steps. Now, you mentioned china. Back in early september, as we were beginning to see indications of this, the president did convey a very forceful message to president putin. Its our assessment that as this circumstance involved and became having greater confidence in conclusions, as you know, the Intelligence Community and fbi, made it clear to the American People on october 7 that russia was playing a nefarious role at the highest level designed to interfere with our elections. The fact of the matter is that russias behavior, as bad as it was, and it was significant, could have been worse. And might have been worse, i did not been for the fact that they understood charlie have a stopped . Susan doing what . Charlie hacking. Susan no. Russia and other state and nonstate actors will continue to hack. Election d in the this went beyond intelligence beyond hacking for commercial gain. This was hacking to acquire information and then to use it to influence the election. Charlie Samantha Power made a speech in which she said, this demonstrates how committed a country russia is to breaking rules and tearing down the existing world order. She cited ukraine, crimea, and syria. Thats interesting. Breaking the rules and tearing down the existing world order. Is that what Vladimir Putin wants to do . Susan i dont know that that is an accurate reflection of his intent. Hes trying to bend the rules of the world order. I think he is certainly trying to manipulate the rules to his benefit. His invasion of ukraine, annexation of crimea, was a blatant violation of International Rules. He did so to advantage his own interests. At the same time as hes doing that, he purports to Uphold International Law by virtue of his role as a member of the Security Council. Theres a duality there. When its convenient for russia, in the present, they are violating International Rules to cement their appropriate points to syria. As another example. In other instances, it tries to wag its finger and beauty champion of the socalled International Rules and norms. Is a dishonest game, a manipulative one. Its all about serving what he believes to be his interests. Charlie Vladimir Putin has said the u. S. Russia relationship is as bad as hes ever seen it. Susan you and i are old enough to remember the cold war. I think we have a little bit of perspective, even in the midst of what is a difficult period in our relationship, theres no doubt. I would not be prepared to characterize it that way. Even as we have reached very difficult times i virtue of what has happened with respect to our election and ukraine and syria, there are still other areas where the u. S. And russia on a daily basis are working together, and are continuing to find areas where our interests coincide, for example implementation of the iran nuclear deal. Charlie john kerry said to me last week they were a great help to getting that deal done. Susan that is true. And thats where their interests and hours coincide. We negotiated and we are both still adhering to the new start treaty to reduce our nuclear arsenals. There are areas where our interests do converge and where we are able to cooperate. There are increasingly a number of areas where they diverge. Charlie donald trump has said hes prepared to consider reducing the sanctions, if there is an action on the part of Vladimir Putin and russia suggesting something within a nuclear treaty. Can you imagine circumstances in which it would be appropriate to reduce the sanctions that have been posed by your administration . Susan we have different sanctions for different purposes. We have sanctions on russia for their annexation of crimea and ukraine. For those we have said as long as they are holding on to crimea, certain sanctions will remain in effect. When it comes to ukraine, if russia were to fulfill its commitment and fully implement and ourk agreement, we European Partners have indicated for a long time that sanctions could be pulled down for their involvement in ukraine. We have a separate set of sanctions that relate to some of their abuses internally, human rights. Thatve other sanctions now relate to their involvement in the election. I think for this latter group of human rights related and election related, the bar ought to be very high for reducing sanctions because the damage has been enduring. Charlie talking about taking a little new look at the one china policy. Do you think thats a wise thing to do . Susan i dont. The one china policy has served the United States, taiwan and china well. It has been a foundational elements of the u. S. China relationship since normalization back in 1979. We are a friend and partner of taiwan, adhered to the taiwan relations act, we provide defense equipment and support to taiwan. That has served taiwan and the United States well. To abrogate the one china policy or bring it into ancillary issue iions or trade think would be a grave mistake and i think we will find that china, with whom we have managed to forge a far more pragmatic and effective relationship where we cooperate in a far wider range of areas than ever before, whether its Climate Change or peacekeeping or Global Health, nonproliferation, and manage our differences and competition within the economic sphere or on the South China Sea in a constructive fashion to avoid conflict, that whole balance could be upset in a very devastating way. Charlie not only that, north korea. Susan china for better or for worse is an indispensable player when it comes to north korea. Our Global Economy is such that the u. S. And chinas economies are intimately linked. They hold a high proportion of our debt. There are many ways in which we andt afford to play fast loose with what is the most consequential bilateral relationship on the planet. Susan charlie people see xi jinping at davos giving a major speech. The first time the president of china has been there. Saying, globalization is good. When the whole populist revolution is about globalism is bad. Hes over there saying, we believe in world market, we believe we have to monitor what happens with globalization. Its almost like china is saying, we are the champion of mobilization. Not the United States. Hasn the United States been the biggest beneficiary of globalization and free trade and open markets. We enforced democratic rule in many places. Raise living standards. Exports are a huge basis of our economy. I think we would be very remiss the mantled ceded of leadership on free trade and economic openness to china. Thats why the president has been so committed to the transpacific partnership. Which he did not get past. Passed. Susan negotiating which he didt past. It, the deal, and getting trade promotion authority, which we did, to enable it to be passed, and then unfortunately in the latter months of the year, the leadership in Congress Make clear they would not pick it up. Charlie tell me where you see the possibilities of the chinese relationship. There much more aggressive in the South China Sea. Even putting building of those islands, with some military equipment and defensive equipment. Are building up their navy to be an outreach of their global power. A continent they know a lot about, they have a presence in africa. China is the most consequential bilateral relationship in the world. I have spent more time traveling as National Security adviser than to any other country. Ive personally been engaged very directly with my chinese counterparts, and met myself with xi jinping on a number of occasions to help shepherd this complex relationship. It now stands the entirety of the u. S. Government, everything from wildlife trafficking to Public Health in africa, to our defense relationship. Its complicated, its intense, its got economic and security and we need tot, recognize the when the united solve and china can problems together, thats beneficial for both countries and the world. We saw that most are medically in the climate sphere solve problems together, thats beneficial for both countries and the where the Paris Agreement was forged. When the United States and china are a confrontation, whether in the economic sphere or security realm, its quite dangerous, and we have to be quite clear to stand up for what we believe in, and thats freedom of navigation, freedom of overflight. They have been adding to their presence. Chinas obviously the largest player in that regard. And weve insisted on, dont take a view on whose claims are legitimate under international law, is that we are the United States and our commercial vessels, our military vessels, will operate where we need to. We will defend our allies, defend the International Rules and norms, and weve done that. China doesnt like it, and there is potential for disagreements in this realm to escalate. For now, we have manage them, and i think manage them responsibly. I will give you another area where we have major differences we have managed to mitigate the conflict and turn down the temperature. That is in the cyber realm. China has been very aggressive over many years, particularly in stealcyber tools to economic assets. Charlie the argument also being made by the United States, that the government of china was benefiting. Susan they are stealing our stuff. Charlie so they would have an advantage in the world market. Made a very strong argument. Did they stop . Susan they have much reduced it. It happened because in september 2015, i apologize, on the eve of president xi jinpings state visit to the United States, following my visit to china in august, we made very clear that unless it was stopped and we reached an understanding about what the rules of the road were going to not onlyhey foreswore deed, commercial espionage using ciber, that we were going to impose sanctions beca