Ian the first thing i thought of when i heard it was the fact that when sessions was having these meetings with kids react , but itent meetings turns out thats where they are conducting business, thats what it sounds like. Given the extraordinary focus and attention everything involving putin and trump and he has been meeting with a lot of people not tillerson, the translators, the Russian Foreign , it lastsand putin over two hours, we dont have a clear read out on what happened, and on top of that we have in our that evening that no one has heard of. We clearly know that trump does not care what the media has to say about his desire to have a close personal relationship with the russian president and what drives it. Charlie you suggest it is his best oneonone relationship. Ian it is clearly his best arsenal relationship. Im personal relationship. I will also say never in my life major seen two made companies with a constellation of National Interest that are dissonant while the two leaders seem to be doing Everything Possible to make nice. That is what people dont understand. The u. S. Russia relationship is under as its been since obama. Charlie Vladimir Putin has said so. Ian and the entire foreignpolicy establishment in the u. S. Has also said so. Everyone says trump is flipflopping on china, he says they are an enemy, flipflops on nato, all these things, yet onrushing he is the consistent. I want to find a way to work more closely. Charlie is it because he has a grand strategy or Something Else . Ian i was discussing this with Richard Haass on the council of Foreign Relations today. We are both a little flummoxed. You can definitely say trump likes the strawman. He likes strong man. He likes erdogan in turkey, he hees xi jinping in china, likes people who get things done. You definitely can say about trump that he also is very transactional, so hes willing to put his chips in to see if you can get something done and then see how they fall. That was with obama, when he first met obama in the oval office, and with xi jinping. Also the fact that obamas relationship with putin was damaged in the end, so theres an opportunity. But if you put those things together, they dont add up to where trump is with putin right now. They dont add up charlie so what is missing when you say it doesnt add up . Somei think there is strategy. The explanation i think we will learn either through weeks or through similar investigation. Lying and covering up too much stuff. I have not believed that there has been direct collusion between putin and trump. Charlie you have not. Are you more open to the idea of perhaps . It also depends on how you define collusion. Ian true. First, because it is hard for me to imagine that putin plus kremlin really would have believed they could have swung the election for trump. You have to believe these guys are as cynical as can be. They believe the american system is as brutal and damaged as the russian system. As the way they see all politics. Its about cash. Follow the money. Thats the way you figure politics in russia. From their perspective, hillary was going to win because the establishment was going to ensure a win. I think the russians were probably more surprised than the americans that trump actually won. I believe that. But its hard for me to imagine but you have no doubt that they hacked and attempted to influence the election one way or the other. Ian no doubt whatsoever. Charlie but where you cant go yet is a collusion between the president of russia and his government and his intelligence operatives, and members of the trump team providing them something which would have clearly been beyond the pale. Ian and that they would have gotten something in return, some commitment of meaningful offers. Charlie or they wanted to do it because they thought they had some leverage on the president , and if he was elected, they would have an advantage. Ian but it clearly seems there were many people around trump, some quite highlevel, that were compromised by the russians. Charlie compromised in what way . You mean Michael Flynn . Michael flynn, Paul Manafort, the amount of money supporting getting 17 million in 1 charlie what about. Meant for it compromised by the russians rather than the ukrainians . Ian the Ukrainian Party he was supporting with the kremlin supported party. Where did he go when he was forced out . To moscow. Given the amount of attention this investigation is getting, withumber of lawyers serious capability on the financial and anticorruption type, they clearly believe these connections are meaningful. I expect we will learn something. Whether that goes directly to the president , i dont have any view. Look atpoint, we cant all of this happening and say it is just smoke. It doesnt make sense. The good thing about our system is we will find out what it is. You just had a significant victory in mosul. We had a kind of encirclement over raqqa. The caliphate is being shrunk. Already in iraq, thats one of the biggest issues there is, what is next . Leastets start with at some positives, which is that osulle can now go back to m and start to rebuild. Charlie it is one of the most distracted places destructive places. It has been ripped apart. Ian having said that, these people want to be in their homes, and humanitarian aid from the u. S. And others will be forthcoming. Given that is one of the things that seriously was destabilizing jordan, this crush of migrants, having an opportunity for them to return is a positive thing. Also the fact that the caliphate was established by isis. They had land, they had a that did raise the money and get people to want to join isis. That didnt make it more plausible you would become a lone wolf in support of this organization. I think there are people now that arent going to die because isis has been, is being destroyed, in its capital. Charlie but isis arose after the iraq war, from remnants of al qaeda that were there because, in fact, the sunni didnt feel like they were getting a fair break. Therefore, there was a whole portion of iraq not willing to oppose them because of the bad deal from the baghdad government. Whats to say that wont happen again . It was the isis, but somebody else . Ian it is happening again. It is hard to imagine everyone that was the nicest has either in isis has either flat or is killed or imprisoned. There are still villages that need to be cleaned up. They will still perpetually violence. They are operating in southeast asia. They are operating in yemen and other countries. I dont for a second believe we are out of and forrisis isis. And for when you destroy saddam hussein, and alloy the party the infrastructure, both military and civil and political around the leadership in iraq, and now the shia and iran are going to be much more in charge of everything but the kurdish region. Charlie i want to stay with the kurds and then go back to another point. With respect to the kurds, is there going to be an independent kurdish state . Ian i think there will in iraq. They have a referendum coming up. I think they are willing to wait because they know they have to, but they want a marker that says we are, in favor, we have voted. The turks cannot say they want charlie but they are less resistant . Ian i think they are, because they have a state that some of the turks have been able to do business with. You have satisfied a level of kurdish independence without , as well asng kurdish separatism in turkey the problem is that. President already one can never say this publicly because of his challenges with the kurds in southeast anatolia. Charlie groups he considers revolutionary terrorism. Yes. So you have that issue, and the iran issue, who will also have bigger problems with the idea of kurdish independence in iraq, that the iranians have more influence over. Overtime, i dont think either of those things can stop what influence iraq . Ran have he other ian ultimately, the iranians are spending more money, calling more shots, developing more infrastructure. They have the direct religious influence and ties with the shia population there. They will do Everything Possible to ensure theres never again going to be a war. Charlie how much influence do they have over bashar alassad, because of the influence over hezbollah . Ian and because the iranians have military capabilities on the ground in syria, too. Charlie but mainly hezbollah. Ian yes. But the answer is, a lot. There had in incidents and political negotiations with the russians have been frustrated. The russians and iranians are working closely right now on syria, and they are sharing military bases. Keep in mind the russians supported u. S. Sanctions against iran. Charlie they supported the nuclear deal. Ian absolutely. I dont feel like the russians i feel like they had a longterm Strategic Alignment necessarily charlie when you look at this deal that took place when the president went to riyadh, and said, im joiningnecessarily with arab countries in an effort to isolate iran in the battle for supremacy in the gulf region, and then later you have this deal which the saudis and amber rudd launch emirates launch a huge deal against the qataris. Whats that about . Ian i think there are a couple of things at play here. The first, lets not forget that we now have a new Crown Printing in saudibia prince arabia. Cable glands strong. He wants to prove himself. Has a lot of opportunity among leading princes. That succession battle is through. Another prince, running internal security forces, many believe hes next on the chopping block. If you are trying to consolidate power, and the big thing that prince salman has done in the region under his authority when he was running defense was this very illfated war in yemen. Now hes leading the charge with a bunch of countries in the region and more broadly against qatar. He put these demands in place on the qataris that clearly were not meant to create a negotiation or a deal. Isolate, andnt to force capitulation, or basically unwind the gulf cooperation council. Hink there was a domestic factors that play. Anyone who is trying to calm the situation, it is difficult. Charlie when you talk to the saudis or mri emirates, they think it is a severe effort by in order to support groups within their own countries that were intent of overthrowing their government. Thats what they say. Ian thats what they believe. The first component is the saudi component. The second is the fact that antiiran,and said antiiran. No matter what tillerson or others would have said, suddenly crown prince salman things, i have an opportunity. The third is what you said. This is not the first time that the saudis and others have had problems with qatar. It looks like they actually leaked a document, from before, 2014, when there was an agreement the qataris were going to stop supporting the brotherhood and be more cautious and temperate in what they used al jazeera for. The contents of that secret deal were made public, and his that it wasaudis correct, which means they leaked it, probably. These countries have had Serious Problems with qatar. Charlie so why does qatar do it . Because they want to play above their weight . They also do it because they have a lot of money. They feel it we are the junior party here. Ian partner in the region. Thats right. Thats been the case very long time. They feel like balancing and hedging between the iranians and other charlie and the gulf countries at the gcc also feel like al jazeera had been on the one hand stirring up things against their own autocratic power. Ian correct. With the exception of al jazeeras treatment of qatar itself, pretty much Everything Else in the region, if they see Something Else in the region to criticize, they can. Have seen the Muslim Brotherhood as the future of the region. Even though they are a monarchy, they think longterm the monarchies are not going to work. The future will be more democratic, more religious and national. They have made that bet. The saudis have not. Trump has come in and said the right want tohe make. So qatar is on the wrong side of this. As you know, they now have a serious relationship, not just with iran doing much better, but gans turkey, who has sent troops into qatar to support them. When i was with Richard Haass earlier today, we were talking about turkey. He said they are a member of nato, but they are not a partner of the United States in nato right now anymore. Charlie how is trump getting a wrong with along with chancellor merkel . Ian i think of the traditional american allies, the merkel relationship is by far the most challenged. The is because merkel is macron, hesve transactional. He invites putin, he invites trump, he can find a way to work with you, disagreeing on climate, but finds a way to work. Has popularity, hes charismatic, everyone is coming to him. That has been positive for the french. Merkel,ase of germany, leaving aside her election charlie and aside from thecharlie fact that she loved obama. Ian she had a good personal relationship with obama. Clearly the way obama hair and dont handled snowden shook her. And the listening on the phone. And the fact that when she took refugees, obama didnt help, and she was personally disappointed charlie rhetorically or any other way. Ian right. I think intellectually and personally they got along very well. Charlie he said to me in an interview in germany that she was the foreign leader he most admired. I said, why . He said temperament. Like used to be called no drama obama. Shes the same way. Ian lets put it this way. If trump were being honest with us, merkel is probably the foreign leader that trump has the hardest time with and is least comfortable with. Charlie did the pull in speech hurt did the polling speech poland speeche hurt . Ian absolutely. But it was legitimate. It just came out that trump gave a speech, he did not mention the work democracy in the speech once. For poland, this was a masterful speech. It was nation, it was civilization, it was family. Charlie theres a lot of people who believe the west is being destroyed. Plays. D in poland, that it was written very well. It was all of the things that a part of the western charlie unraveling. Ian right. But none of them have to do with democracy. For merkel, those things are critical. She would argue they are more important than the thing trump was bringing up. These are two personality types that if they were on a spectrum, they would be off the charts. The fact that merkel was under so much pressure to make Europe Brexit done, now be the leader of the free world, its not happening. I think this is a really challenging relationship for trump, and its not going to improve anytime soon. Charlie great to see you. Ian bremmer of the eurasia group. Back in a moment. Stay with us. Charlie he is the 20th president of princeton university. He has held that job for many years. He is also a supreme score Supreme Court scholar. He has tried to engage princeton more deep beat with American Society, welcoming navy rotc back campus, and increasing Economic Diversity. Welcome to turn these table. I want to read something you read at princetons graduation. We live in a time when confidence in our shared institution is ebbing. Not only journalists, but business, nonprofits, all organizations. It is tempting to complain about but we need, institutions because they enable us to pursue larger purposes together. First, why is confidence in all the institutions ebbing . Its a great question, david. The best i can do is speculate. It is a worldwide trend. There may be different causes in different places. If i look at the u. S. , i think about Political Polarization that leads us to disagree systemically with one another, and at times, as an article last dislike one even to another. That just pushes the question back at a level. Why are we seeing distrust in institutions and one another . I think the growing inequality has something to do with that. Perceptions of procedural unfairness has something to do with it. If you read stories about people who are not only wealthy but itm not to deserve that, but or if you see corruption in the public sphere, it make you distrust the inequalities. It seems like the game produces unfair outcomes. I also think theres another reason, which has a more Positive Side to it. We are becoming very plural as a society. Our institutions are becoming more plural. They are becoming more diverse in terms of the people were represented. That means some of the old fallbacks that some of us may have in terms of who we trust and who we dont have to be reimagined and reinvented. We have to learn how to work in society that is more diverse. David how do you think about what Higher Education needs to faith into ensure American Society at large, but also Higher Education . There are a number of answers. It is an important challenge and tough challenge. One of the things we have to do is know what our values are, stand by those values and stand by them so we can build trust in what it is were doing, to help people understand institutions that sometimes may look different from what we are familiar with. We have to look critical with ourselves. That is where we are falling down with that regard. You mentioned by bringing the navy rotc back to princeton. I think some of the diversity missing from Ivy League Institutions has been the diversity that rotc programs bring to our universities. We are fortunate at princeton, we had the army rotc with us throughout a period when it was absent from other Ivy League Institutions. Looking at political diversity more generally on College Campuses is going to be important if we are perceived, rightly or wrongly, as blue dots were arguments dont get vigorously engaged. That is a problem in terms of do. Ding trust in what we i think its important at places like princeton that we increase social Economic Diversity of the student body, which is something i worked very hard on. David i want to get to the