Thats Strategic Deterrence. Rose we continue with the bbc chief International Correspondent lyse doucet. Is it because we are now witnessing the most documented war ever. The first social media war you can call it. Vietnam was the First Television war where television brought back the casualties to the living room of america. Everyone can watch the streaming on youtube, everything that happens in syria. And yet it seems to be a war of our time that all of the institutions, all of the great powers have proved to be unable or perhaps we should say unwilling to end this war. This war stops being being about syria a long time ago we conclude with Alfred Hitchcocks making of psycho, a conversation with Alexandre Philippe. Its quite frankly the ultimate cinematic trick. I fully believe this is something that hitchcock had been working towards his entire life. I mean he saw an opportunity when he read the book by robert block, to have this sort of epic murder in the bathtub. And its so fascinate to go me he took seven days to shoot this one scene. Something that had never been done before and probably had not been done since. Rose nick burns, Michael Morrell, lyse doucet and Alexandre Philippe when we continue. Rose funding for charlie rose has been provided by the following and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and Information Services worldwide. Captioning sponsored by Rose Communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. Rose tensions continue to escalate this week between President Trump and his counterparts in both north korea and iran. In his first speech last week, President Trump threatened to destroy north korea and called iran a rogue nation. The United States has great strength and patience. But if it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy north korea. Rocket man is on a Suicide Mission for himself and for his regime. The iranian government masks a corrupt dictatorship behind the fault guise of a democracy. It has turned a wealthy country with a rich history and culture into an economically depleted rogue state whose chief exports are vial, bloodshed and chaos. Rose over the weekend the president called kim yungun a madman. A professor of diplomacy of Harvards Kennedy school, nick burns and Michael Morrell former deputy and director of the cia and host of the new cbs podcast intelligence matters. Where are we in terms of both diplomacy and contingent planning. The fundamental problem is that the North Koreans demonstrating the capability of putting a u. S. City in nuclear attack. You have to have Nuclear Weapons, ability to get a nuclear yield out of exp capability to put a missile as far east as chicago or detroit. We dont know a hundred percent what the weight of the payload that they tested was so we dont know exactly how far they can deliver a no clear weapon. Rose as far as chicago. As far as chicago or detroit. Were not a hundred percent sure how much the payload or the deterrent on how far it can go. So check for sure on the weapon, close to a check on the missile and then the third piece, can you make a Nuclear Weapon small enough to fit in a missile. The Intelligence Community thinks it can do that. The last piece is can you make it all work. Can you make all of the Electronics Work under the intense vibration of take off and reentry and the heat and pressure. That we just dont know where they are. But the consensus view is were getting very close to that to demonstrating that capability. The president has said, the president has said they will not be allowed to achieve that capability. So hence the fundamental problem we have, right. Diplomacy is, i think, nick is the diplomat here but i think diplomacy is the right approach. I think putting pressure on them is the right approach. After 25 years of pressuring them, though, im not a hundred percent sure, in fact im uncertain that that is going to stop him from ultimately demonstrating that capability. Rose the language of the United Nations have this impact. You make it seem to realize america is really angry and serious about this or b, it makes them more certain in their desire to do something to hurt the United States. I think the language of the president over the last eight or nine days confuses them. What we need to do based on mikes analysis is to go back to what we did so effectively in the cold war, Strategic Deterrence. Hes a dispickable leader and hes probably evil in many ways but hes not a madman. We assume that hes rational. But eisenhower would have done at the podium last week or reagan or bill clinton would have been to have said the following. The United States is not going to be the aggressor. Were not going to attack north korea but should they seek to attack japan or south korea or American Forces in asia, we will respond with overwhelming force. Thats Strategic Deterrence. And thats what secretary matt es is saying, thats what secretary tillerson is saying its what general done ferred said this week in congressional testimony. Its what all our experts are saying but the president has come out with this shrill lambastic. It makes the leader to be somewhat of a victim. Rose force a u. N. Security council rhesus lation. I think what the president has been able to do is move the chinese a little bit. You got to practice Strategic Deterrence. We have to envelope in a bear hug the South Koreans and japanese. Instead of saying as the president did two weeks ago i might cancel the Free Trade Agreement with south korea. And third sangions. Here let me Say Something positive about the Trump Administration. In the last week theyve announced two sets of sanctions, secretarytorial and financial sanctions last week. This week sanctions against individual companies some of them chinese that have been trading with the North Koreans. This is what president bush and president obama did so effectively with the iranians. They increased the leverage on the pain, they raised the cost to the iranians, drove them to the negotiating table. That sanction piece is critical. And if the Chinese Central Bank is serious and if they instruct all the other banks in china to shut down lending in korea. Its diplomatic, its sanction. Its not making ourselves into the aggressor here thats a tactical mistake. Rose the president and the diplomatic front and the for koreans came to the administration and they said were exactly where were very very close. Well freeze it if you eliminate all hostile actions against our country. Would you take that deal. I wouldnt take it immediately. I would open negotiation on some kind of construct, some variation. What we really cant do right now is agree to a deal that says if the North Koreans freeze their Nuclear Development in place, we will freeze all American Military activities. Because what you want to do in negotiation drive up the economic pressure sanctions but you also want to have the military prepare and strike there. We have an alliance obligation with japan and south korea to defend them. Some might be a fine nasty compromise but you dont agree at the beginning. Theyre not going to make that offer. They want the same kind of strict going into negotiation. What kim wants to do is go from here with this relationship. Rose do you know what we may know if we can shut them down in terms of a power standpoint. With iran under the last decade try to use all the instruments, try to weaken him and coerce him to the negotiation table. I agree with mike. You have to have a rigorous cost benefit analysis of an american attack of choosing war with north korea. There are 30 millions South Koreans in the metropolitan seoul area. 30 millions americans live there. The North Koreans have a tremendous conventional capacity with artillery. You would have to assume in the first days or weeks of the war maybe hundreds of thousands of dead thats not an exaggeration. Thats why you see serious people. General done ford, secretary mattis going up to the hill and speaking up and probably saying diplomacy is the way we go. We get back to rhetoric charlie. As the president gets out and keeps punching kim jungun, secretary tillerson theyre the calming. Rose repeating, we dont want war with the North Koreans. Thats right. Rose we will not attack we dont want to change the regime. Thats with secretary tillerson rose they believe that. The problem with the punching, theres two problems with the punching. One problem is that he does indeed fear incorrectly that the United States wants to get rid of him, his regime and wants to reunite the peninsula and he sees these weapons as the ultimate deterrence. When the president uses the language hes using, it reinforces in kim just the reason why he wants to have these weapons. The second is and this is very strange thing about north korea, they use vict trowel but they are incredibly sensitive. One of the things youll hear from the North Koreans all the time is when south korea said something not nice about kim jongun and north korea gets a back up. So this language not only reinforces their policy but its dangerous because it forces them into a corner. The problem with the rentic is that it introduces into the mild of kim jonguns advisors the doubt are the americans in a da fencive posture will they attack us only if we attack them. Or is President Trump serious, if he is cease he the rhetoric s destabilizing to Strategic Deterrence and therefore deeply annoying. The chinese did something very interesting three on or four weeks ago during the height of the kim trump rhetoric. The chinese publicly two things. They said if the United States preemptively attacks north korea, we will fight on the side of north korea. Then they turned around and they said, if north korea were to attack first, then north koreas on its own. That was a message of deterrence to both of us. It was the chinese being the adults in the room. Very interesting. United states of america used to be the adult in the room. Rose is there some backchannel communication going on right now between somebody who is advising the north Korean Leader who speaks to the president. I dont know. Im not in a position to know. Rose would you expect that. I would hope so. In a situation like this if you dont have a diplomatic relationship with the government and no one in the current government ever admits to meeting kim jongun you need to establish communication. I think secretary tillerson has been trying to do that. You saw charlie in the summer he was saying if theres a pause in some of these Missile Nuclear tests maybe we can graduate tillerson to the next level. Kim jongun didnt give him a chest, there was a flurry of tests of both varieties. I see them as adults. I think they are trying to move us towards negotiation. They understand this is a long term struggle with north korea. Its not going to be resolved this year or next. We do need to get to the negotiation table probably for a compromise which will be deeply unsatisfying to people who want to end this crises. If you can avoid a war, play for time, freeze the North Koreans in place, thats not a bad outcome. Heres a thing you have to worry about in a war scenario is that when i describe the three pieces, we know a lot about one, mostly about the other and the one in the middle we dont know about. So at the end of the day we dont really know what their capabilities are today. Kim jongun fired an icbm with a Nuclear Weapon on it today, it might work. The former dni jim clapper, what he is saying publicly is we have to assume, right. For prudence requires that in military planning and diplomatic thinking we have to assume they might be able to attack us successful today with a Nuclear Weapon. Going to war today not only risks definite war with south korea between north korea and south korea but maybe a Nuclear Strike on korea maybe a Nuclear Strike on japan and maybe a Nuclear Strike on the United States of america. Thats how serious this is. Rose we talked to my previous guests ed sharron and asked him doubt we are going to war with the North Koreans and you said no. I said i thought the probability was quite low because we assume that kim is rational and will understand that his regime will be annihilated and he would too. I agree, i agree. Some wars happen because they dont intend them to happen. Wars happen because people miscalculate and slip into a war. When barack obama were president , if he were president right now the probability of war would be. 0000001. Today President Trump is somewhere between one and two or three percent. Rose let me turn to iran because there was some rhetorical assault on the president. Not only is the deal an embarrassment but he calls iran a corrupt regime and a rogue nation. Why is he doing that . Why was that necessary . What was the point. Let me tee up the problem and let my diplomat friend solve it for us. Theres two buckets here, right. One is the iranian Nuclear Weapons program. The second is iranian misbehavior, maligned behavior in the region. Their own conducting of terrorism, their support to terrorists, their support to ion surgents, regional influence, the desire that israel be wiped off the face of the planet, that whole set of issues, right. This first issue i believe that the jcpo nuclear deal has put that issue in a box for the next ten to 15 years. Its not perfect but its pretty darn if because its put them in a box for 10 to 15 years. As far as i know, the iranians are living up to almost the entirety of the agreement. A handful of small issues where they are not in compliance. Those are minor issues. So the president , right, has to make a decision about how to handle this first one and he also needs to make a decision on how to handle the second one, right. How do we deter the iranians from this misbehavior in the region. This is the second thing he has to decide to do and that has to be done against the following back drop. Which is the most interesting internal politics inside iranian in a long long time. There is a real struggle internally that is playing out publicly between the hard liners and what i call the centrists maybe, call them moderate. Im a centrist. Its a struggle over whether iran is going to remain a revolutionary nation or whether its going to be a normal nation. It was fought publicly rose i asked the foreign minister of iran that very question kissinger once posed do they want to be a nation or to they want to be a movement. They said we want to be both. It cant be both, right. You both cant exist at the same time. This debate played out publicly on the debate stage between rouhani and the candidate. The iranian people voted and spoke overwhelmingly they want to go in a certain direction. So the question is trying to manage the nuclear issue, the president s got to make a decision on very very soon. And in managing this regional misbehavior, how do you do that in a way that doesnt strengthen the hardliners and wakin the centrists. Nick is going to tell us how to do all that. Rose youre talking about supporting terrorism. The charge is again the iranians. They are supporting, they are heavily involved against the saudis with client organizations in yemen, thats one. So iran itself conducts terrorism around the world against israeli and jewish targets and against the targets of its neighbors, number one. Rose how does it do that. It has an apparatus rose its one thing to say im asking because the attempted of the saudi ambassador of the United States several years ago. Rose it was not carried out because it was interrupted. It was interrupted. There was an attack in europe several years ago that the iranians were involved in. So theyre the only, i think its fair to say theyre the only state in the world that practices terrorism. Thats one. Two, they provide support to terrorist groups hezbollah and others. Hezbollah could not exist without support from iran. Support of ion surgents in the region trying to overthrow sunni air regimes, their support for people like president assad is a whole other issue, right. So thats what i mean by this regional misbehavior. To use my construct of the two big problems i think President Trump is right to try to push iranians back for a big struggle for power and hes wrong President Trump trying to wiggle out of the iran nuclear deal. Rose why. Theres a struggle