Ignatius and kareem sagipor. My sense is were not going to reach a comprehensive resolution but neither a comprehensive failure. I call it managed irresolution. I think both capitals, both washington and tehran recognize no one wants to go back to status quo escalation. President obama certainly doesnt want to go to war against iran. So well kick the can down the road, but come march is when theyre talking about extending the deadline until. I still dont see by march us being in a position whereby were able to really comprehensively resolve this issue. Charlie and we conclude with Lawrence Wright, book called thirteen days in september, carter, begin and sadat at camp david. Carter had a navy idea. He liked both these men initially. He loves sadat. He and begin didnt get along, after all. But he had the idea you could bring these two honorable men, put them in this mountaintop in maryland away from the press and they would get to know each other, like each other and find their own way to peace. Rosalynn said by the end of the second day, they were screaming at each other by the top of their lungs, carter had to physically separate them. He had to block them from trying to leave camp david. And it wasnt until the fifth day that he realized he was going to have to do something he didnt want to do, which was to put forward an american plan. Charlie john dickerson, al hunt on the story, and Lawrence Wright when we continue. Rose funding for charlie rose has been provided by the following rose additional funding provided by and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information worldwide. Captioning sponsored by Rose Communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. Authority to make our immigration system work better. The day i sign a bill into law, the actions i take will no longer be necessary. Meanwhile, dont let a disagreement over a single issue be a deal breaker on every issue. Thats not how our democracy works, and Congress Certainly shouldnt shut down our government again just because we disagree on this. Americans are tired of gridlock. What our country needs from us right now is a common purpose. Charlie joining us is john dickerson, chief Political Correspondent for slate and political director of cbs news, well talk about this speech. I begin, with the question, any surprises . Well, i guess surprises only in that it had a little bit of a limitation. There was some thought that perhaps the president would extend this deportation protection to the socalled parents of the socalled dreamers. He didnt go that far, but he still went certainly pretty far and farther than republicans wanted him to go. Charlie saying what he said and picking the fight he may have picked, is he sending a signal about how hes come a long way from where he began when he came to washington . Well, he sure is. Remember when he campaigned as a senator, he was going to change the toxic atmosphere that had grown up over the bush years, he was going to have a new kind of way of operating in washington. Now that started to die almost as soon as he encountered the republican opposition, which was very much against him when he first came to washington, and its been slowly eroding. Whats different here is the president is not just cay goaling, hes not just putting forward policies republicans dont like. This is a bit of a punch in the nose. This is action hes taking that has real consequences and now hes saying go ahead and undo it, republicans. That is a further step for him and really sets the tone for his final two years. Charlie why hasnt he chosen that path is this. According to white house officials ive talked, to hes chosen it for a couple of reasons. One, he doesnt think republicans are going to move. They think weve given them plenty of chances and opportunities over the last several years. They cite the fact that since the Senate Passed its bipartisan immigration bill its been 500 days since House Republicans didnt move. So they dont think the republicans will move. Also they have to move quickly. Theyre worried about the lame duck status, the cold hand of the end of his presidency and he wants to move fast and do big things and this might be the biggest thing hes able to do in his final two years. Charlie did the president make a thinks take in not going to congress before the midterms and asking for the kind of Immigration Reform he wanted when the odds were better then because of the results of the election . Well, they would say at the white house two things one, the president was operating under guidance hed gotten from john boehner and marco rubio who said if you get in the middle of the fight of immigration and meddle in the congressional progress on this, immediately republicans will have their back up and not going to want to do anything you overtly support, so stay general, stay away from the details and well handle it and try to get it through. Ultimately, though, republicans in the house made the calculation and the decision that they wouldnt put forward legislation of any kind on immigration because it would create an internal fight within their party. Why should they tear apart themselves when they saw the 2014 elections as being very good for republicans, they wanted to keep the focus on the president. Charlie knowing the congress that we have and will have in january, is it possible that this could lead to a Government Shutdown . The possibility seems remote, and this is as much a test of the new republican relationship with themselves as it is a test mxetween the president and the new Republican Leaders in congress. Basically the challenge for Republican Leaders is can they control their wing that is closest to the grassroots because grassroots conservatives find this deeply offensive. They think what the president is tight do is not just change immigration policy but change the very fabric of america, and they are very passionate about this and that is reflected through some of the lawmakers. But what Republican Leaders want is an orderly swift and tough response to the president but not one that talks about impeachment oroa Government Shutdown. Charlie because that would be politically advantageous for the president . It would be political advantageous for the president and Republican Leaders believe they have to show that as republicans they can govern, that given control of both the house and the senate that they can actually go forward with the peoples business and do it in an orderly way, and a fight over a shutdown they feel like theyll lose that fight and while theyre losing that fight theyre also not showing people that on the things that they care most ant, which is to say their economic well being, that they need to show that they can do they can deliver on that question. Charlie can the president be very tough on border crossings without losing the support of the hispanic vote and the Hispanic Community by saying to them i can get you more things about amnesty and the absence of deportation, allow me to be tougher on the border . I think thats a model for the way hes likely to proceed. We saw him do that here with this specific action where hes basically taking not deporting one group of undocumented workers but then putting new money on focusing on criminals and on the border. So i think that is the kind of tradeoff that he would be okay with. Charlie how will this play out in 2016 . Well, we saw Hillary Clinton came out and supported the president right after he made his remarks, so there were a lot of democrats who were wondering how she would play this, and she has associated herself with the president on this, and that is important not just for immigration policy and latino voters but also sending a signal about her, how close shes going to stay to barack obama. One of the things we saw in the 2014 elections is the democrats cant really get away from the president , and a lot of democrats think if Hillary Clinton runs, shes not going to be able to distance herself from back back and shouldnt even try and she certainly didnt try to distance herself on this front. On the republican side, this is a big opportunity for all republicans who want to run for president to define themselves on an issue that the grassroots cares a great deal about and its both a substantive question, how do you want to handle undocumented workers, but then theres also a tactical question. In other words, you can be you can have a position that is very tough on undocumented workers but suggests restraint in combat with the president , keeping in mind some of these political realities, and how the candidates of 2016 position themselves in this argument will tell us a lot about which bucket of conservative voters theyre going after in the president ial primaries. Charlie what more do reform advocates want that the president is not prepared either in executive order or in legislation to give them . Well, i think they would want more protections for that larger share of undocumented workers in the United States so if there are 11. 3 or 12 million undocumented workers, they would want larger protections, and his argument has been and hes been saying this in fact, hes said it so much now republicans are using these quotes against him, but he is circumscribed in terms of acting, in terms of his discretion on deportation, he thinks hes gone as far as he can get on that, and advocates would like some further action from him, but he thinks hes used up as much Legal Authority as he can. Charlie i talked to a person who traveled around the country for democrats, advocating democratic elections in the midterms, and that person told me, you cant imagine how deeprooted the feeling is about immigration in this country. Do you understand that when they say that . Yes. I mean, on both sides. So one of the things white house advisors told me this week is the reason the president had to act is, a, he sees himself as acting in the large sweep of history and if we look at his second inaugural address, you saw him talk about rights for samesex marriage, for women, talking about civil rights progress that happened while he was president , and this can be put in that category. Thats one motivation. The other was that he couldnt delay on this because the Latino Community and the democratic constituency thats a part of the folks who elected and reelected him would have been furious. There have been already been enough delays and this would have been real damage to his legacy but also other democrats who want to run in 2016. Then on the republican side, as i mentioned, its this feeling among conservatives that this is messing around with kind of the core of america in terms of allowing people who broke the law to kind of get off free here and that that is why this is such a redhot issue on the conservative side. Charlie john dickerson, thank you so much. Thanks, charlie. Charlie, the Iranian Nuclear talks hit another deadline in a few days and indication no, sir final deal is likely but there could be an extension of the talks. We are joined today by david ignatius, the premier Foreign Policy columnist for the Washington Post and the mideast expert of the carnegie endowment. Please to have you both here. David, whats going to happen next week . The talks extended, collapsed . What . The honest answer is we dont know as we speak. The indications are that theyre still too far apart on the basic numbers that would add up in the minds of u. S. Negotiators to provide sufficient breakout time. Theyd like to see a year before iran could assemble a bomb to a combination of lower stockpile of enriched material or a reduced number of centrifuges that can enrich the material further. They have been kickerring with the numbers for the last year. It appears from what people like me and kareem know that theyre too far apart to get to a deal that could fly in the capitals, but we dont know. And we dont know further for they cant get there on monday if they want to announce they want to package the progress theyve made over the last year which most analysts think is significant and make perhaps a joint communique that describes what theyve achieved and go on with an extension to work on the additional tough parts. Secretary kerry, the u. S. Secretary of state and chief negotiate said hes not looking for an extension, he wants a final deal by monday. A big challenge is finding a technical resolution to whats really a political conflict. I testified before congress yesterday and remember the Congress Talk about iran, the Nuclear Issue certainly is a concern for them, but what animates them about iran is irans regional policies, rejection of israels existence. Rejection of u. S. Influence in the region and support of groups like hesbollah. My sense is well not reach a comprehensive rules nor will it be a comprehensive failure. I call it a managed irresolution. Both capitals in washington and iran realize no one wants to go back to status a escalation. President obama certainly doesnt want to go to war with iran. Well kick the can down the road. But come march is when theyre talking about extended the deadline until. I dont see is in march us being in a position whereby were able to comprehensively resolve this issue. Is that because to have the larger geopolitical questions that you just cited or is there is the big issue centrifuges . Is the big issue r. D. , inspections, all the above . My own take, al, is for the iranian government, in particularly the iranian Supreme Leader ali khomeini, ruling since 1989, and they say about revolutionaries that youre revolutionary till you get power then you become a conservative. I would say for the Supreme Leader not doing a Big Nuclear Deal is an economic risk because iran is facing economic challenges but i argue a potential nuclear risk to do a deal if youre a Supreme Leader because this is someone for 25 years has prioritized hostility with the United States visavis is outside world and to make a major concession like this nuclear deal and would require a longterm concession, you know, ten years, that could be political risky for him at home. We say in the United States the first rule of politics is know your base and the Supreme Leaders base in tehran is those who have been intransit toward the United States. Its fascinating. One can argue its in both countries interest to have a deal. Thats an argument thats easy to make. Both face quite similar elements of whatever we want to call them, hard line factions of what complicate this interest. Both have hardliners at home who say how can you compromise with the regime that represents everything thats bad about the world . Iranians say that as much as we do. I was struck when i went to tehran last december to interview the rinerson foreign minister whos their principle negotiate whos meeting as we speak with secretary kerry, i was struck by several things, first, the yearning of most iranians to be part of the modern world. And this is a sophisticated, technologically advanced country. And the reason that president rouhani was elected by a wide margin when he was not expected to get that many votes is he said, we dont want to be a country that only has friendships with russia and china. We want to be part of the world. And that really resonated with iranians. On the other side, you have this revolutionary guard. Henries kissinger is famous for saying you can deal with iran if its a nation, but not if its a cause. In other words, once it stops seeing its identity as a revolutionary nation, it will become impossible to negotiate deals like this and others. And i think thats one question. You dont think were there yet . I wasnt sure when i was there in december. I had one senior person very close to the Supreme Leader say to me any deal is unacceptable because any deal will mean our revolution is over. And i think that that is the benefit for the west. If they make a deal, even if its sort of an ugly deal, it will mean theyve begun to turn. You wrote a fascinated column a few weeks ago, i wish you quoted kareem, talking about a potentially key figure here, the head of, i think, the Iranian Security council, alley shankhani, i hope i pronounced that correctly, do you have any idea of the role he played in the recent weeks . I was struck in a recent trip to the middle east that his name came up in every capital among officials well connected with their intelligence as someone who was a new figure on the scene in iran. In a sense, he bridges the world of the Supreme Leader and the revolutionary guard on the one hand and president rouhani and the state on the other. He runs the National Security council thats supposed to organize between the two and, interestingly, he was the person who managed to get the deal in iraq to get irans supported nouri almaliki, this polarizing Prime Minister who served so disastrously, and shakhani brokered the deal. Hes standing back in iran, seen as a rival or maybe moderating face of the heads of the figure of the revolution, the guy fighting battles in iran and all the place where iran is fomenting trouble. For a long time we got used to calling the iranian government the clerical regime islamic republic. But in realty the institution of the revolutionary guards eclipsed the institution of the clergy in terms of wielding domestic power and controlling irans Foreign Policy. David touched upon Iranian Society and its aspirations to be part of the outside world, and this is really the parado