tv Charlie Rose PBS January 14, 2014 12:00pm-1:01pm PST
>> rose: welcome to the program. we begin this evening with the story of alex rodriguez and performance-enhancing drugs, joining me, tom of sports illustrated and bill madden of the new york daily news. >> i thought it was very interesting that they were showing on the 60 minutes reports on days he got injected or right before he got injected he would have fabulous days where he was hitting a home run, a game winning home run against somebody or whatever it was. this is the first time i have actually seen graphic proof of how steroids work. >> rose: we continue the evening with an appreciation of ariel sharon who died after many years in a co marks joining me, jeffrey goldberg and ethan bronner. >> ariel sharon was very middle eastern, you know, and he -- i don't mean that in sort of an enlightened way. he absorbed the lessons of the
behavior of people like al assad and often thought israel had to be as brutal as those kind of dictators and that's what got him into such trouble. >> rose: in lebanon. >> in lebanon. >> his view was in some ways the revisionist building an iron wall making it tough, making israel impenetrable and then when it came time to make some decisions about moving forward because it became no longer possible to hold on to all of this territory and people and so call yourself a jewish democracy that's when he began to think about talking about occupation and switching, so in some ways i think, you know, his story is the story of his country, his sorry i have the story of zionism both in its most brutal form and in its effort to come to terms with reality. >> rose: we conclude this evening with some of the conversations for this program between ariel sharon and me. >> every israeli, every jew
wants peace. generally, the generals are expected to like war, and we are branded sometimes, a general is looking for war. to me, it is something personal. i have been participating in all the wars of the state of israel, and i went through the ranks, i started as a private first class, and i saw all the battles, i saw all the horrors of the battles, i saw all the fears of the battles. we lost our -- i lost most of my friends in battles. i was very seriously wounded twice and i felt terrible pain being in a hospital and i had to take, and of myself and of others. >> rose: alex rodriguez, ariel sharon and the legacy from
conversations on this program. next. funding for charlie rose was provided by the additional funding provided by these funders. and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information services captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> i support all my teammates, with the diamondbacks, at all members of the unit equally and unconditionally and i do feel
like i have great support. i have spoken to a lot of my teammates, jonny gomes, big papi and -- >> rose: alex rodriguez, new york yankees third baseman is suspended for the entire 2014 for using performance-enhancing drugs, the ruling was handed down over the weekend by frederick horowitz, baseball's chief arbitrary, it is the longest suspension for doping in the history of baseball, he attacked the ruling and filed claims against the mlb in the federal court and the players union, last night 60 minutes has an interview with tony bosch, who claims to have supplied a rod's drugs. >> once alex rodriguez was fully into your protocol, what were the various banned u substancese was taking? >> testosterone, insulin growth factor 1, human growth hormone,
and some different forms of peptides. >> all of them banned? >> all of them banned. >> and he knew that? >> yes, he did. >> and you knew that. >> and i knew that. >> was rodriguez injecting himself with these substances? >> alex was scared of needles, so at times he would ask me to inject. >> you injected him? >> yes. >> personally? >> personally. >> tony bosch told us alex rodriguez became his client in 2010, bosch says he supplied pro athletes with banned drugs almost ten years, a corrupt sideline to his anti-aging clinic called biogenesis. >> alex wanted to know and would study the product and study the substance, he would study the dosages, because he wanted to achieve all his human performance, in this case, sports performance objective in the most, and the most important one was the 800 home run club.
>> the 800 home run club. >> which was only going to have one member. >> alex rodriguez. >> rose: joining me by phone is tom very due situate and bill madden a sportswriter for the daily news, i a am am pleased to have both of them, tom, where is this now? we have seen bosch on 60 minutes last night telling the story of how .. he even personally injected a-rod with drugs and a-rod has now filed suit. so where is the game? >> well, first of all, the arbitrary frederick horowitz clearly he believed all the evidence that anthony bosch presented in the hearing, not just on 60 minutes, and alex rodriguez is challenging the validity of the suspension and those accusations by tony bosch. the interesting thing here is, alex rodriguez is going at this entirely alone, not just major league baseball in his lawsuit but the major league baseball
players association for not doing a better job of defending him, so he is essentially saying, a ruling by horowitz is not just wrong but the arbitrary was impartial and my union didn't properly defend me. >> so what does this say about alex rodriguez and? i mean is it simply he has nothing to lose and therefore he will go down fighting to the last moment? >> i think -- >> rose: go ahead, tom. >> i was going to say i certainly think that is a part of it but you have to remember the resources that alex rodriguez has to his advantage. he has signed the two richest contracts in baseball history so this is not your ordinary player. this is someone who can, can withstand a very long legal process if that is what he chooses. >> rose: does he have any argument to make the case on? >> not that i can see and this filing suit today, if you read this arbitrary's opinion, which is part of the lawsuit, it had to be a part of the lawsuit
because it originally this morning they tried to get a tro and the judgment told them you can no not -- >> a temporary restraining order. >> temporary restraining order stopping this entire suspension and everything else and the judge said you cannot do that and not unseal the arbitrary's opinion. and so they decided to go ahead and file the suit anyway, which opened up the door to unsealing this opinion, which was supposed to be kept secret for the rest of time. and if you read this opinion, it is just devastating, absolutely devastating. >> rose: how is it devastating? >> well, it takes chapter and verse all the charges that major league baseball had against him, the interviews with bosch, the -- everything that bosch said on 60 minutes last night, only tenfold, as far as all the different injections and purchases and a-rod made from him on all these drugs, and plus the fact that they had all the corroborating evidence to this, and horowitz clearly points out
in all of this that major league baseball had a solid case, that it was irrefutable. >> rose: and so what picture do we get of a-rod, assuming all of these charges are true, what is the picture we get of a star athlete with the richest contract in baseball doing everything he can to enhance his performance? >> well, yeah. i mean, that is what these things are all about as bosch pointed out in the 60 minutes report. a-rod came to him and said i want to be the 800 club. >> rose: exactly. >> and i want to be the only guy, right the only guy in history to hit 800 home runs and i thought it was very interesting that they were showing on the 60 minutes report on days that he got injected or right before he got injected he would have fabulous days where he was hitting a home run, a game winning home run against somebody or whatever it was. this is the first time i have actually seen graphic proof of how steroids work. >> rose: so in other words, right after he took steroids he
would play much better and hit more home runs? >> right. >> rose: you are still left with the question of baseball and what damage this does to baseball, tom, and we have bud selig who basically was just, i think overwhelmed by what he thought a-rod had done. >> yeah. and i think so was the arbitrary. in fact, in the ruling that bill madden referred to, the arbitrary said while this length of suspension may be unprecedented for a major league baseball player, so is the misconduct he committed. that is saying a mouthful for a sports that has really been riddled with the steroids problem for the better part of two decades or more. i think on the one hand it helps major league baseball because it shows they are going after a player no matter how rich, no matter how good, if you violate the joint drug agreement, they will go after you and this is unusual, charlie, because in the past, whenever there has been tremendous change on these issues in baseball, whether it has been gambling 100 years ago,
coaching in the eighties or steroids related to balco or tomsky it has been the federal government that provided the outside agent of change for one of these issues. this is really the first time to my knowledge that it came internally. no federal involvement, but major league baseball's department of investigations that came up with the goods on the player and it is forcing the longest suspension in baseball history when it comes to peds. >> rose: was anything -- i am thinking of the comparison with lance armstrong. people say that if lance armstrong had not come back and tried to make that comeback the last time he might not have been discovered. is there a similar kind of pattern or similar kind of timeline for a-rod? >> well, clearly the problem that baseball has in all these, and all these agencies have or sports have is it is really impossible to stay ahead of the
people who are coming up with these new designer drugs that can't be detected. >> rose: right. >> and that's what the case here was with baseball. in one way, this biogenesis scandal that tony bosch was involved in down in south florida was the best thing to ever happen to baseball because they were finally able to get at people who were coming up with these designer drugs that were enabling players to beat their drug tests because they put, since they put in drug tests, there have been very few players testing positive in the last year or so. >> rose: yes. >> but we all know now by this alex rodriguez case that there are still players that are doing a lot of drugs and they are beating the system, and so they didn't have any subpoena power in baseball, so they had no help from the government, and so they did what they did and what they did was they sued bosch, and by suing bosch, they were able to get him into court and then start mounting his own defense
funds and this was the way they were getting -- >> rose: the amazing thing that story is that it played out like a movie. i mean, there were threats and they wanted bosch to go to columbia and to get out of the limelight. i mean, it had all of the elements of a movie thriller. do you agree, tom. >> i do. i regard it as a karl -- novel come to life considering we are coming out of the territory of south florida. i also wanted to take your lance armstrong analogy and extend it a little bit further, because when lance armstrong was asked why and when he stopped doping, he pointed to 2009, i believe, or 8, the cycling body implemented what they call biological passport testing in which your te ratio, i don't want to get too scientific on you is monitored from time to time and baseball up until last year, it was all about, when it comes to cheating keeping your te ratio below four to one, most
people it is one to one, but baseball allowed basically this window and that is what tony bosch was doing, he was manipulating and managing te ratios while last year, it is a whole new ball game, because that's when you could take the te ratio and if it spiked at all because you and i are, the te ratios don't really spike but once they do that is a red flag, even if it is not above power to one, if it goes one to one to three to one you are going to get busted, so what we heard on 60 minutes, taking these gummies laced with testosterone before a game, that worked fine in 2012, it does not work today. >> rose: fascinating. follow, thank you so much for joining us. >> thank you. >> rose: good to see you again, pleasure. >> good to see you, charlie. >> rose: the case continued, back in a moment, stay with us. >> jews and arabs have been living together for many years in that country but in order to be together, i think for, i think law and order should be
kept altogether in a democracy, you have to keep law and order among all the population, and justice should be made when it is connected to two things. >> rose: prime minister ariel sharon died saturday in a hospital near the tel aviv, he was 85, sharon had been in a coma 62006 when he suffered a massive stroke and will be remembered as one of the most influential leaders in israel's history and one of their greatest warriors, he played decisive role in the six day war and yom kippur war as leader of the israel army. he became one of the most controversial politicians, after the second break of the second palestinian intifada and snrid with the likud, with unilateral disengagement from gaza. joe biden was among those who you'll apologized him. >> like all historic leaders,
prime minister sharon was a complex man, about whom you have already heard from his colleagues, who engender strong opinions from everyone. but like all historic leaders, all real leaders, he had a north star that guided him. the north star from which he never, in my observation, never deviated. >> rose: joining me from washington, jeffrey goldberg of bloomberg view and the atlantic with us in new york, he tha ethn broader of the new york bronner, i am pleased to have both of them here, tell me what israel and the world has lost in the character and achievement and personality of ariel sharon. >> well, israel lost this eight years ago when he fell into a coma and his coma, his stroke
came at actually kind of a moment of inflection for israel. he had just pulled out of gaza, sort of reversing what he had done earlier in his career, because he is the guy that put the settlers in gaza in the first place and the expectation was that he was going to pivot and do much of the same in the west bank, and of course he as israel's probably greatest warrior hero, was in a position politically to do such an evacuation, since his -- since he had that stroke none of the leaders who followed him have been able to do the thing that the majority of israelis say in some form should be done, which is to say, to reverse the settlement project and try to reach some accommodation with the palestinians. so his loss to his stroke is as important, in my mind, as the
assassination of rabin, that obviously was a key moment that derailed the peace process. >> rose: or changed history. >> well, yes. exactly. i don't think you can overstate it. >> rose: would he, in your judgment, and in the judgment of people who knew him have withdrawn from the west bank? >> , you know,, there are two theories of that, one is that he did gaza in order to avoid dealing with the west bank. the second theory, and this is where i lean, is that the man was ruthlessly pragmatic and, if he felt that the way to secure israel's demographic future, meaning as a jewish majority homeland that is a democracy ws to lift up the ten, 20, 30, 40,000 settlers from the west bank he would have done it and he had the power within the society to try to execute that. so i think that they were heading in that direction, we
will never know, obviously but i think it is plausible. >> rose: we will come back to that, there is more to talk about in terms of what happened after the evacuation from gaza. as a zionist, talk to me about him. you a talked about, written about that. >> him as a zionist? >> yes. >> that's a great question. i mean, i think in a lot of ways sharon -- >> rose: the brand of zionism. >> what is weird is that sharon didn't come from either real camp of zionism, he really wasn't born into ideology, he was at jeffrey said ruthlessly pragmatic, work is what he believed in and he had no faith at all in arabs, in palestinians negotiating with them, working with them, his view was in some ways the revisionist who is building an iron wall, making it tough, making israel impenetrable and then when it came time to make some decisions about moving forward because it became no longer possible to hold on to all of this territory and people and still call
yourself a jewish democracy that's when he began to think about talking about occupation and switching, so in some ways i think, you know, his story is the story of his country, his story is the story of zion inism both in its most brutal form and in its effort to come to terms with reality. >> rose: would you consider him, i know you suggested it, jeffrey, the greatest israeli military leader, i mean more so than barack obama, more so than diane, more so than whoever? >> well, i guess i should qualify that, he is the greatest reckless general israel had. you know, you could argue about, look, ehud barak is the most decorated soldier, sharon had some operations to his name that were extraordinary in the 1973 war, when israel was on its
heels for a while, he somehow managed to cross the suez canal with his tank division and came within striking distance of cairo. it was indicate an achievement and it is one of those achievements that is studied by militaries around the world. of course, you know, where does the reckless part come in? he decided in that kind of ruthless way he was going to remake 11 upon to expel for good the plo and he got sucked into a quagmire and it became in some ways israel's vietnam, so, you know, you have to put that in the discredit column, but certainly he was a sort of tank commander that any prime minister would want to have in his corner at a really stressful moment. >> rose: george patton like? >> yeah. i mean, i guess that is -- you might not argue that pat gone is the best american general but certainly the boldest and sharon -- >> rose: and daring? >> that's right. >> and for not, famous for not following orders.
>> exactly. so the other thing is he pan 101 in the early fifties and this was the first elite commando unit and the whole ethic of that but, no rules, we are above rules and we lie, and they were lied about afterwards and that became sort of the way that these commando units or these 19-year-old kid, very bright, very capable young people, doing these very daring acts and he set the tone for that throughout the entire commando units of the israeli military. >> rose: what was his relationship with others, both in likud and labor, whether it was just think of all the people who have been prime ministers from shanir to barack to simon perez, netanyahu, take -- i mean i will answer quickly. >> rose: rabin. >> i think the older guys, these
gaze really admired him in a way for his native born grit that they loved, that they felt represented sort of the sabre mentality and outlook, his piers found it difficult to get along with him and without his career he got in incredible rifts with people. he and netanyahu never got along. >> why is that? >> because he was a guy who followed any rulings rules and wanted it entirely his own way, he was vein floors you, charming certainly but a difficult guy who wanted to do it his way. you know, charlie, this comes back to that point about, you know, he was all energy .. and all that energy was forward, always move forward, and in lebanon, for instance, that energy was used for destructive purposes. in the 73 war, in the gaza withdrawal, i mean, he was such a man of action he was uncontainable. this is the point i think that ethan is
making. >> rose: you also said that, i think you said in a point that he had -- was courtly to his political rivals and had a surprising sense of humor. >> that is true, i think both you and jeffrey spent time with him, as did i, and he was a funny guy. i mean like a lot of people in public life, there are, they are far more approachable and appealing to talk to than you would expect. irrespective of the things they have done so that's right. and he had a kind of manner to him. we know he was brought up by snobbish russian parents who found a lot of that whole sovereign thing a little irritating and i think he had a courtly manner. he was quite charming and he wanted -- this is a strange thing to talk about, a general in this way but he seemed to want to please and he wanted to make sure that you were comfortable and you were happy. >> rose: exactly. >> if not, it is not a well-known characteristic among israeli ministers, so i found it unusual. >> but how did he feel about the
idea of the jewish state, that thousand becomes part of the negotiations? >> i think he was completely in favor of focusing on that thought. i mean, that the truth is -- >> rose: got it from him -- >> i think they have been talking about it for decades to be fair but sharon definitely felt, this was the core issue for him, that when the arab world accepts the legitimacy of the jewish state in its presence then we can talking about making peace and until then and we are not there, he would say, there is no point, so this, you know,, whether he would have made this demand, it seems to me quite reasonable that he might have but he wasn't interesting this negotiating he didn't believe in negotiations with his opponent in this case. >> rose:. >> you know,, it is interesting you say that, because, charlie, i spent a lot of time with him in 2000 before he ran for prime minister and he had very discouraging things to say about palestinians and about the immutable nature of arab hatred for jews.
the rhetoric was toned down when he became prime minister for the obvious reason you have to be careful about the way you talk when you are not simply the opposition leader, but when i saw him several months before he had the stroke, suffered the stroke, the world view had not changed at all. the pull-out from gaza was almost a response to what he saw as the immutability of arab hatred, he was looking to engineer a divorce. he was not looking for negotiations. >> rose: then there is also the thing about bashir al afad, you may have written about this, the only person he really feared was eric sharon. >> the interesting thing about that is when assad looked at sharon, especially his behavior in lebanon, he saw himself, you know, assad -- well, no, no, there are, i mean as tom used, as tom coined the expression
hamas ruled, he he killed 20,000 people and leveled the city, he saw in sharon perhaps the only israeli he feared could do the same. ariel sharon was very middle eastern, you know, and he -- and i don't mean that in sort of an enlightened way. he absorbed the lessons of the behavior of people like bashar al-assad and often thought that israel had to be as brutal as those kind of dictators and that's what got him into such trouble. >> rose: in lebanon. >> in lebanon. there is also this, this idea that the withdrawal from gaza was a huge mistake, because it led to hamas getting more power, and destroyed any kind of unity within the palestinian political -- >> there are two arguments whether it was a mistake, the right wing argument says we should never left what is our, the left wing liberal argument which is that by not negotiating
with the palestinian leadership, and just leaving, you basically deleo legitimate sighed the leadership in ramallah and allowed hamas to rise in gaza, so that's the strong argument that has been made about why he is partly responsible for the rise of hamas, and, you know, one of the things that when jeffrey was talking about was a pivot moment in 2006 when he had his stroke, we don't really know, in fact, whether that is the reason that hamas rose or whether hamas would have risen anyway we don't know many things and whether he would have been able to go ahead with planned pullouts if in fact they were planned they were talked about for sure. one of the ultimate ironies of ariel sharon's act was interpreted by his arab foes as an act of a pit haitian, he left gaza without getting anything in return and that is the -- and that is a legitimate critique. his belief that the palestinians would not negotiate under any
circumstances led him to take this unilateral step which was interpreted by by hamas for their brand of terrorism, on the other hand, you know, whatever failure you can attribute to the unilateral disengagement from gaza the fact of the matter remains today there are no israeli settlers in gaza and from a lot of people's perspective that is a good thing and only ariel sharon could actually have removed them. >> rose: so let me as we talk about ariel sharon and eric sharon come to the question of where we are today and what we know about the negotiations that secretary kerry is trying to pull off. >> well, jeffrey may know more than i, there has been a cone of styles around it, kerry and his dozens and dozens of helpers have been trying desperately to get some kind of framework together that the israelis and palestinians can agree on to move forward to allow for more settlers to be moved possibly or in any case for there to be a two state deal. i mean, the four years i was in
jerusalem last until 2012 there was no sense that this government, this israeli government had any taste for removal of anybody, except for maybe a few outposts but certainly not the blocks and certainly not most settler by any means and nothing like the 80,000 that you would imagine would be necessary to move forward with a deal, but, you know, so there is that issue, this enthere is the issue of the jordan valley, while the palestinians permit some kind of military presence in the jordan valley and of course there is the problem of the return of jerusalem so all of these issues one can't imagine how they are finding a way through. on the other hand, they are still working, what do you know, jeffrey? >> that's exactly right. >> jeffrey are you still surprised that it is still, quote, viable, if it is? >> you know, i mean, both sides are just trying to figure out when is john kerry going to leave them alone already so they can figure out a way of saying no without it soupeding like a no, he is wearing them down,
twofold, the palestinians are actually divided half of palestine is led by hamas and that's a nonstaper, abbas is not as strong as i can't say sir arafat, and on the israeli side, the prime minister has as many suspicions of the palestinian as sharon had but not the same confidence in his own ability to change reality around him. nenetanyahu was actually a man f inaction, not action, and so it is hard to see him taking the kind of bold, even reckless stems that an ariel sharon might take in the circumstances. >> on the other hand, it is clear there are many hand here, on the other hand it is clear that in the interest of ma mowb abbas and netanyahu, clearly they share and interest in actually getting some kind of deal and keeping, keeping kerry happy with them and if that is what you believe if it would
create some form of substantial and peace in that sport of the middle east s so it seems to me, netanyahu does understand, does grasp that there is a demographic problem, if israel wants to be a jewish democracy it can't have control over the west bank. >> the kea questions, the key question for netanyahu is, you know, when sharon did the withdrawal, withdrew settlers from gaza he knew the likud party would split and lot would go with him and form a new party. netanyahu understands, exactly the challenges facing israeli moment but netanyahu go too far with kerry his better is going to collapse. if he leaves the party not many people are follow him and this is a guy who is very interested in maintaining his grip on the prime minister ship so i am just not confident kerry can talk him into boldness .. >> rose: on that, thank you, jeffrey, thank you, thank you, ethan. >> thank you. >> rose: we will be back, stay with us. >> with every israeli, every jew
wants peace, now, it is expected that generals would like war and myself i was branded sometimes a general who is looking for war. >> rose: over the years i have had several conversations with eric sharon, off camera and only camera, we conclude this evening with a look at some of those moments. >> what do you think of your friend, your former warrior friend mr. rabin, prime minister rabin? how do you feel about the way he is running the government and what do you say in knees private moments? because the stories are you two remain friend and still have conversations about the future of the country that you have fought for. >> i know i have been for many, many years, maybe 43, 44 years, i have a lot of appreciation to mr. rabin. i have been working with him and i see him times, but we never
discuss politics or my problems, but we discuss national problems, national security problems. i think that in this case, by shaking hands with every criteria, and i think by signing this agreement or declare principles with one palestinian terrorist organization with the assumption that they have an agreement between them, that they are not going to fight each other, i think by that -- >> rose: hamas and fatah? >> they have an agreement and among the others as well, perhaps, that they will continue terror and that they are not going to attack each others. all of these assumptions that one organization will defend the
israelis from the other, we know that does not exist. so all i can say, i think that in this case mr. rabin made a mistake, and also generals and bright general accounts make mistakes. >> rose: and you have made mistakes yourself. >> everyone throughout their career make mistakes. >> rose: tell me about the mistake you think rabin has made is that he says israel has nothing -- the israel defense force idea has nothing to fear from the plo, we do have questions of assault on individuals, but but nothing that this great nation has to fear from the plo, do you disagree with that? >> i disagree with that completely, let's look back at the last 45, 46 years we can see that everything started from a palestinian terror, including
like assault on individuals, terror, murder, israel, in israel you cannot live in terror so we had to defend ourselves and we started by complaining to americans, to the united nations and we tried to take defensive opinions, but -- >> rose: and then you created unit 101 and you became head of that and you went out and whenever they would make a terrorist attack against israel then you would retaliate expo men chully stronger. >> it was the policy of the government then, i think it was the right policy. israel could not survive that way. it is a tiny, small country, tiny, tiny small country, it is a beautiful country, and we know that to live there the government then led by the late decided to take these steps against terrorists and against those hosting those terrorist organizations in order to make life possible.
they could not live, we could not live in terror, they could not live, and the chain, terrorist act led to war. >> they led to war and i can see now, that after this agreement, i can see all the seeds of the future wars that we would like to prevent. >> rose: you have said before that you wanted to assassinate arafat. you wanted to see him killed because you thought he was an enemy of the state, correct? >> i think that the government through the years made tremendous effort to bring to the situation that knees murderers and talking about a murderer, who got more civilian jewish blood on his hands than anybody else in modern time should be out of power and society. >> rose: but tell me this. >> we made a tremendous effort. >> rose: to kill him?
>> you where us a very hard work. >> rose: why is that a hard word, you wanted to kill him. >> yes, all the israeli government wanted to get rid of him, yes. >> rose: that's an euphemism for killing him. >> exactly. let's was the right word. rose: what is the right word. >> in our society, in western society when people hear the word to kill, assassinate, they feel -- because we speak about a murderer, we speak about a man. >> rose: you wanted to murder him? >> no. we wanted to kill him. get rid of him. >> rose: why did you fail? >> it was complicate, it was complicated. and -- >> rose: he would always escape because he was on the move and you couldn't get that close? >> look, there were many reasons for that. one of the reasons that prevented us from doing that is let's say we wanted -- as i said, the labor government and likud and national unit
government, unity government, but we were very much aware of the fact that the civilian people, the people didn't have my contact with this murderer altogether and he and therefore we had to be very careful. that was mainly the main reason why israel failed, because these are altogether known to have maybe one of the best intelligence services and maybe the best special units and could have done a tremendous thing but maybe that was the main reason for that. >> rose: do you want to be prime minister? >> to be prime minister is not my greatest dream. >> do you want to be prime minister? >> if i feel it is necessary i will d do it. but it is not my dream. i believe that if i become a prime minister, it may be some of the dreams of the jewish people can be accomplished. >> rose: we use that quote. and -- >> i learn from you. >> rose: that's right.
you don't believe that netanyahu is the best person to lead the likud party? >> i don't think i in this is a place here to discuss israeli politicians. we have some problems in our party, the lic likud, i believe these problems can be solved. >> how long can israel continue the way it is without some prospect for peace? without some prospect for not expecting war at any moment? how do you go about changing that? >> >> rose: perez says to you, what is your plan? >> first, i think that every israeli, every jew wants peace. it is generally expected that
generals are to like war and myself i was branded sometimes a general who is looking for war. to me it is something personal. i have been participating in all the wars of the state of israel and i went through the ranks. i started as a private first class, and i saw all the the battles, i saw all the horrors of the battles. i felt all the fears of the battles. we lost our -- myself, i lost most of my friends in battles. i was very seriously wounded twice and i felt terrible pain being in hospitals and i had to take decisions of life and death of myself and of others, and believe me, i understand the power of peace better than most of those politicians that speak about peace and never had this
experience. now the question of how long can we live like that? we will have to live like that as long as there is no change in the attitude of the arab world to jews in israel, and right now we have not yet seen any change. it does mean we have to wait with, until then but we have to be very, very careful. and i think it is important that friends of israel, nonjewish friends of israel should understand that we are facing all the time and now a threat to our very existence. so we, the jews have to decide, if the jews want to have an independent country of their
own, they have to be ready to hold, in one hand. it doesn't mean they do not want peace and i will say but what one can do about it. >> are you disappointed in rabin. >> not him personally. we have good relations. >> rose: how do you feel about -- >> i think that he is maybe ago terrible mistake, a historic mistake that we will pay for it. i'm sorry for that. >> rose: just sorry? >> i'm sorry. that is what i feel, i think. i worry about it. i worry. i think that this government, this kind of government, into one of the most dangerous situations we have ever been since the establishment of the state of israel.
i have seen difficult situations, i never lost myself confidence, but in this case i think it is going to be very, very complicated. i believe in the strength of the jews and i believe .. i believe in our rights to this country and so on, and i can we will be able to overcome it, but it will be very hard and very costly. >> rose: why aren't you more involved? i mean you write an article here and you write an article there, you are on the phone to a lot of people, i assume the prime minister talks to you occasionally. i know you talk to a lot of people, you told me the other day you got in your car after the change of power in the gaza strip, which is only about what, 30 kilometers from where you live? >> less. >> 12 kilometers. you drove to gaza. >> yes. >> to look. you are -- you want to be back in. do you think it will ever happened? ar are you prepared
are you ready? >> i think that -- i he the answer is yes. i think the first -- first of all how to return, how to bring back the responsibility for the future of israel and the future and the fate is -- it is not in our hand, we handed it of. it is not in our hands. the first thing is how to bring it back to be in our hands. the second thing is, i believe that i can provide the necessary answers to those problems and -- >> rose: no concessions anywhere is your answer. no concessions. >> no, no. what i am saying myself, there
will be concessions. there will be concessions. just because concessions in the solutions -- >> rose: here is the judgment on you so far. >> yes. >> rose: great soldier, terrible politician. >> look, one can use any kind of terms and things like that, and i don't know what they mean. to be a great politician, to shake hands with a murderer is to be a great politician. to go around to make concessions when it comes to jewish life, that means to be a great politician. i would say -- to create illusions, to create illusions that means you become a great politician? i never involved
myself in giving marks to others, if they are great politicians, not great politicians. i think the results are important. i remember years ago, it was a 21 years ago, after i left the military, i came up with the idea to form the likud, to bring together five parties, the national jewish parties into one political likud, and everyone burst into laugh, they said he is a good sol soldier he knows w to move divisions. he commanded hundreds of tanks and troops in battles but what does he understand in politics? but i did it, and the likud, so i would not -- >> rose: you won't accept their judgment you are a bad politician if it means the ability to build? >> not at all. >> rose: here is what else i
hear. we are scared of him. lebanon. he is uncontrollable. >> i think -- in i have been in all the wars of israel. if there was one war that the government, the whole government knew about every step that was taken, every detail about what happened and about what is going to happen in the coming day, that was the war in lebanon, the first time in israeli history that every step, every phase, every act in this war was brought to the government and mr. begin said oh because i it s so sensitive and so on, that all the government would serve, would act as the lieutenant and
that was the situation then. and i don't see any reason to be afraid of. i know it is very easy to blame people, very easy to blame people, but i don't think -- >> rose: and you say to foreign minister perez and to prime minister rabin, you are both older than i am. >> look, as far as ages here, i don't think it is important. i know young people are very old, and i know all the people which are young, the problem is can you do things? can you -- can you handle the situation? do you have the answers to the problems? i believe that i do have the answers to the problems and i can provide the answers to
the most complicated problems that this country has got. >> rose:e tom friedman wrote a book which you were mentioned a number of times, and it was said for example about you that you were the one person that assad feared in israel, and he is now writing a column for "the new york times" and he said recently that there is increased sense among the israeli public that they used to say, they are more inclined to want to see two very separate states and to give up some territory and see a palestinian state established and have a very clean division between them, do you think that is a good idea? >> first of all, about assad. >> fares you. >> fares me, maybe i am the right man to negotiate with him, because i am afraid he doesn't fear the present government, and
maybe that would have been a different government and maybe we could have reached peace and a better peace for both sides. and about the separation, i don't see any possibility of separation, because jews and arabs are living together, because what is the means of separations? we have the precept of a boundary, we have closed to one, close to one will palestinians who are israeli citizens so what is going to happen? are we going to separate? and many of them do support the hamas movement and so on, so are we going to separate ourself from them? what is going to happen to jerusalem? jerusalem is a mixed town? are we going to have to divide jerusalem? are we going to prevent palestinians from gaza to travel to jerusalem or
to hebron or the jericho? what kind of segregation? are we going to build fences, hundreds and hundred of kilometers offenses? who will be able to defend those fences? so i think that is not the answer. >> rose: what is the answer? >> the answer is that first of all the jews and arabs live together as others live together. jews and arabs have been living together for many, many years in that country, but in order to be together, i think that law and order should be kept altogether in every democracy you have to keep law and order for all the population, law and order and justice should be made, as it is connected to things. >> rose: do you have a home in the likud party? benjamin netanyahu the head of the party said about you, you are a permanent subversive and suggested you might leave, you ought to leave the likud. >> look, many things have been
said, and -- >> netanyahu said about you. >> i don't think that is the right thing to do. i will do, i formed the likud when i left the military in 1973. i brought five parties together and made, i think i made the main contribution to form the likud and, therefore, the party -- the party was for me a way to implement ideas. the party is not a -- >> how is it that you, a military man,, rabin, a military man and ehud barak, a military man, look at things so differently and rabin and barak
seem to look at it the same way and you differently? >> when we were in the military, i am sure there are many other generals that see different than barak and rabin, and i think -- i don't know what the opinion of barak, because in the military, he doesn't have a chance to say, but it doesn't make a difference. we can find somebody else who can bring his opinions. there are different views, but the evaluation of the situation, and about the risk that this tiny small country can take upon itself and i think already things israel can't take upon itself and i think peace means security, and peace without security is not peace, it is not a desire of anyone, it should
not be to be peace without having security,. >> and you have said before you believe that -- in today's climate peace has become the goal rather than a means? >> peace is a goal, but what we need first of all is security, and i don't think that this goal or this desire to, to want peace should interfere in the stake that must be taken against terror and everything is still in our hand and we could have given the right answer, and peacefully captioning sponsored by rose communications
the following production was produced in high definition. and their buns are something i have yet to find anywhere else. >> cause i'm not inviting you to my house for dinner -- >> -- breaded and fried and gooey and lovely. >> in the words of arnold schwarzenegger -- i'll be back! >> you've heard of connoisseur -- i'm a common-sewer! >> i knew i had to ward off some vampires or something. >> let's talk desserts