♪ MUSIC ♪ >>GOOD MORNING AND WELCOME TO GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES.

I'M DAVID DUMKE.

>>AND I'M KATIE CORONADO.

WELCOME.

>>TODAY WE ARE JOINED BY FORMER DEPUTY NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR TO PRESIDENT OBAMA, BEN RHODES.

BEN HAS WRITTEN TWO BESTSELLING NOVELS, IS ACTIVE IN PODCASTS AND A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT PROJECTS.

WELCOME TO THE SHOW, BEN, >>THANKS FOR HAVING ME.

>>BEN, YOU'VE BEEN ON THE NEWS A LOT COMMENTING ON UKRAINE, RUSSIA SITUATION.

WHEN YOU WORKED FOR PRESIDENT OBAMA IN THE WHITE HOUSE, YOU DEALT WITH VLADIMIR PUTIN, BOTH AS PRESIDENT AND AS PRIME MINISTER.

DOES THIS SURPRISE YOU?

IS THIS IN CHARACTER WITH HIM?

WERE YOU EXPECTING THIS KIND OF BEHAVIOR GIVEN THE STAKES?

>>IT DIDN'T SURPRISE ME BECAUSE IN MANY WAYS IT'S KIND OF THE LOGICAL ENDPOINT OF WHAT HE'S BEEN BUILDING TO FOR 20 YEARS.

HE'S BASICALLY BUILT A SYSTEM THAT HAS BEEN INCREASINGLY AUTOCRATIC INSIDE OF RUSSIA, AND INCREASINGLY AGGRESSIVE BEYOND ITS BORDERS, PARTICULARLY IN THE FORMER SOVIET UNION.

THAT'S BEEN THE STEADY TRAJECTORY.

>>I THINK EVEN IN THE OBAMA YEARS, AT THE BEGINNING YOU MENTIONED HE WAS PRIME MINISTER.

HE WAS STILL THE MAIN SHOT CALLER.

DMITRY MEDVEDEV WAS PRESIDENT.

BUT YOU HAD SENSE OF KIND OF COMPETING POINTS OF VIEW WITHIN THEIR POWER STRUCTURE.

RIGHT?

THERE WERE THE OLIGARCH BUSINESS TYPES WHO WANTED TO SOME EXTENT, BETTER RELATIONS WITH THE WEST; THE HARDCORE, FORMER KGB, FSB INTELLIGENCE SERVICES TYPES WHO PUTIN HAS KNOWN SINCE HE WAS IN THE KGB; THE MILITARY.

THERE WERE SOME LIBERALS, MAYBE NOT LIBERALS IN THE WAY IN WHICH YOU AND I WOULD THINK OF IT, BUT PEOPLE WHO WANTED RUSSIA TO DIVERSIFY ITS ECONOMY AND HAVE INDEPENDENT MEDIA.

OVER THE COURSE OF THE EIGHT OBAMA YEARS, THAT SHRUNK CONSIDERABLY.

AND BY THE END, AFTER THE INVASION OF UKRAINE AND ANNEXATION OF CRIMEA, THE INNER CIRCLE WHAT WAS REALLY JUST HIM AND THOSE SECURITY GUYS.

IT WAS JUST THOSE FORMER FSB TYPES.

HE WAS LISTENING TO FEWER AND FEWER PEOPLE AND GETTING MORE AND MORE AGGRESSIVE.

>>AND SO THAT'S KIND OF BEEN THE PATHWAY HE'S FOLLOWED.

I THINK THAT THIS IS JUST ENORMOUSLY MORE RISKY OF A PROJECT THAT HE'S TAKEN ON THOUGH.

I MEAN, THE ANNEXATION OF CRIMEA, THIS IS A PENINSULA, A RELATIVELY CONSTRAINED GEOGRAPHIC SPACE, 60% ETHNIC RUSSIAN.

ALL HE REALLY HAD TO DO WAS MOVE IN SOME SPECIAL FORCES.

THERE WAS VERY LITTLE FIGHTING AND HE ANNEXED THAT TERRITORY.

THIS IS AN ENTIRE COUNTRY FILLED WITH PEOPLE WHO DON'T WANT THEM THERE.

AND SO I THINK HE'S COMMITTED THE TRUE TRAGIC HISTORICAL ERROR OF AN AUTOCRAT, WHICH IS HE STOPPED LISTENING TO DISSENTING VIEWS AND THOUGHT HE COULD IMPOSE HIS WILL, BECAUSE IT FEELS LIKE HE CAN DO THAT AT HOME AND IN OTHER PLACES WHERE HE SOUGHT TO DO IT.

BUT HE'S BIT OFF FAR MORE THAN HE CAN CHEW.

>>SPEAKING OF POLITICS AND GLOBAL ISSUES LIKE THIS ONE, YOU'VE WRITTEN TWO BOOKS.

YOUR MOST RECENT ONE TALKS ABOUT BEING AN AMERICAN IN THIS CHALLENGING WORLD OF POLITICS.

CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT THAT A LITTLE BIT?

>>YEAH, AND THIS TIES INTO PUTIN.

WHEN I LEFT GOVERNMENT, KIND OF SPIT OUT ON THE OTHER END OF EIGHT YEARS IN THE WHITE HOUSE, THAT'S ALREADY DISORIENTING.

THEN DONALD TRUMP IS ELECTED AND THAT'S KIND OF THE OPPOSITE OF EVERYTHING I'D WORKED ON.

BUT ALSO GLOBALLY, THE TREND LINES WERE IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION OF WHAT SOMEONE LIKE ME BELIEVES IN.

IT WAS AWAY FROM DEMOCRACY, AWAY FROM LIBERALISM, TOWARDS THIS KIND OF GROWING TREND OF AUTOCRACY AND ETHNONATIONALISM.

RIGHT?

AND SO IN THIS BOOK, I BASICALLY SET TO ANSWER THE QUESTION OF HOW DID THIS HAPPEN AND, WHY DID THIS HAPPEN?

AND I LOOKED AT HUNGARY WHERE THERE'S AN AUTOCRATIC LEADER, VICTOR ORBAN, WHO'S MODELED HIMSELF VERY MUCH ON RUSSIA, ON PUTIN.

AND SO I LOOKED AT PUTIN.

AND THEN I LOOKED AT CHINA, AND THE SYSTEM THAT THEY'VE EVOLVED.

AND THEN I KIND OF LOOKED AT THE UNITED STATES FROM THE OUTSIDE IN, WHICH I THINK IS SOMETHING AMERICANS DON'T DO ENOUGH.

WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE TO OTHER PEOPLE?

AND THEN WHAT DOES THE WORLD LOOK LIKE FROM MY VANTAGE POINT?

AND WHAT I BASICALLY FOUND WAS THAT THERE'S ONE BIG TREND IN THE WORLD RIGHT NOW, IN THE SENSE THAT YOU'VE HAD REALLY A FAILURE OF GLOBALIZATION TO DELIVER FOR PEOPLE.

YOU'VE HAD BACKLASH AGAINST SYSTEMS THAT APPEAR RIGGED FOR THE WEALTHY OR THE POWERFUL.

YOU'VE GOT RAMPANT AMOUNTS OF CORRUPTION.

YOU'VE GOT TECHNOLOGY PLATFORMS THAT HAVE DONE WONDERFUL THINGS IN TRANSFORMING THE WORLD, BUT ALSO BECOME THESE KIND OF PERFECT TOOLS OF DISINFORMATION, AND IN THE CHINESE CASE MONITORING AND SURVEILLANCE.

AND BASICALLY WHAT ALL OF THESE AUTOCRATIC LEADERS HAVE DONE IN THEIR OWN WAY IS CAPITALIZE ON THE BACKLASH TO GLOBALIZATION BY OFFERING THE MOST TRADITIONAL FORM OF IDENTITY, AN ETHNONATIONALIST IDENTITY.

PUTIN, MAKE RUSSIA GREAT AGAIN.

MAKE HUNGARY GREAT AGAIN.

THIS IS NOT UNIQUE TO AMERICA.

WE'RE INTERACTING WITH THE SAME FORCES THAT ARE KIND OF RESHAPING THE WORLD UNDERNEATH OUR FEET.

AND REALLY, THE MAIN LESSON I TOOK AWAY FROM IT AS SOMEONE WHO WORKED IN FOREIGN POLICY FOR EIGHT YEARS, IS THE ANSWER TO THAT IS LESS ANY FOREIGN POLICY WE PURSUE AND MORE, HEY, ARE WE REINVESTING IN OUR OWN DEMOCRACY?

ARE WE FORTIFYING OUR OWN DEMOCRACY?

ARE WE ABLE TO AGREE UPON WHAT IT MEANS TO BE AMERICAN AT A TIME WHEN THAT'S INCREDIBLY CONTESTED?

ARE WE ABLE TO GET OUR ARMS AROUND THESE TECHNOLOGIES THAT ARE UPENDING THE INFORMATION ECOSYSTEMS THAT PEOPLE LIVE IN?

ARE WE ABLE TO GET THE CORRUPTION THE KIND OF BREEDS CYNICISM, AND THE INEQUALITY THAT BREEDS CYNICISM UNDER CONTROL?

BUT THESE THINGS ARE NOT UNRELATED FROM WHAT PUTIN IS DOING IN UKRAINE IN A LOT OF WAYS, BECAUSE WE HAVE TO FORTIFY THE DEMOCRATIC EXAMPLE, SMALL D DEMOCRATIC EXAMPLE, IN THE WORLD IF WE ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO COMPETE IN THE LONG TERM, NOT JUST WITH A PUTIN, WHO'S BASICALLY A DISRUPTOR, BUT WITH A XI JINPING, WHO HAS A DIFFERENT WAY OF ORGANIZING SOCIETY AND THINKS IT'S GOING PRETTY WELL.

>>I WANTED TO ASK YOU, AND YOU TOUCHED ON THIS IN YOUR SECOND BOOK, BUT WE'VE PLAYED SINCE WORLD WAR II PRETTY MUCH AN AMERICAN MODEL FOR WORLD POLITICS AND STABILITY.

A LOT OF US CAME TO BELIEVE, PARTICULARLY BY THE END OF THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION, THAT DEMOCRACY WAS INEVITABLE AND KIND OF HUMAN RIGHTS GROWTH WAS INEVITABLE.

>>BUT NOW WE HAVE DIFFERENT MODELS.

YOU JUST MENTIONED XI JINPING IN CHINA, AND PUTIN CERTAINLY HAS HIS MODEL.

YOU OUTLINED VERY ASTUTELY ORBAN IN HUNGARY, HOW HE DRIFTED INTO THAT CAMP AND ADOPTED THAT MODEL.

IS IT NAIVE OF AMERICANS THAT STILL BELIEVE DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS ARE INEVITABLE GROWTH, AND HOW DO WE FIGHT TO SUPPORT THOSE, THOSE MOVEMENTS?

>>I THINK THAT THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING I THINK FOR PEOPLE TO DIGEST, RIGHT?

BECAUSE I CAME OF AGE THROUGH THE END OF THE COLD WAR AND IT SEEMED LIKE THESE BIG QUESTIONS OF HISTORY HAD BEEN SETTLED, AND DEMOCRACY HAD WON, AND OPEN SOCIETIES HAD WON.

AND IN THE NINETIES, IT WAS KIND OF A TRIUMPHALISM AS GLOBALIZATION APPEARED TO BE BRINGING OPEN MARKETS AND DEMOCRACIES AROUND THE WORLD, AND THERE SEEMED TO BE AN INEVITABILITY TO THAT.

AND ALSO THE INEVITABILITY TO AMERICA HAVING THIS KIND OF TOTALLY PREEMINENT POSITION.

>>THE REALITY IS BOTH OF THOSE THINGS WERE VERY ARTIFICIAL IN A WAY.

NO NATION WAS GOING TO MAINTAIN THE DEGREE OF INFLUENCE THAT AMERICA HAD IN THE NINETIES FOR THAT LONG.

OTHER COUNTRIES ALWAYS SEEK TO BALANCE OUT THAT KIND OF POWER.

AND I THINK AFTER THE IRAQ WAR, CANDIDLY, KIND OF FREAKED SOME COUNTRIES OUT.

IT'S LIKE THIS SHOULDN'T BE SO EASY FOR THESE GUYS TO DO THAT.

AND YOU STARTED TO SEE CHINA AND RUSSIA PUSHING BACK MORE.

BUT EVEN THE SPREAD OF LIBERAL DEMOCRACY IS NOT THE NORM IN HISTORY.

PUTIN IS THE NORM IN HISTORY.

WORLD POLITICS IS A STORY OF STRONG MEN AND NATIONALIST POLITICS THAT LEADS TO CONFLICT.

THAT'S KIND OF WHAT HAS BEEN THE NORM MORE THAN THE ABERRATION.

AND SO WE SHOULDN'T BE SURPRISED THAT THIS HAS RETURNED.

WHAT I DID FOR THE BOOK IS REALLY TALK TO DEMOCRATIC ACTIVISTS AND PEOPLE LIKE ALEXEI NAVALNY, WHO'S NOW IN PRISON IN RUSSIA, HUNGARIAN OPPOSITION, HONG KONG PROTESTORS.

AND WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS MAKE DEMOCRACY NOT FEEL LIKE...

I THINK IT BECAME SEEN AS A PART OF THE KIND OF TECHNOCRATIC DAVOS.

YOU KNOW, TRUMP WAS VERY GOOD AT EXPLOITING THE SENSE THAT DEMOCRACY WAS KIND OF TIED UP WITH WHAT PEOPLE DIDN'T LIKE ABOUT THE WORLD, THE INEQUALITY, AND FAVORS THE RICH AND POWERFUL AT THE EXPENSE OF OTHERS.

AND IT'S KIND OF DISTANT FROM CONCERNS ABOUT TRADITIONAL IDENTITY, WHETHER IT'S RELIGIOUS, OR ETHNIC BASED IDENTITY.

I THINK DEMOCRACY HAS TO GET CLOSER TO PEOPLE ON THE GROUND, THE ORGANIZING MECHANISMS OF DEMOCRACY, HOW DEMOCRACY IS ABLE TO SOLVE PEOPLE'S PROBLEMS FROM THE LOCAL LEVEL ON UP, TRYING TO ENCOURAGE AND BRING IN THE PARTICIPATION OF PEOPLE.

SO IT'S NOT JUST LIKE SOMETHING WE CONSUME ON TWITTER AND VOTE EVERY FOUR YEARS.

IT'S DEMOCRACY DEPENDS UPON PEOPLE BEING ENGAGED.

SO I THINK THERE REALLY NEEDS TO BE A KIND OF DEMOCRATIC RENEWAL.

AND I THINK ACTUALLY THAT'S WHAT ZELENSKYY HAS TAPPED INTO A UKRAINE, WHICH IS A SENSE OF LIKE A CIVIC NATIONALISM AGAIN, THAT WE ARE ALL A PART OF SOMETHING BIGGER THAN OURSELVES.

NOW THAT'S ONE THING TO DO THAT IN THE MIDDLE OF A WAR WHERE THE URGENCY'S CLEAR.

BUT I THINK IN THIS COUNTRY WE SHOULD NOT TAKE MULTIRACIAL, MULTIETHNIC DEMOCRACY FOR GRANTED.

>>AND SPEAKING ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE, EARLIER YOU MENTIONED PUTIN AS A DISRUPTOR.

RIGHT?

BUT THAT DISRUPTION THOUGH IS ALREADY HAVING IMPACT HERE.

AND IN YOUR PODCAST, YOU MENTIONED THE WORD FAMINE.

SO IF YOU CAN RELATE THAT TO THE DISRUPTION AND HOW THAT'S A DOMINO EFFECT THAT IMPACTS US RIGHT HERE.

>>WELL, I THINK WARS ALWAYS HAVE SIGNIFICANT UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.

THEY NEVER END HOW PEOPLE THINK THEY ARE GOING TO END AT THE BEGINNING.

SO PUTTING ASIDE JUST UKRAINE.

THERE ARE GOING TO BE RIPPLES FROM THIS WAR FOR MANY YEARS.

THE AMERICAN ECONOMY IS GOING TO BE TESTED BY THE SANCTIONS WE'VE IMPOSED.

WE ALREADY SEE THAT IN HIGHER ENERGY PRICES.

IT'S GOING TO MANIFEST IN OTHER WAYS.

THEY'RE GOING TO BE DISRUPTED SUPPLY CHAINS.

THERE'S GOING TO BE CONTINUED INFLATIONARY PRESSURE.

WE'VE NEVER SANCTIONED A COUNTRY ON THE SCALE THAT WE'VE JUST SANCTIONED RUSSIA.

THEN ALSO IF YOU LOOK GLOBALLY, RUSSIA AND UKRAINE ACCOUNT FOR AN ENORMOUS SHARE OF THE FOOD SUPPLY FOR A LOT OF COUNTRIES THAT ARE TEETERING RIGHT ON THE EDGE ALREADY OF EITHER CONFLICT OR FAMINE.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE MIDDLE EAST AND YOU LOOK AT SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA COUNTRIES THAT GET MORE THAN HALF OF THEIR FOOD STOCKS, THEIR BREAD LITERALLY, FROM RUSSIAN AND UKRAINE.

THAT'S NOT COMING BACK ON THE MARKET.

AND SO WE HAVE TO BE PREPARED FOR THE INCREASING RISK OF FAMINE.

BUT ALSO WHEN THERE'S A LACK OF RESOURCES, THERE'S OFTEN MORE CONFLICT.

AND SO THOSE ARE JUST TWO EXAMPLES IN THE WAYS IN WHICH, NEVERMIND THE REFUGEE ISSUE, WHERE YOU HAVE MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF UKRAINIANS, OBVIOUSLY, WHO HAVE LEFT AND THEY'RE BEING WELCOMED.

BUT THEY'RE GOING TO STAY.

AND CAN SOCIETIES ABSORB THAT SCALE OF REFUGEE INPUT?

SO THIS IS GOING TO PLAY OUT OVER MANY YEARS, AND IT'S GOING TO HAVE MANY RIPPLE EFFECTS THAT GO FAR BEYOND UKRAINE'S BORDERS.

>>BEN, YOU LOOK AT AMERICAN PRESIDENTS SINCE WORLD WAR II AND YOU HAD DIFFERENT POLICIES, BUT YOU HAD GENERAL CONSENSUS ON THE OVERALL DIRECTION.

OBVIOUSLY YOU WERE IN THE WHITE HOUSE AT A TIME OF CHANGE, RIGHT AFTER YOU HAD 9/11, IRAQ, AND AFGHANISTAN GOING ON, WHICH YOU, OF COURSE, INHERITED.

PRESIDENT OBAMA TRIED TO SHIFT IN A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT WAYS AND STILL HAD TO DEAL WITH OLDER PROBLEM KIND OF LEGACY ISSUES.

THEN YOU HAD THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, WHICH RIGHT OR WRONG, WAS A GREAT DEPARTURE FROM THE PAST.

AND NOW IT SEEMS WITH PRESIDENT BIDEN, YOU DON'T HAVE CONSENSUS WITHIN THE UNITED STATES ON THE DIRECTION OF THE US FOREIGN POLICY.

HOW MUCH IS THAT A LIABILITY TO THE UNITED STATES GOING FORWARD AND THE WORLD WE WANT TO LEAD?

>>IT'S JUST A MASSIVE LIABILITY THAT I DON'T THINK AMERICANS APPRECIATE ENOUGH.

YOU KNOW, COLD WAR NOSTALGIA CAN BE DANGEROUS, BECAUSE IT'S NOT LIKE EVERYTHING WAS GOING GREAT IN EVERYTHING WE DID IN THE COLD WAR.

THE ONE THING THAT WAS THE CASE IS THERE WERE KIND OF THESE GUARDRAILS AROUND HOW MUCH AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY COULD SWING IN DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS.

AGREEMENTS WERE KEPT FROM ONE ADMINISTRATION TO THE NEXT.

COMMITMENTS WERE KEPT TO ALLIES.

THE KIND OF BASIC WIRING WAS UNDERSTOOD BY THE WORLD.

AND EVEN WHEN OBAMA CAME IN, HE OPPOSED THE WAR IN IRAQ.

HE BASICALLY DISAGREED WITH BIG CHUNKS OF THE WAR ON TERROR.

BUT WE DIDN'T JUST END IT MUCH TO THE CHAGRIN OF OUR PROGRESSIVE CRITICS.

WE TRIED TO KIND OF PUT IT ON A GLIDE PATH, BRING TROOPS HOME INCREMENTALLY, AND THEN BEGIN TO FOCUS ON THIS BIGGER AGENDA THAT FOR US INCLUDED THINGS LIKE CLIMATE, DOING IRAN NUCLEAR DEAL TO DEAL WITH THAT ISSUE, THE OPENING TO CUBA.

WHAT TRUMP DID IS PROFOUNDLY DIFFERENT THAN ANYTHING WE'D EVER EXPERIENCED BEFORE.

LITERALLY NO AMERICAN PRESIDENT KIND OF CAME INTO OFFICE WITH THE SAME DETERMINATION TO JUST KIND OF UNDO WHAT HIS PREDECESSOR HAD DONE FOR THE SAKE OF UNDOING IT.

AND I THINK WHAT PEOPLE MISS ABOUT THIS IS IT TOOK ALL EIGHT YEARS OF THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO NEGOTIATE THE PARIS CLIMATE ACCORD.

AND IT TOOK THE UNITED STATES TWISTING EVERYBODY'S ARMS TO COME INTO THAT AGREEMENT.

IT TOOK SEVEN YEARS TO BASICALLY GET TO THE IRAN NUCLEAR AGREEMENT, INCLUDING PAINSTAKING NEGOTIATION, A LOT OF SACRIFICES MADE BY ALLIES TO IMPOSE SANCTIONS AND THEN TO UNWIND THOSE SANCTIONS.

IT TOOK WITH CUBA A BIG LEAP TO ESSENTIALLY RESUME DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS, OPEN THINGS UP.

AND WHEN YOU CANCEL ALL THAT, IT'S NOT JUST THE PEOPLE LIKE ME ARE UPSET BECAUSE OF THE THING YOU WORKED ON GOT CANCELED.

IT'S THAT THE NEXT TIME YOU TRY TO MAKE AN AGREEMENT, HOW ARE THOSE COUNTRIES GOING TO LOOK AT YOU?

THEY'RE GOING TO THINK, WELL, IF I MAKE AN AGREEMENT WITH THESE GUYS IS A TRUMP OR SOMEONE LIKE HIM JUST GOING TO COME IN IN TWO OR THREE YEARS AND JUST TEAR IT UP?

YOU COULD FEEL THAT IN GLASGOW AT THE CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCE.

THERE THE UNITED STATES IS ONCE AGAIN SAYING EVERYBODY NEEDS TO DO MORE AND WE NEED YOU GUYS TO GET STOP USING THIS KIND OF METHANE, AND WE NEED TO MAKE THESE PLEDGES.

THEY DIDN'T GET MUCH OUT OF THAT SUMMIT, AND I DON'T FAULT THE BIDEN TEAM.

WHAT I FAULT IS THESE COUNTRIES ARE THINKING LIKE, WELL, WHY SHOULD WE REMAKE OUR ECONOMIES IF THE AMERICANS ARE JUST GOING TO MAKE A BUNCH OF COMMITMENTS THAT THEY THEN BREAK IN TWO OR THREE YEARS.

SO THIS IS A REAL PROBLEM FOR HOW OUR DEMOCRACY INTERACTS WITH OUR FOREIGN POLICY.

THERE HAS TO BE SOME BALANCE BETWEEN CONTINUITY AND CHANGE.

>>GOING BACK TO WHAT YOU JUST SAID ABOUT THE AGREEMENT AND THE OPENING UP WITH CUBA.

THE FIRST PART OF MY QUESTION IS HOW DID YOU GET THAT TO HAPPEN?

AND THE TRUST, RIGHT?

WHICH IS SUPER IMPORTANT IN SOMETHING LIKE THIS THAT HAS HAPPENED FOR SO LONG, RIGHT?

AND THE SECOND PART OF IT IS, DO YOU REALLY THINK THAT WAS THE WAY TO GO?

DO YOU THINK THAT HELPED WITH THE CUENTAPROPISTAS, THE PEOPLE WHO OWNED THEIR OWN BUSINESSES, BUT HAVING TO GIVE BACK TO THE GOVERNMENT A CHUNK OF THE MONEY, STILL HELPING THE COMMUNIST REGIME WHILE I WAS THERE, AND SAW THAT THEY WERE EATING AND EVERYTHING.

THE RIGHTS WERE STILL AN ISSUE, RIGHT?

THEIR HUMAN RIGHTS.

THEY DON'T HAVE FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND THE PRESS.

BUT DO YOU THINK, THOUGH, THAT THEY STILL MOVED FORWARD?

SO THE FIRST THING IS, HOW DID YOU MAKE IT HAPPEN?

THAT WAS A BIG DEAL FOR THESE PEOPLE.

AND DO YOU THINK IT WORKED?

SO, I MEAN, THE HOW.

THE QUICK VERSION IS WE DID A YEAR AND A HALF OF SECRET NEGOTIATIONS.

THE FIRST MEETING I REMEMBER WAS EIGHT HOURS, AND THE BULK OF THAT WAS ALEJANDRO CASTRO, SON OF RAUL CASTRO, GIVING ME THE CUBAN VERSION OF HISTORY BASICALLY.

AND PART OF WHAT I WAS LIKE, LOOK, I DISAGREE WITH THAT, BUT WE'RE HERE TO ACTUALLY TALK ABOUT THE FUTURE HERE, NOT THE PAST.

I THINK BECAUSE THE US AND CUBA, THE PAST IS SO INTENSE AND SO PERSONAL, UNDERSTANDABLY TO PEOPLE, BUT WE'RE NOT GETTING ANYWHERE.

FOR 65 YEARS WE'RE BASICALLY DOING THE SAME THING AND THE CASTROS WERE MORE ENTRENCHED THAN EVER, AND THE CUBAN PEOPLE WERE SUFFERING AS MUCH AS EVER.

AND SO WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME JUST EXAMINING, WHAT WOULD IT LOOK LIKE?

WE HAD A LIST OF THINGS WE WANTED THEM TO DO THAT INCLUDED MULTI-PART ELECTIONS, RIGHT?

THEY HAD A LIST OF STUFF THEY WANTED US TO DO.

GIVE THEM BACK GUANTANAMO, YOU KNOW?

SO THERE'S A LOT OF STUFF WE WEREN'T GOING TO DO, BUT COULD WE IDENTIFY THIS SPACE WHERE WE COULD TAKE THIS LEAP TOGETHER.

AND AT THE CENTER OF IT WAS REESTABLISHING DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS, OPENING EMBASSIES, NORMALIZING RELATIONS, CONTACTS BETWEEN GOVERNMENTS.

AND THEN WHAT WE WERE INTERESTED IN IS OPENING UP AS MUCH SPACE AS POSSIBLE FOR CUENTAPROPISTAS, FOR AMERICANS TO TRAVEL DOWN THERE.

WE FOCUSED A LOT ON INTERNET ACCESS INSIDE OF CUBA, WIFI ACCESS.

AND I DON'T WANT TO SAY THAT TO SOME EXTENT YOU BUILD TRUST, BUT TO SOME EXTENT YOU DON'T AND YOU NEED A THIRD PARTY.

SO THE VATICAN CAME IN LATE.

WE BROUGHT THEM IN TO BE THE THIRD PARTY.

LIKE IF YOU'RE IN A NEGOTIATION AND YOU DON'T REALLY TRUST EACH OTHER, YOU NEED SOMEONE TO WITNESS LITERALLY THE AGREEMENTS.

AND SO WE WENT TO FINALIZE ALL THESE TALKS AT THE VATICAN, AND EACH SIDE HAD TO KIND OF READ ALOUD IN THE PRESENCE OF CARDINAL PAROLIN, THE SECRETARY STATE OF THE VATICAN, THESE COMMITMENTS.

HAVING THAT THIRD PARTY IS WHAT ALLOWED US TO BRIDGE THE FINAL TRUST GAP THAT WE WOULD FOLLOW THROUGH ON WHAT WE SAID WERE TO DO.

AND WE DID.

WE DID, AND THE CUBAN SIDE DID.

I STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT IT WAS WORKING AND IT WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

YOU ASKED ABOUT CUENTAPROPISTAS.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE NUMBERS OF HOW, HOW MANY CUBANS WERE SELF-EMPLOYED, HOW THEY WERE DOING, THE REVENUE THEY WERE BRINGING IN BEFORE TRUMP ROLLED BACK THE POLICY AND AFTER.

THOSE PEOPLE HAVE SUFFERED BECAUSE HE ROLLED BACK THE POLICY.

THAT'S NOT AN OPINION.

THAT'S A FACT.

AND IF YOU DENY AMERICANS THE CAPACITY TO TRAVEL DOWN THERE, PART OF WHAT YOU ALSO KNOW IS THAT A LOT OF THOSE PEOPLE DEPEND ON THAT TRAVEL.

SO IF YOU'RE SAYING WE WON'T LET THEM TRAVEL BECAUSE THAT'S OUR POLICY, YOU HAVE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT MEANS THAT THE RESTAURANTS, THE PALADARS THAT CATER TO TRAVELERS, ARE NOT GOING TO MAKE AS MUCH MONEY.

THE SMALL CRAFTS AND ARTS INITIATIVES ARE NOT GOING TO MAKE AS MUCH MONEY.

THE ENTREPRENEURS THAT WERE BUILDING CONNECTIONS TO ENTREPRENEURS IN AMERICA, THOSE CONNECTIONS WERE SEVERED, AND THOSE PEOPLE WERE HURT.

THE CRITIQUE THAT THEY WERE OPERATING WITHIN AN UNJUST SOCIETY THAT VIOLATED THEIR HUMAN RIGHTS, ABSOLUTELY THE CASE.

BUT THE QUESTION IS, DO YOU WANT TO MAKE THAT BETTER, EVEN IF BETTER IS NOT EVERYTHING YOU'D WANT, OR NOT?

AND I BELIEVE THAT THE KIND OF KEEP A LID ON EVERYTHING APPROACH DOESN'T ACHIEVE THE OBJECTIVE IT CLAIMS IT WANTS, WHICH IS TO IMPROVE THE LIVES OF THE CUBAN PEOPLE AND ENHANCE THEIR FREEDOMS.

OUR BET WAS IF YOU OPEN THIS UP AND IF AMERICANS ARE TRAVELING DOWN THERE AND BUSINESS TIES ARE BEING BUILT AND INTERNET CONNECTIONS ARE BEING BUILT, THERE'S GOING TO BE A MOMENTUM THAT IT'S ULTIMATELY GOING TO LEAD TO POLITICAL CHANGE.

AND IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN ON MIAMI'S TIMELINE.

THEY WERE NOT GOING TO NEGOTIATE THAT AWAY.

BUT OUR BET WAS THAT IF WE CONTINUED THAT COURSE, FIVE YEARS, 10 YEARS, CUBA WOULD BE A FREER PLACE, A MORE PROSPEROUS PLACE, MORE CONNECTED TO THE WORLD.

AND I FEAR THAT NOW THAT'S BEEN PUT BACK FARTHER FROM REACH.

>>IS THERE WORRY WHEN YOU LOOK AT CUBA, WHEN YOU LOOK AT PLACES LIKE RUSSIA AND CHINA, WHO ALSO OPENED UP IN MANY WAYS WESTERN BUSINESSES AND INTERNET, IS THERE A FEAR THAT REGIMES ADAPT TO TECHNOLOGY AS WELL?

>>THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.

AND IT'S ONE THAT SINCE WE'RE IN FLORIDA, SENATOR RUBIO USED TO PUT TO ME.

HE'D POINT TO VIETNAM AND CHINA.

LIKE THESE PLACES LIBERALIZED ECONOMICALLY, BUT LOOK AT THEIR POLITICAL SYSTEMS.

AND IT IS ABSOLUTELY THE CASE THAT TECHNOLOGIES THAT CAN CONNECT PEOPLE AND EMPOWER PEOPLE, THEY'RE ALSO TOOLS OF SURVEILLANCE.

AT THE SAME TIME, WHAT I WOULD ALWAYS SAY IS VIETNAM IS NOT AN ISLAND 90 MILES FROM FLORIDA.

AND THIS IS WHAT THE CUBANS WERE SCARED OF FOR UNDERSTANDABLE REASONS.

THEY DON'T HAVE THE DISTANCE AND THE SIZE TO HAVE THE SAME ANTIBODIES TO CHANGE THAT A VIETNAM OR A CHINA HAS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WORLD WITH MASSIVE POPULATIONS AND MUCH MORE DIVERSE TRADING PARTNERS.

IF THE CUBAN ECONOMY AND SOCIETY STARTED TO GET KIND OF WIRED INTO THE UNITED STATES, I WOULD TAKE THE BET THAT THAT WOULD CHANGE IT.

I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE BECAUSE CUBA'S SMALL ENOUGH THAT THIS MATTERS.

AIRBNB WAS STARTING TO REALLY TAKE OFF IN CUBA.

YOU HAD ORDINARY CUBANS HOSTING AMERICANS IN THEIR HOMES.

THAT MEANS THE MONEY IS GOING TO THOSE CUBANS.

THE GOVERNMENT WILL TRY TO TAKE ITS CUT IN SOME WAY, BUT THAT IS DEFINITELY RESOURCES REACHING CUBANS.

WHAT CONVERSATIONS ARE HAPPENING?

TO BE YOU A FLY ON THE WALL OF THESE CUBANS, WHO'VE HAD SO LITTLE INTERACTION TO AMERICANS AND HAVE HEARD HOW HORRIBLE AMERICANS ARE AND HOW TERRIBLE THEY ARE.

SUDDENLY YOU'VE GOT AMERICANS IN THEIR HOMES.

I'M SURE THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT POLITICS.

I'M SURE THEY'RE TALKING DEBATING IDEAS.

AND SO I HAVE ENOUGH CONFIDENCE IN AMERICA, FRANKLY, TO SAY THAT IF NO RESTRICTIONS ON TRAVEL EXISTED TOMORROW, THAT WOULD BE AN ENORMOUS BENEFIT TO FREE EXPRESSION IN CUBA, EVEN IF THAT MEANS THE GOVERNMENT'S GETTING MORE RESOURCES OUT OF THEIR HOTELS.

I GET THAT.

THE GOVERNMENT KNOWS HOW TO CONTROL A CLOSED SOCIETY.

THEY DON'T KNOW HOW TO CONTROL AN OPEN SOCIETY.

>>POWERFUL.

GOING BACK TO HOW YOU STARTED YOUR CAREER.

I READ THAT IT WASN'T SUPPOSED TO BE A CAREER IN POLITICS.

CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT THAT?

>>YEAH.

I MEAN, I WAS INTERESTED IN WRITING, SO WHEN I WAS AT A COLLEGE, I GOT A MASTER'S DEGREE IN FICTION, WHICH MY CRITICS HAVE HAD A LOT OF FUN WITH OVER THE YEARS, AND I DON'T BEGRUDGE THEM THAT.

BUT, YOU KNOW, I WAS ONE OF THESE KIDS.

I WAS 24.

I WAS TEACHING.

I WAS WORKING ON A CITY COUNCIL CAMPAIGN.

I WAS GETTING THIS MASTER'S DEGREE.

DIDN'T REALLY KNOW.

I THOUGHT I WAS GOING TO KIND OF BECOME A WRITER AND PUBLISHING MAGAZINES OR SOMETHING.

AND THEN I WITNESSED THE 9/11 ATTACKS.

I WAS ACTUALLY WORKING.

IT WAS ON ELECTION DAY, AND I WAS AT A POLLING SITE FOR A CAMPAIGN I WAS WORKING ON, AND IT WAS DIRECTLY ACROSS THE RIVER FROM THE WORLD TRADE CENTER.

SO I LITERALLY WATCHED AS THE FIRST TOWER BURNED AND THE SECOND PLANE HIT AND THE FIRST TOWER COLLAPSED.

AND I JUST REMEMBER THINKING, WHATEVER I THOUGHT I WAS GOING TO DO IN MY LIFE, THAT'S OVER HERE NOW.

I WANT TO BE A PART OF THE RESPONSE TO THIS.

IT WAS VERY VISCERAL IN NEW YORK.

I MEAN, YOU COULD SMELL IT IN THE AIR.

THERE WERE SIGNS OF PEOPLE MISSING EVERYWHERE.

I WENT TO AN ARMY RECRUITER.

I CONSIDERED THAT COURSE OF ACTION.

THEY DIDN'T QUITE KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH A FICTION WRITING GRAD STUDENT.

THEY HAD A BETTER PITCH FOR ME, THAT MAYBE LIFE WOULD'VE BEEN DIFFERENT.

AND IT LED ME TO WANT TO KIND OF MOVE DOWN TO DC AND KIND OF JOIN THE WORLD OF AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY.

I KNEW I WAS A WRITER.

THAT WAS MY SKILL, AND SO I GOT HIRED AS A SPEECH WRITER FOR SOMEONE WHO RAN A THINK TANK, A FORMER CONGRESSMAN NAMED LEE HAMILTON, WHO'S ACTUALLY FROM FLORIDA ORIGINALLY.

AND HE ENDED UP BEING APPOINTED THE CO-CHAIR OF THE 9/11 COMMISSION.

SO 9/11 REALLY KIND OF SHAPED MY TWENTIES.

AND I HAD A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF EXPERIENCES WITH HAMILTON BECAUSE HE ALSO CO-CHAIRED WITH JAMES BAKER ON THIS THING CALLED THE IRAQ STUDY GROUP THAT LOOKED AT IRAQ.

WE WENT TO IRAQ.

BUT I WAS GETTING MORE AND MORE FRUSTRATED THAT THE OUTCOMES WERE NOT GETTING BETTER FROM MY PERSPECTIVE AS A DEMOCRAT.

AND I WAS LIKE, WELL, IT'S NOT ENOUGH TO BE HERE.

I NEED TO BE IN POLITICS.

YOU KNOW, IF YOU WANT TO MAKE CHANGE, YOU ACTUALLY HAVE TO KIND OF GET THE DIRT UNDER YOUR FINGERNAILS OF GOING INTO POLITICS AND NOT JUST SITTING IN THINK TANKS.

NOT THAT THERE'S ANYTHING WRONG WITH THINK TANKS.

IT WAS JUST MY MENTALITY.

AND I WENT TO WORK FOR THE OBAMA CAMPAIGN.

>>WE'RE RUNNING A LITTLE LOW ON TIME, BUT I WOULD DO WANT TO ASK YOU.

SO YOU ENDED UP IN WITH BARACK OBAMA, WHO ENDED UP BECOMING A GLOBAL PHENOMENON.

WHAT IS THE OBAMA LEGACY IN FOREIGN POLICY?

YOU STILL WORK WITH THE FORMER PRESIDENT.

WHAT DO YOU THINK THE LASTING LEGACY WILL BE?

>>YOU KNOW, IT'S SO INTERESTING TO ME BECAUSE IF YOU'D ASKED ME THAT IN LATE 2016, I WOULD'VE SAID HE WAS TRYING TO KIND OF MOVE US OUT OF THE POST 9/11 ERA AND INTO THIS NEW ERA WHERE WE'RE FOCUSED ON THINGS LIKE CLIMATE CHANGE.

AND SO PARIS IS A HUGE PART OF THAT LEGACY.

HE'S TRYING TO AVOID FUTURE WARS, AND SO THE IRAN DEAL IS A WAY TO SOLVE A PROBLEM WITHOUT GETTING INTO WAR.

HE'S TRYING TO KIND OF MOVE AMERICA INTO A NEW ERA.

AND IN PART BECAUSE TRUMP UNDID A LOT OF THOSE THINGS I HAD TO RECONSIDER WHAT IS THE OBAMA LEGACY?

BUT THEN I ACTUALLY REALIZED, I THOUGHT ABOUT IT A LOT, WHO ARE MY HEROES AS PRESIDENTS?

JOHN F. KENNEDY WAS ONE OF THEM.

I COULDN'T NAME YOU LIKE FIVE IRAN DEALS HE DID.

I MEAN, THERE WAS THE CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS.

HE STARTED THE PEACE CORPS.

WHAT YOU REALIZE ABOUT PRESIDENTS IS THERE'S SOMETHING MORE INTANGIBLE, LIKE WHAT DO THEY REPRESENT?

AND WHO ARE THEY REACHING?

BECAUSE THE OTHER EXPERIENCE I'VE HAD IS MEETING PEOPLE ALL OVER THE WORLD WHO ARE NOW PRIME MINISTERS, OR MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT, OR RUN ORGANIZATIONS WHO TELL ME LIKE, YOU KNOW OBAMA'S REALLY THE ONE WHO INSPIRED ME TO GET INVOLVED AND GET INVOLVED IN POLITICS.

AND I WAS LIKE, WELL, THAT'S ACTUALLY LIKE A BIGGER AND MORE INTERESTING LEGACY THAN THE IRAN DEAL, YOU KNOW?

AND I THINK OBAMA'S ONE OF THESE FIGURES, AND NOT EVERY PRESIDENT IS, WHO STANDS FOR A STORY IN THE WORLD: OF INCLUSIVITY, OF MULTIRACIAL DEMOCRACY, OF MOVING INTO THE FUTURE REALLY IN DEALING WITH ISSUES OF CLIMATE CHANGE.

AND HIS LEGACY KIND OF DEPENDS ON WHAT HAPPENS.

LIKE IF THE WORLD CAN REVERTS BACK IN THE DIRECTION THAT IT HAS BEEN MOVING, THEN HE'LL LOOK LIKE THIS KIND OF STRANGE ABERRATION.

IF THE WORLD KIND OF ENDS UP CORRECTING IN THE DIRECTION OF GREATER DEMOCRACY AND MULTIRACIAL INCLUSIVITY, NOT JUST HERE BUT OTHER PLACES, I THINK OBAMA WILL BE SEEN AS ONE OF THOSE KIND OF KENNEDY-LIKE FIGURES WHO CAME ALONG AND WAS TALKING ABOUT THINGS THAT WERE GOING TO HAPPEN.

AND HE HELPED GIVE THINGS A SHOVE THAT MADE THOSE THINGS HAPPEN.

AND SO I'M OBVIOUSLY PARTIAL, BUT I THINK HE WILL, BECAUSE I'M TRYING TO BE HOPEFUL AND OPTIMISTIC ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THINGS.

I THINK THAT'S HOW HE'LL BE SEEN.

HIS LEGACY WILL BE THAT HE WAS THE GUY WHO WAS TRYING TO MOVE US INTO THIS NEW ERA.

HE DIDN'T GET US ALL THE WAY THERE.

BUT THE PEOPLE THAT HE INSPIRED, HOPEFULLY, THEY'LL BE THE ONES WHO GET US THERE.

>>BEN RHODES, IT'S BEEN GREAT HAVING YOU ON TODAY.

THANKS FOR JOINING US.

>>THANK YOU GUYS.

>>THANK YOU.

>>AND THANK YOU FOR JOINING US.

WE'LL SEE YOU AGAIN NEXT WEEK ON ANOTHER EPISODE OF GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES.