[MUSIC]

Brian Lehrer: It's The Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. Good morning, everyone. We have a chance today to talk with Washington Post associate editor, Bob Woodward. Legendary since the 1970s, as many of you know, for breaking so much of the Watergate story that led to the resignation of President Richard Nixon and so much ever since. He is still going strong with his new book, War, primarily about the Biden administration's diplomacy and policies toward the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East. There are newsworthy scoops in this book. Maybe you've heard a few. This is where Donald Trump's Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mark Milley calls Trump "fascist to the core." There's reporting on Kamala Harris in the Middle East. Maybe you can learn something about whether and if she would really change course from Biden, and there's more. There are deeper thoughts about war and peace and America's place in the world 50 years after young Bob Woodward was living and reporting in the Vietnam War era. Bob, thanks for coming on with us again. Welcome back to WNYC.

Bob Woodward: Thank you.

Brian Lehrer: Let me just jump right into the middle of something to start, if that's okay. Tell me if you agree with this take on Kamala Harris from the positive review of your book in the Atlantic. It says, "Harris comes off well in her cameos. She asks diligent questions in the Situation Room. In phone calls with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, she plays a heavy asking him about civilian casualties in Gaza. There are no instances, however, of her disagreeing substantively with Biden." That's the quote. My question for you is how much would you agree with that description of how readers should perceive Harris if they read the book?

Bob Woodward: There is a detailed account of the meeting. I have the notes. This was July 25th, just a number of months ago. She's meeting with Netanyahu, the prime minister of Israel. What she really does-- If you want to know how she operates, what she cares about, read this section of the book. I'm going to give a quick summary. She's going to presidency school, but she has her own very strong views.

In this meeting with Netanyahu, according to the notes of the behind-closed-door meeting I have, she says, "I'm disturbed by the humanitarian situation in Gaza. It's unconscionable. People are starving. There are 4,000 people per toilet in western Gaza." Netanyahu tries to say, "Oh, there's no starvation in Gaza," and she comes back very, very strong and really says, "Now wait a minute, there's got to be some accountability here." She forcefully criticizes Israel's treatment of civilians in Gaza.

This is what's so interesting. You have all of those behind-the-scenes discussion. She comes out at a press conference and says, "We cannot look away in the face of these tragedies. We cannot allow ourselves to become numb to the suffering in Gaza," and then she says, "I will not be silent." Netanyahu hears this afterwards and of course, realizes she's running for president, she might become president, so he does not challenge her, but privately, he is furious.

She's taken a much stronger public line against Netanyahu than Biden has. You may agree with it, but if you see this account and experience, not only the substance but the emotions, the idea of her coming out and saying, "I will not be silent." It's a great quote and it's refreshing, if I may say, as a reporter, to see somebody in this public position coming out and saying that, I will not be silent. She's going to presidency school as vice president and she's had some experience. She has not had all the experience that Biden had, but she is strong and there is an intellectual humanitarian engagement with this tragedy about what's going on in Gaza.

Brian Lehrer: She did not break with President Biden's policies publicly, however, regarding aid to Israel during this presidency school, as you call it. Based on your reporting, would you expect Harris to change course on the US continuing to arm Israel with as few humanitarian conditions as Biden placed on those shipments if she's elected?

Bob Woodward: No, I think the support of Israel, by Biden, by Harris, by the whole administration is very, very strong. We've sent billions of dollars of aid and support and weapons to Israel. Now, there is this division in the government, as I report, support Israel. A lot of people don't support Netanyahu personally as the leader. I quote some people, including Biden, saying some very severe things about Netanyahu.

Brian Lehrer: It sounds like you're not expecting much of a policy change, just a change in language or tone. No?

Bob Woodward: Who knows? Priority in the policy of Biden and Harris is let's get a ceasefire. The continuing violence. It's known that at least 40,000 people have died in this conflict.

Brian Lehrer: Bob Woodward from The Washington Post is my guest. His new book is called War. Now can you talk about General Mark Milley, who Donald Trump as president appointed to the exalted position of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff? You certainly made news, Bob, with your quote of Milley in this book calling Trump fascist to the core. Can you give us more details on that one? What question from you was he responding to or what was the context of that answer besides those four explosive words?

Bob Woodward: It was a meeting that we both were there, and he said to me, said, "We've got to talk," and then he just unleashed. This is one of the most respected people in the US Military, and said, "Trump is the most dangerous person. He's a fascist to the core," and voiced this worry that all kinds of people who worked with Trump have made very clear that there is distrust and great worry.

What Trump does, he wants loyalty from his general, but no regard for the Constitution. We know the Constitution, as George Washington said, it's an experiment. It's something that we're working on and for somebody like Trump, when-- The danger to constitutional order from Donald Trump couldn't be greater. What George Washington, the first president of the United States under that Constitution, always said, democracy is fragile. It can be broken. Here we have Trump out there saying these things, and it's exemplified by his claim.

Now it's 2024. He goes back to 2020 when he clearly lost the election. 60 courts have said this, and he maintains he really won the election. People close to Trump, like Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, one of his real allies, said to him, "You've got to stop talking about 2020. It's over. The people who are worried about 2020 are people who literally think we didn't go to the moon and get to the year we're in right now."

What Trump is doing here is laying the groundwork about, "Oh, 2020, I really won," which is not true. No one agrees with that, including Lindsey Graham, his ally. What we see going on is Trump laying the groundwork to make the same claim again now, this year in 2024.

Brian Lehrer: We now, just recently in all these cases, have Milley saying that about fascist to the core and most dangerous person in your book, General John Kelly, who Trump appointed as Homeland Security Secretary of all things, and then trusted him enough to elevate him to Chief of Staff, General Kelly saying on tape to The New York Times recently that Trump would govern as a "fascist" for sure. Also, Trump's own Defense Secretary, Mark Esper, saying after the Kelly remarks that people should look up the word fascist in the dictionary and ask if Trump fits the bill.

Esper said, "It's hard to say that he doesn't. When you look at those terms, he certainly has those inclinations." What strikes me, Bob, is that these aren't some earnest liberals from Health and Human Services or something, these were Trump's top national security officials. Now that you've written a book about war and foreign policy and war policy, military policy, do you think it's significant that the F word for Trump is coming from a concentration of people in those positions?

Bob Woodward: It's all of them. What they say-- I somewhere have a list of these are the key people. I think one of the most important people is former Secretary of Defense, Mattis. One of the great generals who was elevated to being Secretary of Defense, saying that Trump is unfit. The list, I wish I had it here, it's quite astonishing. What they say is Trump has no team. He doesn't. People don't support him. He's got some outliers. He has no plan. He acts alone.

That's the danger. That's what the Constitution was set up, and as George Washington said, to make sure that there's some order here. Trump is the destroyer of order, the destroyer of any plan. And it's shocking what he has proposed and the way he talks. Look, he doesn't like advice, he doesn't like the truth. He just is this kind of instinct machine, and he keeps talking about instinct. When I interviewed him a number of years ago, and he talks about this instinct. You can't run the government by instinct. Yes, it's a factor, but you need a team and a plan. Zero. No real team, no real plan.

Brian Lehrer: Do you have any reporting, Bob, or even informed speculation on what kinds of scenarios, what kinds of fascist acts General Milley or any of the others think Trump might enact? I think the word can seem scary but abstract to casual news consumers.

Bob Woodward: No. Trump has said this. He's going to punish people who've been against him. He has made it very clear that this is going to be-- if he becomes president, part of his agenda will be a vengeance campaign against the people who have held their ground, for good reason, against him.

Brian Lehrer: Bob Woodward is my guest. His new book is called War. You've got new reporting here on Trump's relationship with Putin regarding Ukraine. Would you give our listeners an example of something you learned about their interactions and why it might matter to America or the world?

Bob Woodward: [chuckles] It's very significant. First thing I report is that Putin said to Trump because Trump gave him this very important, sensitive test equipment for COVID. Putin said to Trump, "Please don't tell anybody you sent these to me." Trump, "Oh, I don't care." Putin, "No, no, I don't want you to tell anyone because people will get mad at you." There's this alliance between Putin and Trump on this. "Let's send this sensitive, expensive equipment to Putin. Not just for anything, but for Putin's personal use."

I reported this, and this is a time when Americans were dying. It sounds technical, but you need this kind of equipment because you can have COVID, and it's not detectable. It's called asymptomatic. You don't show symptoms. We are in a pile of trouble if Trump comes back. This is not a political judgment on my part. This is a reflection of the reporting of what Trump has done. I report in the book. This is important if you'll bear with me.

Brian Lehrer: Please.

Bob Woodward: CIA Director Bill Burns, one of the strongest, most experienced people. He'd been a diplomat in Moscow before, and actually, as the ambassador from the United States to Moscow, knew Putin. The current CIA Director, Bill Burns, I report in the book, says the following, "Putin manipulates. He's professionally trained to do that. Putin's got a plan, just as he did when Trump was in office at playing Trump." We now have a situation where the leading autocrat in the world, Putin, is playing Donald Trump according to the experience and the very sensitive intelligence gathered by the CIA.

Brian Lehrer: You know Trump has been campaigning on this notion that if elected, he could end the war in Ukraine in 24 hours, I think he says. Do you have any indication of how exactly he would change US Policy in a way that might change the course of the war in any direction?

Bob Woodward: What Jake Sullivan, who's the national security advisor now for President Biden, has said publicly what would happen if Trump gets into power. He will just wave Putin in. Just say, "Go to Kyiv, take Ukraine." That is a very real worry. What has Trump said? He's been asked about Ukraine, and he won't even say he wants Ukraine to win over Russia. Also, Trump, just recently, last week, this is the whole-- It's appropriate that it's Halloween because it's magical thinking that Trump literally blamed Zelensky, the very brave leader of Ukraine, for Russia's invasion.

I lay out in the book the whole rationale that Putin developed for launching this invasion. This is a brutal war. Hundreds of thousands of people have died. It is off the radar screen, but it's been going on for two years. What would happen, as I mentioned earlier, if Russia were able to take Ukraine? Poland could be next, Europe could be next. This isn't just about individuals and personal preference. This is you need to have a policy where the United States stands strong to protect our allies in Europe, in NATO. Trump has dismissed NATO as a problem rather than one of the great alliances in history.

Brian Lehrer: One other thing about Ukraine before we go on to a couple of other things in our remaining time, you also have Putin in the book coming as close as "coin flip" to using nuclear weapons in Ukraine. Considering the consequences, including probably for Russia if he did, how could it have been that close?

Bob Woodward: It's because the-- Again, one of the things I report in the book, the intelligence that we have about what's going on in Russia is very strong. At some point, not now, we had a human source in the Kremlin was helping us evaluate what was going on. It started out the CIA assessment, this is 2022, that there was a 5% chance that Putin would use a tactical nuclear weapon. It rapidly went up to 50%. In the White House, the deputy national security adviser, John Finer, is, "My God, this is what it was like during the Cuban missile crisis in 1962 when we almost had a nuclear exchange."

Russia is dangerous if they have this doctrine. I lay it out in the book in great detail that if they are about to or significantly suffer a catastrophic battlefield loss, they can use tactical nuclear weapons. There is an interchange between the defense secretary of the United States, Lloyd Austin, when he calls up his Russian counterpart Shogun and says the following-- I have a transcript of this because Austin meets him right square in the face and says, "We know you're contemplating the use of tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine," and lays out a explanation of using nuclear weapons will take the world into that dangerous realm. Don't do it. No one's done it since almost for 80 years, Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

He lays out this argument which is very compelling of, "Let's not have a world where people will use nuclear weapons." In fact, it's so powerful. The transcript of it is in the book should be pasted to the wall of the Oval Office. He laid this all out. Shogun, the defense minister in Russia, he interprets this as a challenge even more than that, and says, "I don't take kindly to being threatened." Then Austin says, I think one of the most important lines, "Mr. Minister," the US Secretary of Defense Austin said, "I am the leader of the most powerful military in the history of the world. I don't fake threats."

Very dramatic. A moment when the United States and Secretary Austin stood up to the Russians and they interpreted this as a threat. Austin made it very clear, "We are the most powerful military, not just now, but in the history of the world. I don't make threats." They were so worried that President Biden called President Xi of China to get Xi to issue a public statement. This was, I think, on November 4, 2022. Got Xi to issue a statement, "We should not be using nuclear weapons."

He's right, we shouldn't, but we teeter on the edge of this. This is the world that has been hidden from us, and I think people need to know that there-- I call this possible use of nuclear weapons the silent shadow overhanging the relationship between the United States and Russia. It is indeed a silent shadow which could-- The idea that people are going to use even small tactical nuclear weapons changes history permanently.

The United States, and Biden and the generals and Defense Secretary Austin, Secretary of State Blinken, and including the CIA Director Burns, have worked very aggressively and methodically to prevent this from happening. They've been successful so far, but if you get to a moment where Russia faces, as I said, catastrophic battlefield loss, Russia's doctrine is, "We can use tactical nuclear weapons."

Brian Lehrer: Pretty darn frightening. We have a few minutes left with Bob Woodward. His new book is called War. Bob, taking the really long view after Watergate and the dark Arts of Richard Nixon that you revealed, and after the divisive Vietnam War ended around the same time, or for that matter, after we basically won the Cold War around 1989, and maybe I should add the civil rights laws of the 1960s, people might have thought the US was heading for some kind of era of good feeling, with less inequality and more national unity and civility domestically and maybe toward the rest of the world. Look where we are.

Maybe you'd have to write three more books to begin to answer this question, but as much as you've reported on and thought about these things all these years, what went wrong? Can you even begin to say why things have gone as south as they have in this country, given those foundations that could have made things so much better than this now?

Bob Woodward: Some of the leadership has been-- There have been problems, but has been very strong. The problem is Putin. As I say, he is the Hitler of our century. He is trying to take over another country. A line has been drawn by the Biden administration and by the Western world, but it's a battle that has not been settled. The idea that we're having this battle now largely behind the scenes is, as you said, frightening.

Brian Lehrer: That's about foreign policy, which I realize is what your book is about. My question is really about the domestic situation, how we've become so polarized, and everything else you might want to say, and that there's a fair modicum of support for somebody who so widely, as your report described as want to be authoritarian. How did we get to this point, if you have any thoughts about it?

Bob Woodward: It's because of Trump. Trump has this presence. I spent a year talking to him. Last year he was President 2020, and lay out in the book I did rage about how he ignored the warnings about the coming of the coronavirus. Read those interviews. It's published together in the Trump tapes. What Trump did was really a moral felony. He was born-

Brian Lehrer: People in the country or conditions in the country have to be susceptible, right?

Bob Woodward: That's for psychologists and historians to address, but Trump is a consequence of the political system we have that exists. Again, I'm sorry to go back to George Washington, he said, "This is fragile. We need to deal with it very, very carefully," and of course, Trump is not. Trump is a threatening presence. If he becomes president again-- Look, people support him, I think, and this is somebody not engaged in politics one side or the other, but people need to think, "Do we need this sort of person? Is this person going to serve the interests of the country?" There is such single-minded focus on self. It's frightening that we have somebody who will dismiss reality and want to govern and make the presidency an instrument of personal revenge. Trump just does not believe in democracy.

Brian Lehrer: Last thing, Bob, if I may. You have this long relationship, obviously with The Washington Post. I believe your current title is associate editor. Were you part of the editorial board's decision to endorse Kamala Harris for president? Do you think it helps or hurts the paper's credibility that the owner, Jeff Bezos, canceled it at the last minute? Bezos, in his own op-ed, argues that all presidential endorsements do is create a perception of bias.

Bob Woodward: I disagree. I think the reporting news side of The Washington Post has been excellent, has made the case about the danger of Trump. Traditionally, the editorial page has supported the reporting side and the reporting is so strong and so conclusive. There's no rational argument on the other side for the owner to come in and make a declaration as Bezos has done. I worry about-- I think it is-- Look, this newspaper going back to Watergate, everything when the news side and the editorial side have joined, they make strong cases for each other. This has not happened. You see lots of people have resigned. What, 200,000 people have canceled subscriptions. I have not. I still have my subscription. I still believe in The Washington Post, but like any institution, it can make grave mistakes. I think for the editorial position to be adopted as it has is totally refuted by the facts that the news side has reported on, and I have reported on, tried to report on in my books.

Brian Lehrer: One quick follow-up. Do you think Mr. Bezos has any ulterior motives, business-related, what the government might do that affects him? Any kind of ulterior motives, not just trying to rebuild the public's trust in journalism and the paper, as he asserts?

Bob Woodward: He said in his statement that these are very principled judgments that he has made. I radically disagree with this. I think it's not supported by the evidence. The Washington Post needs to be, I'm going to repeat myself, unified with this overwhelming evidence about the danger of Trump, and it's not.

Brian Lehrer: You're not accusing Mr. Bezos of anything other than bad judgment, it sounds.

Bob Woodward: I don't. I disagree. I don't know what the real motive, if they're hidden motives, often there are. I just know that institution like The Washington Post is strong when the editorial page can realize the overwhelming evidence, as is this case, that Trump is a threat to the constitutional order, a threat to the politics of the day. I know people on the editorial page, I know they believe this. Lots of subscribers or former subscribers are upset about it. I hate it, actually, to see this separation between overwhelming evidence and statement by the owner that is completely unsupported. I think it's a tragic breakdown between the news side and the editorial side.

Brian Lehrer: Bob Woodward, his new book is called War. Thank you so much for spending so much time with us. We really appreciate it.

Bob Woodward: Thank you.

Brian Lehrer: Folks, that interview with Bob Woodward was recorded yesterday afternoon for us to air at this time. That's why we didn't open the phones. He wasn't available live today. I thought that was a very interesting ending, where rather than just say an editorial board is independent from the news side and people should be able to understand that, he said the editorials draw conclusions based on the reporting, at least in the case of The Washington Post.

I thought that was a very different way than I've heard before to frame the reason for a newspaper or any news organization to do editorials or endorsements that based on their own reporting, there are conclusions to draw. That's the job of the editorial board. I just found that really interesting.

Copyright © 2024 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.