    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: WILLIAM J. CLINTON (1999, Book II)]
    [December 22, 1999]
    [Pages 2343-2349]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    Interview With Charlie Rose of CBS' ``60
    Minutes II''
    December 22, 1999

    Terrorism During Millennium Celebrations

        Mr. Rose. Mr. President, because of the recent arrest and heightened
    security concerns at airports, do you expect, worry that there will be
    an incident of terrorism before the first of the year?
        The President. Well, we are on a heightened state of alert, and
    we're doing a lot of work on this. But I would say to the American
    people, they should go on about their business and celebrate the
    holidays as they would, but they should be aware. You know, this whole
    millennial idea draws out a lot of people who are maybe, by our
    standards, deranged, and other people maybe want to use it for their own
    political ends. So if people see anything suspicious, they should report
    it to the authorities as quickly as possible. But otherwise, I should
    say, they should go on about their business. We're working very, very
    hard on this.
        Mr. Rose. It worries you?
        The President. No, I'm concerned, but I think we have, I think, the
    best law enforcement folks we could have, and they are working very
    hard. And we're doing quite well so far. So I have every hope that we'll
    get through it. But I think that what I would ask the American people to
    do is not to stay at home and hide but just to keep their eyes open. If
    they see something that looks fishy, tell the authorities and we'll get
    on it. But they should know that we're working this very hard.

    Last Year of President's Term

        Mr. Rose. All right, let me--I look around this office, and I see a
    desk over there that President Kennedy sat at. And I remember the story
    he said about the Presidency, and one of the great things about the
    Presidency was he could walk to work. As you think about leaving this
    building, what will you miss the most?
        The President. I think what I'll miss the most is the work, the job,
    the contact with all kinds of people and all kinds of issues, the
    ability to make a difference, to solve problems, to open up
    opportunities for other people. There's almost no--not almost, I suppose
    there is no job like it in the world. It's been an unbelievable thrill
    and a profound honor, and I will miss it very much.
        I'll miss a lot of the other things. I love living in the White
    House. Hillary, I suppose, has done
    more work on the White House than anybody since the Truman
    administration, redoing rooms and building a sculpture garden and doing
    things like that. And we love living here. I love going to Camp David; I
    love Air Force One; I love all of the perks of the job. But the thing I
    love most is being President, doing the job every day. It just--to me,
    it's an almost indescribable honor. I would never grow tired of it, and
    I feel graced every day.

    Term Limits

        Mr. Rose. If you could change the 22d amendment, would you?

    [[Page 2344]]

        The President. I don't know. It's probably not fair to ask. On
    balance, I think the two-term tradition has served us well. I'm glad
    President Roosevelt served the third term, because of the war. But on
    balance, I think it's served us well.
        Now, you know, I'm young, and I'm strong, and I'm, as far I know, in
    good health. I love the job. And so if I could serve again, I probably
    would. But I think that's the reason we have this limit, so that people
    like me don't get to make that decision. [Laughter]
        Mr. Rose. Are you going to leave a note in that desk over there for
    your successor, and what will you say?
        The President. I will, and I don't know what I'll say. But probably
    most of what I'll say will be predictable. I'll be wishing my successor
    well and talking a little bit about the job and offering to be available
    if I can ever be of any help.

    National Economy

        Mr. Rose. Prosperity. Economic prosperity and growth has been a
    hallmark of this Presidency. How long can it last, and will it be a part
    of our future, our near future?
        The President. Well, it certainly will be part of our future. Now,
    how long it will last? The truth is no one knows. I believed when I got
    here that there was a chance that we could have a very long period of
    economic growth. Now I couldn't have known, when we started and we
    started slashing the deficit and investing more in technology, that we
    would have the longest economic expansion in history that would even
    outstrip wartime when we had been fully mobilized. And in February we
    will.
        But I think that there are some fundamentally different things now.
    If the Government can follow good policies and the Federal Reserve will
    follow smart policies, there is this enormous power of productivity
    we're getting out of the revolution in technology and information
    technology. It's just now working its way into every sector of the
    economy, and it's also continually advancing itself. So I think if we
    can keep that going and if we can keep our markets open, that's very
    important, not just the exports we sell but the imports we buy, the open
    market keeps the American economy highly competitive and tends to keep
    inflation down. And I think that's one of the things that's been under
    appreciated about this. I never will forget, back in '94 I got really
    alarmed when lumber prices went way up in a hurry, and I thought
    homebuilding prices were going to explode. And then all of a sudden, we
    had this big infusion of less costly imports.
        Now, we have to work on fair trade rules; we've got to have--we
    can't be taken advantage of, as some tried to during the Asian financial
    crisis, but on balance, these open markets are very good for us. They
    give us growth and competition, keeps inflation down. And I think that's
    very good.

    Globalization and the Technology Gap

        Mr. Rose. What we want to do here in this conversation is really
    focus on the future. You've done a number of conversations about this
    century and your term in office. Thinking about the future and the
    economic health of the country, there is also this process. In 10
    years--10 years ago the wall came down; 5 years ago the web went up.
    Globalization is part of our life.
        The President. It is.
        Mr. Rose. Some worry--and Seattle might be an indication that we're
    looking at the possibility of a great gap between a two-tier system,
    between the haves and the have-nots of the world, those who get it with
    technology and those that don't.
        The President. Well, first of all, the worry is well-founded, but
    it's a constant. That is, we have had a great gap in opportunity, even
    though it's sometimes closed and sometimes open, but there has been a
    huge gap between the haves and have-nots since the dawn of the
    industrial revolution and the creation of middle class societies with
    mass wealth. Some have had it, and others have not ever created it.
        There is a chance that what will happen now is that it will become
    more pronounced across countries and within countries because of the
    advantages that technology-literate people and entrepreneurs with access
    to money will have in a rapidly changing world. That is, it's liable to
    accelerate.
        But I would remind you that in the United States we had an
    increasing gap between the rich and the poor for about 20 years, as we
    moved into this new economic phase. The same thing happened when we
    changed from being an agricultural economy to an industrial economy. In
    the last 2 or 3 years, we started to see the gap close again. And the
    answer is not to run away from globalization. The answer is to make
    change our friend. The answer is to

    [[Page 2345]]

    have broad access to information and information technology, to have
    broad-based systems of education and health care and family supports in
    every country, and to continue to try to shape the global economy.
        You mentioned Seattle. I think that you had a lot of people out
    there protesting globalization, but they can't reverse it, and it's done
    a lot more good than bad. It's created--over the last 50 years, as the
    world has become more interconnected, we've moved away from the specter
    of war as holocaust, even though there have been a lot of smaller wars,
    and we've seen millions, hundreds of millions of people lifted into the
    middle class. So the answer is how to make this globalization more
    human, more humane, and how to shape it so that everybody has a chance
    to be a part of it.

    Response to American Hegemony

        Mr. Rose. Do you hear around the world now, as I'm sure you've heard
    from heads of state and others, this kind of unilateralist--America in
    the future is too strong, too dominant, and the fear of a backlash
    against us.
        The President.  I agree with that. And I think--I've tried to be
    very sensitive to that--I think we have--and to make sure that we
    fulfilled our responsibilities. I think that, on the one hand, people
    are glad that we won the cold war, if you will; they're glad that the
    forces of freedom won. All over the world people are embracing democracy
    and market economics. But if you enjoy the level of military and
    economic strength we have and the level of political influence, people
    are going to resent you.
        And I must say--and again, I don't mean to be partisan here, but I
    think the resentment is deeper when the Congress takes as long as they
    did to pay our U.N. dues and puts the conditions on it they did, when we
    don't ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, when we basically preach
    to other people around the world, you ought to do this, that, or the
    other thing. But instead of helping them, we continue to have a very
    large military budget, but we spend the smallest percentage of our
    income on assistance to other countries to help them succeed
    economically and politically of any advanced country in the world. So we
    do some things that breed this resentment.
        Now, a lot of them resented me at Seattle because they think that
    when the United States says we ought to have core labor standards and we
    ought to have good environmental standards in a world trading system,
    that I'm trying to keep poor countries down, that I just want them to
    open their markets to us, but they won't get rich because I'm going to
    try to force them to give up their comparative wage advantage or their
    ability to grow. That's not true. So some of the resentments against
    America are not fair. But it's all perfectly understandable. I mean,
    look how fortunate we are compared to most other countries. and when
    people get in a tight spot, they want us to come help; Bosnia, Kosovo,
    the Middle East, you name it.

    Prospects for the 21st Century

        Mr. Rose. Do you think this century coming up will be America's
    century, as the 20th century has been described?
        The President. Well, I think it can be. But I think we have to think
    very carefully about how we want to define that. I mean, look what we
    know will happen. We know that, barring some completely unforeseen
    event, China and, sometime thereafter, India will have economies that
    look bigger than ours, because they've got so many more people than we
    do, 4 times as many people; in the case of China, even more. We know
    that Europe will grow more integrated, I think, in the 21st century. And
    the European Union will be more and more a union. And they have 50
    percent more people than we do, and they could have a lot more than that
    if they continue to bring in other countries.
        So I do not believe that we will have the relative economic
    dominance we have today. We've got about 4 percent of the world's people
    and almost 22 percent of the world's income. But I think we can be still
    very prosperous. I think we can still be the strongest individual
    country in the world in many ways. But I think we will have to build
    partnerships with some of those who resent us now. We will have to have
    an increasingly interdependent world. Because, whether we like it or
    not--it's like globalization; interdependence is another word for
    globalization--we will become more interdependent, and we'll have to
    learn to be adroit at that. We won't be able to just say, ``Well, if we
    like it, we're here, and if we don't, we'll walk away.'' We'll have to
    really work on our partnership skills.

    [[Page 2346]]

    Future Allies

        Mr. Rose. You touched on something that I've thought about. This
    century was marked by our friends becoming our enemies--France and
    Germany--our enemies becoming our friends. Is that going to be part of
    the 21st century, people we now look on as rivals become friends,
    friends become----
        The President. I think it is highly likely that some of the people
    that have been our most recent rivals will be our friends.
        Mr. Rose. Like?
        The President. Well, I know a lot of people are very skeptical about
    Russia now, because of the problems they've had. But they just had a
    genuinely democratic election with a lot of debate, vigorous opposition,
    brutal campaign ads, you know, the whole 9 yards.
        Mr. Rose. Did the results surprise you?
        The President. No. It's about what I thought they'd be. You know,
    still only 25 percent of them are voting for the old Communist Party;
    the rest of them are for something else, in spite of the economic
    hardship that they have faced in the last few years. So I still think
    there's a chance that if the leaders of Russia define their national
    greatness in 21st century terms, that is in terms of their ability to
    unleash the creative capacity of their people rather than their ability
    to dominate their neighbors, which was their 19th and 20th century
    definition of greatness, that they will be--we'll have a real
    partnership there. It's also possible that we'll have one with China.
        Mr. Rose. A partnership?
        The President. Absolutely. It just depends on how they view us and
    their own self-interest.

    Future Rivals

        Mr. Rose. Do you see, on the other hand, people who we might
    consider friends, like Western Europe, becoming more rivals because----
        The President. I think the only way that would happen is if it were
    provoked by greater protectionism, economic protectionism outside the
    borders of Europe. That is Europe could get so big, and they could
    integrate the economy of Europe, and they'll have a lot of poor
    countries coming in just like we have poor States and poor regions. If
    they close their economy, rather than open it, that could be a difficult
    thing. But I think it's far more likely that our former enemies will
    become at least friendlier, if we're not friends, and that all of us
    together will face the enemies of the nation-state in the 21st century.
        Mr. Rose. The enemies of the nation-state?
        The President. Yes. The organized enemies of the nation-state that
    have vast money and vast access to weapons and technology and travel:
    the organized crime syndicates; the narcotraffickers; the terrorists.
    And I think the likelihood that all these people will be integrated--
    there may be some rogue states that will support them, but I think
    you're more likely to see the nation-states trying to uphold stability
    in their national lives, increasingly open and democratic. Even China, I
    think, will become more open and more democratic. They're already
    electing mayors in a million little towns, literally.
        Mr. Rose. In democratic elections?
        The President. Yes. And so I think--by their standards. They don't
    have a Republican or a Democratic Party like we do, but they are having
    these elections. I think in the future the likelihood is that nation-
    states will be allied against the enemies of the organized society and
    the open society.

    Chemical and Biological Threats

        Mr. Rose. Do you expect in the next 10, 20 years to be a terrorist
    attack in the United States, thinking about the recent events, thinking
    about the potential for germ warfare, the potential for biological
    attacks, and the potential----
        The President. Oh, absolutely. I think that's a threat.
        Mr. Rose. A likelihood?
        The President. Well, I think it's highly likely that someone will
    try. And keep in mind, the World Trade Center was blown up just a few
    years ago. We were fortunate to catch the people who did it. Oklahoma
    City had the terrible explosion.
        What I think will happen--let me back up a minute. I have done
    everything I could as President to try to organize the permanent
    Government, the people who will be here when I am gone, and the Congress
    to deal with the long-term threat of biological, chemical, and small-
    scale nuclear war, as well as the increasing sophistication of
    traditional weapons. And we are doing a massive amount of work now in
    preparation to try to minimize the chances that it will occur and--God
    forbid if it should occur--to try to minimize the impact of it. I

    [[Page 2347]]

    think, parenthetically, one of the benefits of our research into the
    human genome is that we'll be able to analyze these viruses much more
    quickly and come up with antidotes much more quickly than we used to be
    able to. Even now, when new strains of diseases--whether it's AIDS or
    anything else--come up, we can identify them so much more quickly than
    we used to be able to.
        So what I think will happen--let me just make this point--the
    organized forces of destruction will take maximum advantage of new
    technologies and new scientific developments just like democratic
    societies do. So I think, just like the computers are all being
    miniaturized and people carry these little pads around that have--and
    now you've got these gadgets where you can use as a telephone or a
    typewriter, do E-mail, and all that. Well, the same miniaturization will
    apply to biological and chemical weapons. And if people should get
    nuclear materials that can be made into a bomb, to nuclear materials,
    which is why we've worked so hard with Russia to control access to that
    stuff.
        So we've just got to be ready. There will always be bad guys out
    there in the world who will try to take advantage of people's
    vulnerabilities.
        Mr. Rose. But aren't the odds against us, when you describe that
    kind of technological advantage--I mean, and just recently two people
    trying--in separate cases--trying to get inside America's borders with
    explosives--it gets more and more easier to conceal, and more and more
    the likelihood that an American city----
        The President. Well, if you go back through all of human history and
    you look at conflicts in weapons systems--and that's what we're talking
    about, biological, chemical weapons--offense always precedes defense;
    that is you've got to know what you're defending against.
        So my goal in this whole thing, trying to mobilize the country on
    biological, chemical weapons, and make sure the Government is doing
    everything possible, is to close the gap between offense and defense.
    And the answer to your question is we won't be severely--there might be
    incidences. I mean, the World Trade Center was blown up; Oklahoma City
    was blown up. We've got a guy in the laboratory in the Middle West,
    almost 5 years ago, who was trying to develop biological agents,
    political extremist.
        Mr. Rose. And there are scary ideas coming out of science, where
    viruses can attack certain ethnic groups?
        The President. Yes, there are people that----
        Mr. Rose. The potential of science to do harm is alarming.
        The President. But you know, it's always been that way. I mean, it's
    always been that way. And I think that I'm actually more optimistic
    than--keep in mind, no one believes that someone's going to come in and
    kill everybody in America. That's what we worried about during the cold
    war. And we still have to deal with these traditional threats. That's
    why India and Pakistan is perhaps--the Kashmiri issue is perhaps the
    most dangerous one in the world today because you've got two nuclear
    powers there who are somewhat uncertain about one another and why we
    have to work hard to avoid that.
        But yes, there will be problems. Yes, there could be terrible
    incidences. But I would say to the American people, they should, on
    balance, be hopeful. But what they should do is to support the
    leadership of this country in putting maximum resources into research
    and development so that we're prepared. And I think we will grow
    increasingly sophisticated in picking these people up, increasingly
    sophisticated in detecting these weapons, and what we can't afford is to
    have a long period of time where these offensive capabilities of the new
    age are better than the defensive capabilities. If we can close the gap
    between offense and defense, we'll be fine.
        Mr. Rose. What's interesting about a conversation about the future
    with you is that because of this office and your curiosity, you see and
    know more than almost anyone. I mean, you are aware because you talk to
    the scientists; you talk to people responsible.
        The President. I think about it a lot.
        Mr. Rose. You do?
        The President. Sure. I have to. See, I think one of the jobs of the
    President, because of the unique opportunity of the office you just
    described it, is to always be thinking about what will happen 10, 20, 30
    years from now, and to allocate some time and effort to make decisions
    for which there will be almost no notice.
        You know, right now, I mean, hardly anybody reports on or thinks
    about the work we're doing in biological warfare or chemical warfare--
    the speech I gave at the National Science Foundation--but it's fine.
    It's what my former national

    [[Page 2348]]

    security aide, Tony Lake, used to call ``the
    dog that doesn't bark.'' And there is a sense in which there's a bunch
    of dogs in this old world you don't want to bark.
        Mr. Rose. It's the old notion about if the tree falls in the forest
    and nobody hears it, did the tree fall? Can you--are there things that
    we don't know about that alarm you, this sense of science and where it's
    at and what's coming down the pike, that gives you great pause?
        The President. Well, there are a lot of things that concern me. You
    know, we've done a lot of work--the other thing that, besides the
    chemical and biological weapons--trying to protect computer systems.

    Year 2000 Problems

        Mr. Rose. Speak to Y2K. Where are your concerns, and do you think
    that most of those----
        The President. My concerns, well, they're much more traditional in
    Y2K. I think we've done a good job here. We've spent a lot of money--I
    say we, the American people, not just the Government, the private
    sector--we've spent a lot of money, tried to be ready. I feel a high
    level of confidence. It wouldn't bother me a bit to get on a commercial
    airline, for example, on New Year's Eve or New Year's Day and fly
    around. I think our systems are in order here.
        My concerns really are for some of our friends around the world that
    have more rudimentary computer networks and capacities and whether they
    will have a shutdown that they won't be able to immediately fix or get
    around.
        Mr. Rose. And make them vulnerable to what?
        The President. Well, if there were problems in the financial system,
    what if records disappeared and people lost money? That would be
    destabilizing in some countries. If power systems----
        Mr. Rose. And make them vulnerable to outside forces, to kinds of
    elements you mentioned earlier?
        The President. Well, maybe, but I think more internal
    destabilization. What if a power system shuts down in a big country with
    a hard winter? How long will it take to get back up before anyone would
    freeze to death? I mean, these are the kinds of practical problems that
    I'm concerned about.
        But I think that--I'm talking about something far more insidious,
    though. What we have to--this is, again, offense and defense. What we
    have to do--this technology of computers is changing so fast, and we've
    got a lot of whizbangs out there, and they can make a ton of money
    working for bad guys. So what we've got to do is to continuously work on
    protecting the cyber security, the infrastructure of the information
    economy, just like we're trying to deal with chemical and biological
    warfare and the miniaturization of weapons and all this.
        But most people are good people. We've got plenty of talented
    people. We just need to be imagining the future, thinking about all the
    problems as well as all the opportunities, and then prepare. Society
    always has problems; there are always misfortunes. But basically, I
    believe the future is quite promising and far more exciting than any
    period in history. I wish I were going to live to be 150; I'd love to
    see what happens.

    Possibilities of the Future

        Mr. Rose. Would you like to be cloned?
        The President. No. I wouldn't wish that on anybody. [Laughter]
        Mr. Rose. There is this thing, too. I mean, think about Chelsea's
    children, your grandchildren, say the year 2050, whatever the
    appropriate time might be. What's this world going to look like? Is it
    going to be more interesting, more challenging? How will we travel; what
    kind of food will we eat; will we go to other planets?
        The President. I think we'll be eating food that's like what we eat
    now. I think it will be safer. I think we'll know a lot more about it,
    even safer than it is now. I think that in big, urban areas, I think
    we'll still have our love affairs with cars. I think they will be much
    more safe. They'll be made of composite materials that are much more
    resistant to wrecks. And I think where there is a lot of heavy traffic,
    I think that we'll all travel by a computerized plan.
        I also think there will be a lot more rapid rail transit. I think it
    will be safer. It'll be better, and I think we'll be able to do things
    while we travel and spend more time. I think we will go into outer
    space, and at sometime in the next century, I think there will be large,
    permanent platforms sustaining life in outer space that will basically
    be jumping-off places to distant planets and maybe even beyond. That's
    what I think will happen.

    [[Page 2349]]

        Q. Hold on one second. I know you've got to change tape. Okay.
        Mr. Rose. You said computerized plan----
        The President. No, I meant cars. You want me to say it again?
        Mr. Rose. How much time do we have?
        The President. I just misspoke myself.
        Mr. Rose. How much time do we have here?
        The President. I don't know, 10 minutes, 5 minutes?
        You want to do that again?
        Mr. Rose. The last question? All right. Okay.
        Think about the future of your grandchildren, Chelsea's children,
    the year 2050. What will life be like then? What kind of food; what kind
    of transportation; will we be living on other planets? Will we still be
    concerned about things that concern us now, like overweight, stuff like
    that?
        The President. I don't think all of the problems will go away. I
    think the food will be pretty much like it is now, but even safer. I
    think that on Earth, we'll travel in automobiles, still, but in traffic
    jams, we'll have automated systems. I think there will be a lot more
    high speed rail. I think we'll travel in ways that give us more free
    time to do things while we travel.
        I think that there will be large platforms in outer space that will
    be jumping-off places to distant planets, and I think that the
    biomedical advances will be stunning. I think a lot of cancers will be
    cured. I think there will be a vaccine for AIDS. I think that the
    research in the human gene and the revolution, the continuing revolution
    in microchips will enable people to probably cure spinal cord injuries
    by having a programmed chip that goes into the spine and replicates all
    the nerves that were damaged.
        I think that it'll be a fascinating time. And I think there will be
    lots and lots of continuous daily communication with people across
    national and cultural lines.
        Mr. Rose. Would you go to space if you had the opportunity?
        The President. I might. I'm real interested in it. I like it a lot.
    I think it's important.

    Post-Presidential Plans

        Mr. Rose. What one thing do you most want to accomplish--I've got to
    go--when you leave this office? What's the single most important thing
    for you to accomplish when you leave?
        The President. You mean, after I'm not President anymore?
        Mr. Rose. After you're not President.
        The President. I think the most important thing is for me to be a
    useful citizen of this country and of this world, because I've had
    opportunities here only my other living predecessors have had. And I
    think that for me to be able to continue the work I've done in racial
    and religious and ethnic reconciliation and trying to convince people
    that we can grow the global economy and still preserve the environment
    and trying to empower the poor and the dispossessed, in trying to spread
    the universal impact of education and use technology to benefit ordinary
    people, these kinds of things--I think I should continue to do this work
    and trying--I want to get young people into public service. I want them
    to believe this is noble and important work.
        So I think, in a word, I have to be a good citizen now. That's the
    most important thing I can do when I leave office is to use the
    maximum--to the maximum extent I can, the knowledge that I have, the
    experience that I've gained to be a really good citizen.
        Mr. Rose. Thank you, Mr. President.
        The President. Thank you.

    Note: The interview was videotaped at 5:10 p.m. in the Oval Office for
    later broadcast, and the transcript was released by the Office of the
    Press Secretary on December 28. The text of this interview follows the
    transcript as released by the Office of the Press Secretary. A portion
    of this interview could not be verified because the tape was incomplete.