Extended Interview: Former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates

0:00We all belong outside. We're drawn to nature. Whether it's the recorded sounds of the ocean we doze off to, or the succulents that adorn our homes, nature makes all of our lives, well, better. Despite all this, we often go about our busy lives removed from it. But the outdoors is closer than we realize. With AllTrails, you can discover trails nearby and explore confidently with offline maps and on-trail navigation. Download the free app today and make the most of your summer with AllTrails. Hi, it's Sierra Miller. I can't wait for you to check out my new collection of shoes and accessories at Designer Shoe Warehouse.

0:36If you love shoes as much as I do, then trust me, I got you. From cute sneak arenas to the perfect flip flops to stunning heels, these shoes are all style, no drama. It's a girls' girls summer, and DSW has just the shoes. Shop the Sierra Miller collection right now at your DSW store or DSW.com.

1:00Hi, this is Margaret Brennan, moderator of Face the Nation and chief foreign affairs correspondent at CBS News. Last week, I spoke with former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who is now the chancellor at William & Mary. Here's our conversation. Mr. Secretary, if you're ready, we'll dive right in. Absolutely. So it's great to be back here with you, but there's a lot going on in the world. You said in December we're living in perhaps one of the most, if not the most, dangerous periods in our modern American history. Why do you feel that way? For the first time in our history, we face nuclear-armed adversaries in both Europe and Asia.

1:42When China finishes their strategic nuclear modernization, China and Russia together will have nearly twice as many strategic nuclear warheads. deployed as we do. We have never faced a country, at least since the British empire, that had greater manufacturing and industrial capacity than the United States. We have not faced a country that was as technologically advanced as we are, ahead of us in a few areas, behind us in a few areas, pretty much even with us and a few others. So, we face an adversary that is more powerful and has more non-military instruments of power than any adversary we face, certainly than the Soviet Union.

2:34So whether it's strategic communications or development assistance or trade or whatever, the Chinese are all over the world dealing with these things. So I think if you take all those things together and the nature of the two regimes, this is a very, very perilous time. The two regimes, Russia and China, the chief adversaries, in your view, of the United States. So President Trump was in China, standing across from Xi Jinping, and he referred almost jokingly to the grouping as the new G2. He seemed to mean the two global powers. Do you think that the US and China are on equal footing? Is that how you would describe it?

3:22I don't think so yet. I think China is a, you know, the military refers to China as a near peer. And I think right now, our military power is greater than theirs, although they're catching up and certainly ahead of us in terms of shipbuilding and so on. But we still have a lead economically. We still have a lead technologically. And I think, you know, we have our own problems here at home, but the Chinese have some real problems as well domestically in terms of their economy and demography and so on. So, you know, they're approaching our level of power, but I think they're not there yet. But the meeting itself seemed to be the message between President Xi and Trump.

4:19There weren't a lot of, as they call it, deliverables coming out of this summit. There was an announcement of working groups to study artificial intelligence and talk about tariffs. What do you think was accomplished? I think that the main objective for the administration, for the president, probably was simply to keep a lid on the relationship, to keep a floor under it so it doesn't deteriorate, to continue the trade truce that has existed for about a year now. We're still batting back and forth various measures against each other, but by and large, the trade truce has been sustained. And so I think avoiding a re-escalation of the economic conflict between the two, I think putting this floor under the relationship, keeping it on an even keel, probably was the primary objective of both sides, frankly.

5:18Certainly for the business community. That was their concern. And if we can get some greater business opportunities, Please, of course, take advantage of that, and we'll see what happens. Well, Xi Jinping's language in that public statement that was released by his government was very strong on Taiwan. China considers it a core issue, as they described it. The US still officially has this stance of strategic ambiguity. But do you think the tone needs to shift a little bit from the United States, given how strong the Chinese rhetoric is now? I think the Chinese rhetoric has often been strong in the past when it comes to Taiwan.

6:02Whenever we've made an arms sales to Taiwan in the past, the Bush administration, the Obama administration, and so on, the Chinese rhetoric gets very, very strong. So I think Xi was reiterating the Chinese position on that. that, I think it would be a mistake to change the carefully worded position of the United States with respect to Taiwan. Any change at all, the nuances, this is one of those things where the experts parse these things down to the tense of the verbs and so on. So I think keeping things in the US position as it has been was important. And I think everything I've read so far indicates that the president did that.

6:49So leave it open to question whether the U.S. would militarily come to the defense of Taiwan if China were to move on it. That needs to be an open question. Well, on paper, the president has made significant pledges to Taiwan in terms of promised arms sales. Not delivered on yet. There's another$14 billion in proposed weapons sales that the Trump administration has delayed approving. Do you think the president should greenlight that? I think he should. I think we should go forward with what we've agreed with Taiwan. One of the concerns that I have is even with respect to previous arms sales, there is a huge backlog of weapons that we have sold to Taiwan that we have not been able to deliver because we don't have the supplies.

7:39And so if you're offering another$14 billion, is that just going to be added to the backlog, or is there a way forward in terms of actually getting these weapons to the Taiwanese? I think one of the—an important thing that has happened in recent years is getting the Taiwanese to focus on purchasing the kinds of weapons that would be necessary to defend themselves against a Chinese amphibious invasion. In the past, they wanted the kinds of high-end weapons that would enable them to retake the mainland. Well, that's never going to happen. And so getting the old Chinese, the old Taiwanese generals to adapt their thinking to the kinds of weapons that the Ukrainians, for example, have been using and so on…

8:30AMY GOODMAN The high Mars, the fat. It has been an achievement. And the Taiwanese legislature has just finally reached an agreement to fund the purchase of these weapons. So I think we should go forward with it. It is in our own way our counter to President Xi's strong statement. Yes, you have your position. We have ours. Mm-hmm. So you talk about the demand for weapons. There's a bigger problem with supply and readiness and access to them right now. A retired colonel in China's People's Liberation Army was recently quoted in the New York Times saying, the depletion of U.S. stockpiles has, quote, significantly diminished the U.S.

9:16military's ability to project its combat power. They're looking at what's being used in Iran and Ukraine. I know Admiral Paparo, the head of Pacific Command, has said he doesn't see any real costs on our ability to deter China. But isn't that pretty time dependent? It's fairly well reported and established that there is a lag in terms of replenishing American weapons stockpiles. Isn't that a problem? It is a problem. And I think this administration especially has been very aggressive in working with the Congress in trying to expand our defense industries and bring new companies into the defense industrial mix that can produce the kinds of numbers of these weapons that are necessary.

10:10I've read that Ukraine is going to produce 7 million drones next year or over the next year. We need that kind of capacity in the United States. But it's a matter of getting the factories built, expanding factories. And part of the problem in Washington is you get all the right rhetoric about increasing our ability to produce these weapons, but the money is slow to come, and it's unpredictable. And so what's needed is accelerated action in actually starting to get these factories built and expand these capabilities. But when you compare it to Ukraine, that's a wartime economy. That's an emergency they're responding to.

10:52You're saying we need to act like it is here. Absolutely. Absolutely. We do need to replenish. And I would say that I'm well away from it now, but based on everything I've seen, I think that where we have the real shortfalls are in precision-guided munitions, but also defensive missiles like Patriots, the THAAD missiles, and the Navy's Standard Missile 3 that are our most effective, although very expensive, air and missile defense systems. And those are the ones that have been expended especially. Recently. Yes. Secretary Rubio did tell another network, though, that his belief is that China's preference is to have Taiwan willingly join the People's Republic.

11:43Do you expect that to be the more likely scenario, that there is sort of a slow strangulation of Taiwanese democracy by the Communist Party? Let me put it this way. I think the chances of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan are pretty low, particularly over the next several years. And partly because Xi has other options open to him that involve far less risk. So they have surrounded Taiwan with ships and in the air. They have shown their ability to close off maritime and air access to the island. They could create a blockade or a quarantine around Taiwan anytime they wanted, what the Taiwanese call an anaconda strategy.

12:32And it would strangle Taiwan over time. I don't think they want to go in and attack Taiwan. They don't want to destroy the very chip factories they want to take over. And then there's cyber. There are all kinds of pressures. I also think that the Chinese are hoping that over time, the Kuomintang, KMT, which has been more friendly toward China, will be a vehicle that will allow them over time to get more and more influence in Taiwan and maybe have some kind of a Hong Kong-style transition over a period of time. I think I think that Chinese would far prefer that kind of If you will take over of Taiwan Then all the risks inherent in a military invasion There isn't one single Chinese general or Admiral today that has one day of combat experience The last time these guys fought was 1979 in the North Vietnamese the Vietnamese gave him a bloody nose He's fired.

13:37She has fired all these generals There are now no generals left on the Central Military Commission that kind of oversees the whole thing. He's fired and they're slated for execution his last two defense ministers. So this is not an outfit that I think he has enormous confidence in right now. And he's been fighting against corruption in their military ever since he became president of China. So I'm not sure that he thinks his military is the greatest in the world. Or he's threatened by them. You know that thing where you get an amazing pair of shoes at a really great price and want to tell everyone about it?

14:17Yeah, so do we. Here at Designer Shoe Warehouse, we'll give you something to brag about. Like the latest styles from brands you love. Or the trends everyone's obsessing over. Or shoes that make you feel like, well, you. So go ahead, show off a little. Find shoes that get you at prices that get your budget. Head to your DSW store or DSW.com today. DSW, let us surprise you. Ready to level up? Chumba Casino is your playbook to fun. It's free to play with no purchase necessary. Enjoy hundreds of online social games like Blackjack, Slots, and Solitaire. Anytime, anywhere, with fresh releases every week.

14:53Whether you're at home or on the go, let Chumba Casino bring the excitement to you. Plus, get free daily login bonuses and a free welcome bonus. Join now for your chance to redeem some serious prizes. Play Chumba Casino today. No purchase necessary. VGW Group. Voidboard prohibited by law. 21+. TNCs apply. Let me ask you about what's happening in the Middle East. The last time we spoke, last spring, we were just weeks away from that U.S.-Israeli strike on the three nuclear sites in Iran. You said at that time, it was May, when you were Defense Secretary, you were concerned that a strike on the nuclear program would just buy time, a year or two, but it would not solve the problem.

15:37Do you still believe that? I think the only way that we are likely to get the enriched uranium out of Iran and bring about an end to their nuclear aspirations is through a negotiation. to go after that buried thousand pounds of enriched uranium. It's a huge and complex military operation. And so I think that the only way you do this, and bringing pressure to bear on them to force them into negotiations is certainly the only path that seems to offer any chance of success. But I think ultimately that the only way you actually end the Iranian nuclear program for good is to negotiate it. Well, that offer of having the UN go in and inspect the sites and possibly remove the enriched uranium was on the table before the strikes were carried out in February.

16:44They weren't quite at a deal, but that was being discussed. Is that where we end up at the end of this, back with some kind of UN agency going in and doing what the U.S. and Israel have not been able to do? I suspect that the administration would not settle for any arrangement that did not include getting that enriched uranium out of Iran, or as has been said, or diluting it in some way that makes it no longer usable for a potential weapon. But the diplomacy seems to be at a stalemate, and so does the military operation at this moment in time, with Iran still having control over the Strait of Hormuz.

17:32Is it possible for the president of the United States to walk away and leave this for the Israelis to settle? No, I don't think he can walk away. And no, I don't think the Israelis can settle it. I don't think, as powerful as they are, they don't have the kind of power the United States has. And I think the president seems to have been very consistent, very clear, that under no circumstances can Iran ever have a nuclear bomb. Well, the only way you get to that objective is resolving this issue of the enriched uranium and any future plans for enrichment. I mean, I don't think that the nuclear program in Iran poses an imminent threat.

18:21After all, we bombed it twice. The nuclear material is pretty deeply buried. to you'd have to spin up use the centrifuges to spin it from 60 percent enriched over 90 percent enriched the centrifuges are very sensitive they're also mostly destroyed many of their nuclear scientists have been killed so I don't think this is not a problem for tomorrow but it It does—you know, the president's got it right in terms of this is a long-term threat that cannot be allowed to develop. And if left alone, they clearly have been trying to move in that direction. But it is a big enough problem that it was clearly not going to be settled in four to six weeks, which was the time stamp that the American people were told to expect in terms of the duration of conflict.

19:15I think that there were some unrealistic expectations. You're smiling as you say that. Do you have a clear, have you heard a clearly articulated sort of center of gravity to this operation, an end goal, a strategy? Because there are members of Congress who are saying they're not getting enough information from the administration on many of these points. Well, I think some of the justifications have changed over time. But one thing, I think there have been a few things that have been consistent from the very beginning. One is to eliminate Iran's ability to have a nuclear weapon. Another is to eliminate their military capabilities to attack their neighbors.

20:01Third is to eliminate the capability to support their surrogates, the Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis, to sink their navy. I think those have all been articulated as objectives of this operation. And although the nuclear program has been dramatically damaged and set back a long time, I think those other things, a lot has been accomplished. AMY GOODMAN, Prime Minister Netanyahu told my colleague, Major Garrett, over the weekend on 60 Minutes that the war was not over, because there were still nuclear issues, there were still missiles that needed to be dealt with and militias. He did not seem to be saying he was done.

20:47I think it would be hard to say the war is over, I think from either the standpoint of the United States or Israel at this point. Prime Minister Netanyahu is someone you had a lot of experience with over the years. Yes. And you were very critical of him in your 2014 book. You referred to his arrogance and outlandish ambition and his approach specifically to Iran. You were called a disagreement during a 2009 meeting where he argued an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities would trigger the Iranian people to overthrow the regime and that Iran would not attack, he said, American targets or oil facilities in the region.

21:27That was in 2009, and he was trying to press an American president to do what this American president has done. Was he overly optimistic then? And is he now? He told me all those things in July of 2009, and I told him then he was dead wrong, that he was underestimating the resilience of the Iranians, that I thought he had been lulled into an unrealistic position by the absence of an Iraqi reaction when the Israelis destroyed the Osirak reactor in Iraq. Hey, he'd been lulled by the Syrian lack of reaction when we destroyed their— when Israel destroyed their reactor. That was during the second Bush administration.

22:17But this is the war he's been trying to sell for years. And I told him then that this notion that he was saying then, the regime is—this is 2009. The regime is fragile. It'll crumble at the first attack, and they won't have time to do anything else. I told him then he was wrong. The regime was historically weak at the moment of these strikes. Is it possible he's right now, even though we haven't seen those things, like an uprising among the Iranian people? I think that the likelihood of an uprising—of course, this is one of those predictions that can get you into a lot of trouble—but I think the likelihood of a near-term uprising is very low because the besiege and the internal controls seem very much intact in Iran.

23:03You haven't seen any demonstrations or very few demonstrations in the street. People are cowed, they're afraid, and right now they're concerned with how they can eat and live under the current circumstance that this is a regime that couldn't provide water to Tehran before the attack started. So I think that when the danger will come will be some time after the war stops. But I also think what you generally see in regimes like this is not so much a change of regime from the streets, but that the regime itself begins to fracture and that you have people within the regime who want to take a different tack.

23:48And so you have an internal fight for control. Let me ask you about how America is handling its own problems here at home. You were CIA director. You were a defense secretary. How do you assess Secretary Hagseth's performance? Well, I will—I mean, I'm not into talking about my successors, but I will say I want to point to something positive that I think is going on. It goes back to something we were talking about earlier. I think the leadership in the Pentagon, and especially the Deputy Secretary and the Undersecretary involved in acquisition, are doing some very important and overdue things in terms of shaking up the bureaucracy in the Pentagon in trying to figure out ways not only to expand industrial production of defense materials and to do it on time and on budget, but also to bring and develop new companies into the defense and industrial business that have new kinds of manufacturing capabilities and that can crank out what we need much faster and much cheaper than has been the case in the past.

25:05I think some of the moves to reduce the autonomy of the services will help this. So I think some of the things they're doing to try and shake up the defense industrial base is really important and a high priority. But we're here at William & Mary where you are Chancellor. This is one of the universities that Secretary Hegseth included on his list of, quote, woke breeding grounds of toxic indoctrination. He has ordered U.S. troops cannot attend this school or institutions like it, including ones he studied at, Princeton and Harvard. He referred to them as factories of anti-American resentment and military disdain.

25:54What's your response to that? Because I'm sure you have some feelings, but also what's the impact on telling our fighting force that they can't attend a school like this? Well, I think he's badly misinformed. The fact is, this is a very military-friendly campus. We have a lot of relationships with military organizations here in the Tidewater of Virginia and even in Washington. And we do a lot of national security work here. And we have a very active ROTC program. I just commissioned 10 officers last night. So I think this is a very, very military-friendly campus. And we have very good relationships with the services.

26:41Woke breeding ground of toxic indoctrination. What's the impact on our next generation of American troops who won't have access to top universities because of his description? Well, I think they will. You don't think this lasts? Well, first of all, I think the practical application of this has been one fellowship here at William & Mary. We've got a lot of other relationships going. And I think that, first of all, I think that's a complete mischaracterization of this campus. But I think the military is still going to be active on U.S. campuses through the ROTC programs and various other national security programs.

27:33But he's got this focus on the warrior ethos. I'm sure you've heard a lot of what he has announced. He summoned the generals to D.C., told them he's tired of seeing fat troops and fat generals. He wants to weigh them twice a year. He ordered a ruthless review of the Judge Advocate Court, the military lawyers. He fired most of the inspectors general, saying he planned to overhaul the weaponized internal Pentagon watchdog. When you're talking about the things you like, would you put any of these things on that list? No, but I will say this. I mean, I've fired a fair number of generals and senior people myself.

28:14The way I handled it was a little differently in the respect that I felt that I needed to go in front of the press and explain why I hadn't taken these actions. And in the case of where I, on the same day, fired the chief of staff of the Air Force and the Secretary of the Air Force, I not only have a press conference explaining why I had done it in terms of the mishandling of nuclear materials and weapons, I went to three different air bases to talk to airmen, assemblies of airmen to explain why I had relieved their superior officers. So I think you need to be able to make changes in personnel.

28:55But I think the way you do it is important, and I think it's important to explain to people why you have done it. Well, there's not a full Pentagon press corps even present at the Pentagon these days for a news conference like that without getting special permission to be on the premises right now. He's fired 16 military officials at least, including the Navy secretary, the Army Chief of Staff, General Randy George. during the Iran war he pushed out the Admiral the helm of South South com the chief of naval operations the Air Force vice chief of staff the head of defense intelligence do you see those things as necessary disruption that ultimately will have a positive impact or does it concern you well it concerns me but I also have to acknowledge that I don't know the rationale for those changes I don't know why those changes were made and there may be perfectly justifiable reasons, but I just don't know what they are.

29:55And you think that that should be explained to the public and to the Congress? I think that people, when you have a lot of changes like that, yeah, I think there is an obligation to explain, at a minimum to the Congress, the rationale. The systems don't seem to be operating that way right now. No. You're being very diplomatic in your description of oversight of the Pentagon and Pentagon operations. The CIA director was just in Havana meeting with Raul Castro's grandson, along with the head of intelligence and the head of the minister of the interior. The U.S. is offering Cuba aid. They're pressing for political change and floating the potential of indicting 94-year-old Raul Castro, who's no longer in power, but he's clearly influential.

30:44Does it matter to U.S. national security, what happens on this island? I think that actually the biggest risk is that we end up with another Marial evacuation from Cuba that has tens of thousands of Cubans heading to the United States out of desperation, as happened a number of years ago. So I think that's actually, at this point, the biggest threat. You know, the Cubans have had a lot of security people in Venezuela. They formed the security cordon around Maduro. He didn't trust his own people. They've done this in other countries. So they have been involved in ways that impact our national security and our interests in their engagement in other countries for a long time.

31:32But are they an imminent threat to the United States? Other than in these, if you will, peripheral ways. I think the main threat is, frankly, is collapse. Which the administration says they're trying to avoid. Right. Are you really buying a car online on Autotrader right now? Really? At a playground? Yeah, really. Look at these listings from dealers. Wow, your search can really get that specific? Really? And you just put in your info and boom, cars in your budget. Mom needs a second, honey. You can really have it delivered? Really? Or I can pick it up at the dealership. One sec, sweetie. Mommy's buying a car.