Return to Transcripts main page


Interview with Iran's Foreign Minister; Interview with Bono

Aired October 6, 2013 - 10:00   ET


FAREED ZAKARIA, CNN HOST: This is GPS, the Global Public Square. Welcome to all of you in the United States and around the world. I am Fareed Zakaria. We have a fascinating show for you today with two big exclusive interviews. We'll start with Iran's foreign minister, Javad Zarif, on nuclear negotiations, on Prime Minister Netanyahu's warnings about Iran and much more.

Also, it's a beautiful day when Bono comes to the GPS set to talk about all manner of things from why Americans should be proud of foreign aid to why conservatives really do care about the poor.

Also, tanks, attack helicopters, rocket propelled grenades, AK- 47s; all of them fuel the fires of war and the U.N. wants to regulate this trade. Why is that a bad idea? You will not be surprised when I tell you what's the hold up.

Finally, ever find yourself under fire in a war zone and need help keeping out of harm's way? Never fear, there is an app for that. Of course, there's an app for that.

But, first, here my take. It is the defining moment of a democracy when an outgoing leader celebrates the election of a new one, from the opposing party. Think of George H.W. Bush welcoming Bill Clinton, or Jimmy Carter doing the same for Ronald Reagan.

Across the world, this is the acid test of a real democracy. Mexicans will tell you that they knew that they had gotten there when their president, Ernesto Zedillo, after 70 years of one-party rule, allowed free elections and stood with the newly elected successor and affirmed his legitimacy.

The basic and powerful idea behind this ritual is that in a democracy, the process is more important than the outcome. If a genuine democratic process has been followed, we have to accept the results, regardless of how much we may dislike them.

The ultimate example of this in recent American history might be Al Gore's elegant acceptance of the process


AL GORE, FORMER VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: While I strongly disagree with the court's decision, I accept it.


ZAKARIA: Complicated, politicized, but utterly constitutional that put George W. Bush in the White House.

It must also have been very difficult for Richard Nixon to report the results of the 1960 election when John F. Kennedy won by a razor- thin margin and was marred by voter fraud, but he did. However much you dislike the outcome, you respect the democratic process.

That is what is at stake in Washington this week. The debate going on there was not trivial, not transitory and not about Obamacare. Whatever you think about the Affordable Care Act, it is a law that was passed by the House of Representatives, then the Senate, signed by the president, and then validated by the Supreme Court as constitutional.

That doesn't mean it cannot be repealed. Of course it can be repealed, as can most laws. But to do so, you would need another piece of legislation, one that says quite simply "The Affordable Care Act is hereby repealed in its entirety" and that would have to then pass the House, the Senate and be signed into law by the president.

What you cannot do, what cannot be allowed to stand is the notion that if a group of legislators cannot convince a majority in both houses and the president to agree with them, would then shut down the government or threaten to default until they got their way. That is not democracy. That is extortion.

I would be happy to see President Barack Obama compromise on the budget, taxes, spending, even Obamacare, but he cannot compromise on the principle that the rules of democracy must be respected, whatever the outcome.

If Democrats had threatened to shut down the government or default on the debt to force the repeal of the Bush tax cuts or to defund the Iraq War, I would have hoped that President George Bush would have also been uncompromising.

America's power and influence abroad derives in large measure from the strength of its democracy. And if politicians here start playing fast and loose with the rules, doing whatever it takes to get the results that they want, what does that say to people in Russia, Egypt, Iran, and Venezuela who get pious lectures on the rules of democracy from Americans?

It tells them that something is deeply rotten with the American system right now.

Let's get started. A few weeks ago, it was unimaginable that the President of the United States and Iran would chat, but, of course, it happened a few weeks ago. Very few would have argued that there was a real chance that the United States and Iran would come to terms on Tehran's nuclear program.

But that is exactly what my next guest says and he should know. He is the man charged to negotiate a nuclear deal for Iran. Javad Zarif is the Foreign Minister of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Welcome to the show. JAVAD ZARIF, FOREIGN MINISTER OF THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN: Thank you. Thank you for having me.

ZAKARIA: Tell me first, do you still continue to hold that optimism on the basis of the discussions you had?

ZARIF: Well, the first meeting we had was positive, but we didn't get into the details and usually it's more difficult to negotiate the details. But I think it's a good beginning. It's a good political jump to the process.

And we can start with this -- what I hope to be, a political will and political desire on the part of the members of E3+3 and Iran to move forward and resolve this issue because what we have done in the last 10 years has not benefited the P5-Plus-One, it hasn't benefited Iran.

We have very serious sanctions that are hurting the Iranian people and, at the same time, instead of a few hundred centrifuges that we had 10 years ago or eight years ago, now we have 18,000.

So, nobody has benefited from this pattern of relations that we've had over the last eight years. There is a need for change and I hope that everybody realizes that we need to change that process, put an end to something that was a lose-lose situation and hopefully begin something that will be to the benefit of everybody.

ZAKARIA: So, let me ask you, why does Iran need nuclear energy? You are one of the largest oil exporters in the world. You burn off as much natural gas; that is, you waste as much natural gas as your entire nuclear energy program produces.

This is a huge investment and you are enriching -- you're creating, as you said, thousands of centrifuges, enriching uranium up to 3.5 percent. It does seem odd that the world's fifth largest petroleum exporter, at its peak, would need this massive investment in nuclear energy for peaceful electricity when you have so many sources in oil and gas.

ZARIF: Well, there's several answers to your question, but, in order to be brief, let me just point to them. The first is that the ratification of energy resources is a policy that is recommended.

Going through alternative sources of energy is now the major policy option that, both from an environmental perspective as well as from sustainable development perspective, is being suggested and promoted at the international level.

It is interesting to note that in 1974 it was an American corporation, an American consulting firm that suggested to the Shah of Iran, then an ally of the United States, that Iran should procure 20 percent of its energy from nuclear reactors.

So, I think there are firm grounds to believe that Iran can and needs to diversify its sources of energy for future generations.

ZAKARIA: But there are 40 countries that have civilian nuclear energy. They do not enrich.


ZAKARIA: They do not enrich. Why do you need to have the capacity to enrich when most countries that use civilian nuclear energy don't enrich?

ZARIF: We did not have any intention of enriching. We owned 20 percent of an enrichment company in France called Eurodif. Unfortunately, we were not able to even get a gram of enriched uranium from them.

They have pushed Iran into a situation where Iran had to rely on itself. Now, they cannot come back and try to rewrite history.

Iran has had to do this not out of its own choice, but out of necessity. Iran is a proud nation. We believe we have the technological capability, we have the human resources in order to stand on our own feet.

And once the international community or those who have the capacity deprive us of that, then we will rely on ourselves.

ZAKARIA: Why did you build underground nuclear facilities which were not revealed to the IAEA?

ZARIF: No, no, you see, again, the facilities in Iran, according to the agreement that we had with the IAEA, now the international mechanisms for monitoring have changed. They have improved, in fact.

But, at that time, you were supposed to inform the IAEA 180 days before you introduced uranium to that facility. The facility that we have -- that we had in that times, when we showed it to the IAEA, not a single gram of uranium had been introduced in that facility.

There had been, in other places, but, unfortunately, they have tried to present a different portrayal. In the facility in that times, which has become the subject of so much international enthusiasm ...

ZAKARIA: Because it was hidden.

ZARIF: Yes. It wasn't supposed to be revealed. We were supposed to reveal that facility to the IAEA 180 days before we introduced uranium to that facility.

And when the secretary -- Director General of the IAEA, the former Director General, Mr. Mohamed ElBaradei, went and visited that facility in February of 2002, we had not introduced a single gram of uranium to that facility.

It was a smaller facility where we had done some testing at the laboratory level. Our technicians believed that we did not need to inform the IAEA, but it has nothing to do with that major facility.

But what we can do now, instead of looking back, is use the IAEA with its monitoring capabilities to make sure that Iran does not deviate from its program. The IAEA has not been able to find a single evidence.

And the IAEA has done more investigation in Iran in the past 10 years that it probably hasn't done in any other country, has not been able to get to a single evidence that Iran has diverted its activities into nonpeaceful operations.

But we are willing to work with the IAEA, we are willing to answer past questions, we are willing to take the path of confidence- building and transparency in order to remove any doubt because, as I said, it is in our own interest to make sure that the international community considers our program to be totally peaceful and totally proliferation-resistant.

ZAKARIA: We're going to take a short break. There's lots more ahead on the show including my interview with Bono.

But, up next, back with Iran's Foreign Minister Javad Zarif. We will talk about Israel and also whether Iran really wants to make peace with America. Stay with us.



BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER: Last year when I spoke here at the U.N., I drew a red line. Now, Iran has been very careful not to cross that line, but Iran is positioning itself to race across that line in the future at a time of its choosing.


ZAKARIA: And we are back with Iran's Foreign Minister Javad Zarif.

What did you think of Prime Minister Netanyahu's remarks at the United Nations?

ZARIF: Well, unfortunately, some people find it in their interests to deceive the international community and to conduct a policy of fear-mongering. Israel has been pushing the line, since 1992, probably you can find even an earlier version, I haven't.

Of what I've seen is since 1992, Israel has been saying, and most of it has been Netanyahu himself, that Iran is six months away from a nuclear bomb. And, now, what is it 20, 22 years - 21 years from 1992? We still don't have a bomb. We won't have a bomb because we don't see it in our interests.

And it's interesting, Israel is one of three states outside the NPT. Israel has a clandestine nuclear weapons program. Israel is known to have 200 warheads at least, nuclear-wise.

And it is interesting that that regime take -- has the audacity to go around in the international community and introduce a member of the NPT, who has been in full compliance with its NPT obligations, of being a nuclear threat.

Everybody knows that Israel is a nuclear threat. Its arsenal -- its nuclear arsenal is a major security threat to the region and to the world.

And, in fact, several NPT Review Conferences, starting with the 1995 NPT Review Conference which allowed all of us to renew the NPT and then continuing in 2000 and again in 2010, they have all stress with consensus of the international community, in fact, unanimity, that all should join the NPT, all non-nuclear weapon states should destroy their stockpiles and should joint the NPT as non-nuclear weapon states.

And it is interesting really for him to be going around making these lies trying to basically sweep under the rug Israeli practices that are the major threat to the security of the region, major violations of the most basic rights of the Palestinian people just in order to create fear.

Why is it that he's worried about a deal where the international community can monitor Iran's nuclear program, make sure that it's never weaponized? He should ...

ZAKARIA: I'll tell you why ...

ZARIF: Welcome it.

ZAKARIA: His argument is and he quotes from President Rouhani's book where he says, "This was the strategy," he says. "Rouhani adopted the last time he was negotiating. And the strategy was, and he's quoting from Rouhani's book, he says, "By creating a calm environment, a calm environment by negotiating, we were able to complete the work in Isfahan."

Isfahan is a place where there's a major reactor that actually has been a critical of -- stepping stone in the Iranian program. And so, Netanyahu says, "In other words, he saying we fooled the world once. Now, he thinks he can fool it again."

ZARIF: No. What President Rouhani said in his book, and I have read and edited that book several times when we were both out of office, is that you cannot pursue a peaceful program when the entire international community has concerns and anxieties about your program.

You can, in fact -- and this is our argument, you can, in fact, pursue a peaceful program only with the cooperation of the international community, only through transparency. This is exactly the opposite of what Netanyahu is trying to portray to the world.

He's been lying. He continues to lie. He's been, in fact, investing in creating fear and anxiety in order to pursue ulterior motives.

ZAKARIA: What did you think of President Obama's statement with Prime Minister Netanyahu in Washington? ZARIF: Well, I believe political leaders have to exercise leadership. I was rather disappointed that President Obama used language that was insulting to the Iranian people.

I believe President Obama should, in fact, stick to his declared intention to deal with Iran on the basis of mutual respect. That's what he said in his letter to the president. That's what he said in his address to the General Assembly.

You do not deal with another state with mutual respect by threatening them, by trying to intimidate them, particularly when you know that that is not useful, that is not of any utility. As I said, the Iranian people react very, very negatively to such languages of threat and intimidation.

ZAKARIA: Do you think that this nuclear deal, if it happened, could be a step toward normalization of relations with Washington?

The reason I ask is it's difficult for me looking at how anti- Americanism is so much part of the -- at the center of the regime, the "death to America" chants that take place every Friday, the references to America has the Great Satan.

Do you want to come to terms with the country that you call the Great Satan?

ZARIF: What I want to say is that we have a bad history, a bad history of mistrust.

A history where we had a good number of activities on the part of the United States starting from the overthrow of a popularly elected government to whatever happened during the Iraq War, unfortunately the use of chemical weapons by Iraq and the failure of the United States to respond with the necessary enthusiasm, unfortunately, as its doing now to those chemical weapons.

In fact, there was an attempt by the United States to sweep that under the rug, too.

So, there's a lot of cause for concern on the Iranian side and there may be cause of concern on the American side. So, we have to move in a serious way to deal with those concerns.

But the most important and immediate problem that we need to face right now is the nuclear issue.

ZAKARIA: Javad Zarif, thank you so much for joining us.

ZARIF: Thank you, Fareed.

ZAKARIA: Lots more ahead including the world's biggest rock star, U2's Bono on Africa and foreign aid.

But, up right next What in the World, a global deal that would make it tougher for dictators and terrorists to get their hands on weapons of mass destruction, but it will never get through the United States Senate. Why? I will explain.


ZAKARIA: Now for our What in the World segment. Amid all of Washington's discussions on Syria and Iran, one other issue seems to have gotten ignored.

The U.S. signed an actual international treaty last week, one with vast implications for terrorism and war around the world. The problem is the treaty needs to be ratified by the U.S. Senate and that is just not going to happen.

Let me explain, it is the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty, an agreement that aims to control the $70 billion global trade of weapons. Almost every major commodity is subject to come form of international regulation, gold, oil, currencies.

But there have been few controls on the flow of weaponry. Countries have wanted to have an unregulated free-for-all in the weapons market and I'm not talking just about guns.

The U.N. treaty covers battle tanks, combat aircraft, attack helicopters, warships. These are all weapons that are playing a part in ongoing wars in Syria and large parts of Africa.

As Nigeria's President Goodluck Jonathan put it last week these are the true "weapons of mass destruction" as much as the chemical weapons that were used in Syria. And, yet, everyone, including rogue states, militias and terrorist groups seem to have unfettered access to them.

The key part of the U.N. treaty is that it asks signatories not to export weapons to groups or states which could use these weapons in crimes against humanity. Simple enough, don't send arms to Syria or Sudan or North Korea.

Who could object to this? The United States Senate. Critics of the treaty, most prominently the gun lobby in Washington, claim that somehow the Obama administration will use this treaty as a backdoor method to impose gun control in the United States.

So, they explain, the treaty would violate the Second Amendment and infringe on our constitutional right to bear arms. Except that this is simply factually wrong.

Here are the exact words from the treaty as it stands. The treaty affirms, "The sovereign right of any state to regulate and control conventional arms exclusively within its territory pursuant to its own legal or constitutional system."

Sounds pretty clear to me. The issue is not about gun control in the United States. This is about stopping dictators from acquiring tanks and missiles and attack helicopters that can kill tens of thousands of people in a day. It is about making it harder for terrorist groups to buy extremely dangerous weapons. The other broader critique is that treaties like this tend to have no real impact because they're not enforceable. But they do make it harder for really bad guys to get guns. The U.N. Arms Trade Treaty has already taken seven years to negotiate, clauses have been inserted to allay American fears. Whether with number one exporter of arms. Now remember, 154 countries voted to sign the treaty in April, only three countries voted know -- Syria, Iran and North Korea. By not ratifying, that is the company we will be keeping. We will be right back.

Up next, a conversation with one of the world's greatest activists and singers -- Bono.


CANDY CROWLEY, CNN ANCHOR: I'm Candy Crowley in Washington with the check of the headlines. U.S. commandos have captured a top al Qaeda figure. Abu Anas al Libi was grabbed in Tripoli, Libya, Saturday. He's suspected in the 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. More than 200 people were killed and thousands were injured in those attacks. The U.S offered a $5 million reward for information leading the capture of al Libi. He was on the FBI's most wanted terrorist list. Al Libi has been indicted on the -- in the U.S. on several terrorism related charges. U.S. officials want him to face trial in this country. In the second military operation in Somalia Saturday, U.S. Navy SEALs targeted the top leader of al Shabaab, the group behind the terrorists attack at a shopping mall in Kenya two weeks ago. The SEALs came under fire and had to withdraw before they could confirm whether they killed their target. Meanwhile, the Kenyan government has identified four of the terrorists who took part on the mall attack. One of them is an American Somali.

And seven people are dead after a monster truck plowed into a crowd in an event in Mexico. At least 46 others were injured. The investigation into the incident is under way.

Those are your top stories, "Reliable Sources" is at the top of the hour. Now back to "Fareed Zakaria GPS."

ZAKARIA: Bono does not need an introduction, but I'm going to give him one anyway. His band U2 is one of the most influential musical (inaudible) of the last 30 years. Among other super (inaudible) under their belt. They have had the highest grossing concert tour in history, they have won more Grammy awards than any other group, but the one-word named singer is also a passionate antipoverty activist, having founded the advocacy organization One and also Red, which brings the private sector into the fight against AIDS in Africa. It was through these efforts that Bono and Lindsey Graham and Condi Rice recently found themselves in a bar together in Liberia. Now, that may sound like the beginning of a joke, but it is not. So, what is the story?


ZAKARIA: Welcome to the show, Bono.


ZAKARIA: So what was that? What was that moment like? That meeting in the bar?

BONO: That's funny. That reminds me the Irish joke, it was -- two Irish guys leave a bar- it could happen.


BONO: You know, I was hosting a codel in Liberia, trying to show American taxpayers where their money's been spent, how well it's been spent or not. If because it may be, perhaps the surrealist moment was indeed in a very low-lit bar in Monrovia, in Liberia. And remember, this is a country it's still in rubble after civil war, and seeing these very senior senators in authority, I mean, not age, and sort of, you know, moving and grooving to a girl called Sweets in this low light, and hanging out with people you wouldn't normally find them with. But, you know, they were there because they're really passionate about this stuff, and, you know, Lindsey Graham is an amazing advocate. You know, we only had one idea, really, our organization One. Which was to work with both sides, not to be held hostage by ideology on the left or the right, but actually to find a radical center. Not a soft center, tough-minded center, but that's been our strategy.

ZAKARIA: How do you get to the right? Because you did it with Jesse Helms, you've done it with Lindsey Graham, what is the argument you use with ...

BONO: I think already that your question I challenge, because it predisposes that people on the right are not prone to be moved by this. I think they are. I think people on the left are also. Look, we have cranks on both sides, which are, you know intolerable. And -- but most people are just looking for progress. This is probably the one area you'll get, even Congress now to agree on.

ZAKARIA: But foreign aid, as you know, is not popular. I mean that part of the challenge you faced and the success you've had is that you've made foreign aid sexy.

BONO: Sexy?


BONO: Thank you. Strange enough, you only think on the right -- maybe they are suspicious to foreign aid, but I don't know, you know, the military, for example ...

ZAKARIA: They are good.

BONO: You know, I had a dinner a few months ago with six, you know, four-star generals. And they want to understand -- and they see men and women being put in harm's way in their military, and they see development as a much more secure way, or -- much -- sorry -- a much more economic way of making things secure on the ground, if you like stopping fires before they start. So we've got a lot of support there. And then, you know, there's this thing -- Americans are patriotic. They actually believe that the idea of America should be contagious. When you go -- you know, they actually -- they know their country is not just a country, that it is an idea. And, you know, they just don't like the waste of it, or corruption and things like that. And we fight in the one campaign as hard against corruption as we fight for aid.

ZAKARIA: And you would argue and you would tell the American people and the world that the money spent over the last ten years has actually been very effective, right?

BONO: It's remarkable. Debt cancellation, where the first -- we came across each other in Jubilee 2000, you know, drop the debt campaign, you have 51 million children -- and extra 51 million children in school on the continent of Africa, largely because of great African leadership that spent those resources that were freed up very well on their people. And the conditionalities that were key to getting your debts canceled allowed finance ministers to tackle corruption. And it was fantastic. The AIDS stuff, the United States is so far out in front. You know, you deal with Syria, you deal with Iraq, you deal with all these quagmires. Well, guess what? The United States has their taxpayers here in this country pay for it's 9.7 -- 10 million people owe their lives to the U.S., left and right, George Bush started, President Obama is finishing it. This virus that's -- tiny little virus that wreaked so much havoc in so many people's lives, the greatest health crisis in 600 years, is on the run because of the American leadership. That's important.

ZAKARIA: And I think that, you know, the way you phrase that is important, because we do think about how do we stop people from dying in Syria or in Sudan or in the Congo. And those are real and important struggles ...

BONO: Yes.

ZAKARIA: But the flip side of that is, with really minimal effort, you can actually save lots of people's lives. It's almost a certain fact that if you spend a certain amount of money and effort, and do it wisely ...

BONO: Yes.

ZAKARIA: You'll save an enormous number of people's lives.

BONO: Yes. Less than half of half of one percent of the GDP of the United States achieves all this. It is about as good -- it's a great value for money, and it's such good news. We failed in telling the American people of what they have achieved around the world. And I -- that's why I'm here.


ZAKARIA: Coming up next, more of my conversation with Bono, to give us his take on the world leaders he's met. George W. Bush, Shinzo Abe, Nelson Mandela. And, of course, and I'll ask him about his new career as a mimic. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BONO: Actually, I thought it was a member of his own road crew.



BONO: U2's Bono not only lives life king-size, he lives to do lasting good in the world. How? Well, it begins with getting the world's most powerful people to sit up and listen. More of my conversation with Bono.


ZAKARIA: When you are meeting with somebody like the Japanese prime minister, what is that meeting like? Does he treat you like a rock star? An antipoverty activist? Some mixture of both? What does he ask you? Stuff about music? Does he only talk about ...

BONO: They often look at me at first like some sort of an obscure potted plant, and kind of, you know their stuff will take pictures and you're like some bizarre thing, but after a while, that is quickly forgotten, usually as I don't leave the office, point (inaudible) and then, you know, I -- I have the relationships, I've met before, we have a relationship going back. I do remember meeting with another Japanese head of state. And his -- I could feel his staff kind of nodding off during the meeting. He was being very polite. So I just said the world "China ..."



BONO: because, of course, one of the great faux pass, geopolitical faux pas of this century in 100 years-time looking back, would be if the United States or Japan or Europe were to cede influence on the continent of Africa to China. China, people say, it's the Chinese century. Ask the Chinese, they are all in Africa. You know, and I'm excited to meet them and they're doing some incredible work in Africa, but, you know, we need to talk with them about some of what they're doing, because we think, particularly in the mining area and resources, that we all, Chinese, European, and the U.S. companies -- need to now going forward adopt to higher standard in the way we treat developing economies.

ZAKARIA: One of your big new causes has been anticorruption, and specifically you've targeted companies like Exxon, Chevron, American Petroleum Institute that's funded by them. Explain why? What is going on then? What do you want to stop?

BONO: It's the Wal-Mart target, Exxon or Chevron, they do some really good work on malaria and HIV/AIDS, (inaudible) Chevron, but they are part of the API. The API has sued the SEC to stop new legislation passed by Congress enforces oil, gas, all extractive industries to publish what they paid for those rights in developing world. Because corruption -- corruption is complex. It's not simple. It's no longer just brown paper bags. If you don't publish what you pay to a state for their rights, then the people who control that state can issue a different number.


BONO: So you pay $4 billion for the mining rights, and you -- for them 3.8, that's $200 million for your Swiss bank account. That's what corruption looks like. We always talk about corruption south of the equator, which is a real problem, but this is north of the equator. This is our complicity in it. And it's not good enough -- it's on American behavior, it's very 20th century, the oil business, so that's just the way things are getting done, that's the way we get things done. No more. There's no transparency revolution happening, and it's a great thing, because all over the continent of Africa, all over the developing world, there's young smart leaders, they are tech- savvy, you know, they are online, even 2G phones, they are checking in and they are holding their governments to account.

ZAKARIA: You've dealt with so many different leaders around the world. Who has impressed you a lot?

BONO: The great man Nelson Mandela is at home now. He was -- he was a towering figure for me in so many ways. I've been working for him since I was 18. We did our first antiapartheid concert. Desmond Tutu, he's my other boss, and I so admire him, but, you know, even President Clinton, who I imitated this week, to my chagrin -- I was trying to cover for him while he was off ...

ZAKARIA: Explain what happened?

BONO: No, no, he was off doing some stuff, he lost his notes and I- Sheryl Sandberg, actually, from Facebook, she said you have to do something. And performance don't like lulls. So I went on and pretended to be him.


BONO: When I first met Bono, he walked into the Oval Office, and actually I thought it was a member of his own road crew.


ZAKARIA: What did you think of his imitation of you?


BILL CLINTON: Well, I'm Irish and all, and we Irish, we can imitate anybody.



BONO: He's a better president ...


BONO: ... than a mimic, but I wanted to say one of the reasons why I admire him so, he's virtually a deity in Ireland because of the peace process. So not just his work on debt cancellation, on HIV/AIDS, but as an Irish person, you know, I live in a country now that's largely peaceful. I grew up in the '70s. It was horrible. We had a really nasty, nasty time of it. Mostly in the north, but sometimes in the south. So we owe Bill Clinton. I love his big brain and his -- and the big heart that he has. You know, he's staying up late at night worrying about other people's safety, so I'm going to pick him this week.

ZAKARIA: Do you imitate other people?

BONO: No, I do not.

I'm working on you.

ZAKARIA: Oh, yeah, that's right.

BONO: You know, I still need to see Bill. I'm getting there.

ZAKARIA: All right. Bono. Pleasure to have you on.

BONO: Thank you. Always. I love this program.


ZAKARIA: The one and only Bono. Up next, it seems these days there's an app for everything. Well, if you hope to avoid war zones while traveling in the Middle East, yep, there's an app for that, too. I'll explain.


ZAKARIA: The federal government shutdown did much more than make your beloved panda cam go black. It kept hundreds of thousands of federal workers at home without pay. That brings me to my question of the week from the "GPS Challenge." Which American city's workforce has the largest percentage of federal workers? Is it A, Washington, D.C.? B, New York, New York, C, Honolulu, Hawaii or D, Colorado Springs, Colorado. Stay tuned and we'll tell you the correct answer.

This week's book of the week is Malcolm Gladwell's latest. Do I need to say more? His new book is titled "David and Goliath," and like everything he writes, it is compulsively readable. A series of fascinating stories, including a wonderful retelling of the original David and Goliath story. He has his critics, and he'll by on the show to argue with them in a few weeks, but there's no writer today who has so much fun with ideas. And that's an extraordinary achievement.

Now for "The Last Look." In last century wartime warning systems were pretty low tech. From air raid sirens to emergency broadcast systems. But in the 21st century your smartphone might just be your best warning tool. In Lebanon, for example, as sectarian violence spills across Syria's border, apps are being developed for avoiding riots, car bombs, and even snipers. The military created "LAF Shield," which allows them to highlight danger zones for users to avoid. Users, in turn, can swipe to issue an SOS or report suspicious activity to the army. Another app that uses crowd sourcing to pinpoint locations of protests, street fights and burning tires was downloaded 100,000 times in just one year.

And the goal of "Way to Safety," an app under development, is to be able to locate a gunman just using the smartphones in people's pockets. The app will record gunfire, identify the type of weapon being used and triangulate the exact location of the shooter, as long as several users are in the area. Now we just need an app. To get the world's warring factions to stop fighting and to make peace.

The correct answer to our GPS challenge question was, D, Colorado Springs, Colorado. The federal government has more than 2 million employees in total. Almost 450,000 of them work in the Washington, D.C. area, but as a percentage of the workforce, Colorado Springs leads the nation. The city is home to three military installations. There are 55,000 federal workers who comprise 18.8 percent of the workforce. Thanks to all of you for being part of my program this week. I will see you next week. Stay tuned for "Reliable Sources."