Bob Woodward discusses 'War,' his new book breaking down world conflicts and U.S. politics

Few journalists working today have covered as many presidents as the Washington Post’s Bob Woodward. His latest book, “War,” is about war in Ukraine, war in the Middle East and a war for the American presidency. Nick Schifrin sat down with Woodward to discuss more.

Read the Full Transcript

Geoff Bennett: Few journalists working today have covered as many presidents as the Washington post’s Bob Woodward. His latest book is out today.

And Nick Schifrin spoke with him a short time ago.

Nick Schifrin: Woodward’s new book is titled “War.” It’s about war in Ukraine, war in the Middle East, but also a war for the American presidency.

And Bob Woodward is here. Welcome back to the “News Hour.”

Bob Woodward, Author, “War”: Thank you.

Nick Schifrin: Thanks a lot, Bob Woodward.

Let’s start in the Middle East.

President Biden’s policy when it comes to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who was often referred to as the bear hug, as in, the closer Biden holds Bibi, hopefully, the more Bibi will be willing to moderate his behavior per U.S. interests. That’s the idea.

But in private, you quote Biden calling Netanyahu an SOB, one of the biggest effing A-holes in the world, a bad effing guy and an effing liar.

There comes an unprecedented moment in the Middle East. Biden is trying to get Israel to listen to him when it comes to responding to the October 7 attacks. Did the president feel like Netanyahu listened?

Bob Woodward: Well, there was listening, but Bibi’s going to do what he wants. And he says so to Biden. Look, I’m going to have to do some of these things that maybe you’re not going to like.

But what’s so interesting, there can be an alliance of policy. As somebody in the White House said, that Biden’s policy is pro-Israel, but not necessarily pro-Netanyahu.

Nick Schifrin: There was a similar gap between what the president said in public in terms of support for Netanyahu and how he described to him in private that you described with Vice President Harris.

You described this meeting that Vice President Harris had with Benjamin Netanyahu back in July. And after the meeting, you quote the Israeli ambassador here saying that the meeting was cordial. But, after, Harris comes out and says: “I will not stand silent as the people of Gaza suffer.”

And Netanyahu, you say, was furious.

Bob Woodward: He was furious because, at the meeting, which was a kind of, hey, Israel, United States, everything is fine, and then when she comes out and makes that declaration, which tells you something about her. She’s separating herself from some of the Biden policy.

And Netanyahu is just burning, furious. But this is just a couple of months ago. And she’s libel to be the next United States president, as we know, as he knows. So there’s a fury, but it seems to stay private.

Nick Schifrin: Let’s switch to Ukraine.

You report that, by September 2022, U.S. intelligence reports considered exquisite revealed that Putin was so desperate about battlefield losses, the chances that he might use tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine had gone from 5 percent to 10 percent to 50 percent, or basically a coin flip, as you quote someone saying.

Why? What were the indications that the chances were so high?

Bob Woodward: What the strain in all of this is U.S. intelligence has gotten better and better. And they actually, at some points, know what’s going on in the Kremlin.

At one point, they have a human source that’s really telling them, so they have got that picture. And they realize that Putin’s the autocrat, he’s desperate. Any catastrophic — under their doctrine, any catastrophic battlefield loss would mean, ah, we’re going to use tactical nuclear weapons. And he does it in private.

But, in public, it goes from 5 percent as you say, up to 50 percent. And in the White House, they realize 50 percent is a coin flip. And the deputy national security adviser, Jon Finer, realizes what a momentous moment this is and reflects on how this is what it must have been like in 1962 during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Nick Schifrin: You describe an all-hands-on-deck order from the president, where everybody calls their Russian counterpart, including this conversation between Lloyd Austin and Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu.

Austin says this — quote — “If you did this, all the restraints that we have been operating under in Ukraine would be reconsidered. This would isolate Russia on the world stage to a degree you Russians cannot fully appreciate.”

Shoigu replies: “I do not take kindly to being threatened.”

Austin: “I am the leader of the most powerful military in the history of the world. I do not make threats.”

And then, a couple days later, Shoigu calls back and says: “We have this intelligence that says the Ukrainians are thinking about using a dirty bomb,” basically releasing radioactive material into Ukraine.

Austin replies: “This seems to us like you are trying to establish the predicate for using nuclear weapons. Don’t do it.”

Shoigu replies: “I understand.”

How tense was that phone call and that moment?

Bob Woodward: Well, the — all of the moments are very, very tense because the stakes couldn’t be higher.

The idea of Putin — remember who he is, an autocrat. I report that the intelligence agency’s assessment of him is that he’s not only a brutal leader; he’s sadistic. And that’s pretty stark.

Nick Schifrin: Let’s switch to former President Donald Trump.

You report that, as president in 2020, Trump sent a bunch of Abbott point-of-care COVID test machines for Putin’s personal use, when, of course, those were in short supply at the time, and that since Trump has left office, he and Putin have spoken as many as seven times.

Do you believe it is still a mystery, as you quote former Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats saying, it’s a mystery why Trump treats Putin this way?

Bob Woodward: Yes, or is it blackmail is what Coats asks the question about. But now we see today that Trump is out saying — not denying that he’s talked to Putin and said, well, it would…

Nick Schifrin: Maybe it would be smart if I did.

Bob Woodward: Yes, it would — and when Trump says something is smart, that means he’s either done it or he’s planning on doing it.

So the relationship between Putin and Trump is central to understanding Trump, because what the characteristics of Trump are, he really has no plan. It’s just what comes into his mind. And he has no team, and he operates alone. This is very different than the kind of relationship that others have had with Putin.

Nick Schifrin: Finally, wondered if we could look forward.

Many of President Biden’s aides I speak to say that they don’t think that they’re going to get the cease-fire in Gaza that they have been looking for. They’re not even calling for a cease-fire in Lebanon. And when it comes to Ukraine, they are worried that the best Ukraine can do is hold the line over the next year.

And so while they’re proud they haven’t gotten into these wars with U.S. boots, as you write about, they are worried that their legacy is not ending the wars that started on their watch. Do you hear that from them?

Bob Woodward: But very important is that he intentionally did not put U.S. troops. And Joe Biden, age 81, is somebody who experienced, not in the military, but in politics, something called Vietnam.

And he looks at Vietnam as, ah, this is where we — we sent half-a-million American troops to Vietnam to fight in a foreign war because of that giant danger of, allegedly, North Korea. I mean, Biden had — says that’s when you step off the cliff, when you put American troops at risk.

And by not doing that, he has put the United States in a much better position. And the overall conclusion I reach is, one of the things Biden did is he made the homeland safer by not getting involved with U.S. troops in the Middle East or in Asia or anyone — anywhere.

Nick Schifrin: Bob Woodward.

The book is “War.”

Thank you so much.

Bob Woodward: Thank you.