B (3:31)

Well, first of all, it's already taking a toll on the ordinary Filipino. The transportation cost, the, the price of food because it also affects the fertilizers that are being used for our food security. So these are all. Now it has its cascading effect from energy issues. It goes down now to our food, agriculture particularly.

A (4:04)

And Madam Secretary, you know, it's already beginning to cause some distress and some protests as we know that there have been taxi drivers and transport workers blocking roads today as we speak in the capital Manila and striking over what you're talking about, the cost of fuel, the lack of payments. These diesel and petrol prices have more than doubled, as you say, in the last month. You've offered some mitigation, about 5,000 pesos for some transport workers. But many say they aren't getting them. Let me play just a short clip of one of these workers.

D (4:39)

It's overwhelming, it's a lot to deal with because tomorrow you'll never know how to adjust the money that you earn. Our earnings keep shrinking. That is the most painful thing happening to us because of the rise in cost of diesel.

A (4:50)

So you hear from one of your own country people, what is the best you can do for them right now and what is the worst that might happen if you can't?

B (4:59)

Well, right now the President has come up with this national energy emergency. Now what does this mean? With this emergency powers, it will now give the legal authority for the President and certain members of the bureaucracy, the agency is concerned to really ensure energy supply that will mitigate the increase of prices and energy needs. Again with the view of looking of helping the economy. Now I think this is actually a whole of government effort and well, this was just announced by the President only about, I think yesterday. It can start with decreasing certain taxes, particularly excise taxes. We are also looking into the vat, a possibility in the future. Now these are very important emergency powers given to the President to mitigate the situation because this will help, this will help lower down the prices.

A (6:11)

Now you've got about two and a half million Filipinos living in the Middle east and working there. Are you trying to get them out? Is the fact that some of them are losing their jobs, you know, sort of diminishing the remittances that they send home? Or what is the crisis for in that regard?

B (6:28)

Well, again, this is issue. Now let me just get back to the point that one of the pillars of our foreign policy is assistance to nationals. And therefore, since the situation started in late February, there has been a number of repatriation efforts by both the Department of Foreign affairs and another agency which is in charge of overseas workers, the Department of Migrant Workers. So far There has been almost 2,000 of our contract workers that have been repatriated. And of course, that goes without saying that they are being taken care of while here in the Philippines, however, there's still a number of people who are requesting to be repatriated and all efforts are there and it's continuing. And we have been looking at situations if the airspace is closed in certain places in the Middle east, certain airports, then our embassies as well as consulates try to find some land routes. And therefore we have still Filipinos, let's say, in Iran, and we're trying to get them out through Peru, Turkey, and the same thing with the other countries in the gcc.

A (7:54)

So I want to ask you, Foreign Secretary, you are a very close ally of the United States. As I said, Asia appears to be impacted the worst by the energy crisis right now. Did you get any heads up? Could you have made any contingency plans and will this sort of maybe push you into an alliance of necessity, perhaps with China because your own president has said the Philippines might embrace joint energy exploration with China in the South China Sea?

B (8:25)

Well, first of all, the United States has been very helpful in providing us also some energy sources. I mean, all these details are actually with the Department of Energy. But yes to your question, the United States always has even reached out. Now to your other query, there is such a possibility because of also the need for our energy sources. And I mentioned also the statement made by the President because there might just be some discussions on a certain disputed territory whereby there can be some kind of discussions and negotiations.

A (9:07)

I understand regional security, of course, is an issue. As you know, a lot of this about Iran and the US And Israel's, you know, reason for war is to make sure that Iran never gets a nuclear bomb. But just in your hemisphere in Asia, North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un told his lawmakers this week that the Iran war justifies his decision to double down on nuclear weapons. What's your reaction to that?

B (9:36)

Well, we have been very consistent in our position against North Korea and its ambition towards missile, I mean, having this missile capability. And we have been one, particularly when we have our statements made together with Republic of Korea and Japan that we have been telling them that we are against this situation. And there has been some continuous discussions. Particularly this is being discussed in the ASEAN setting. Now that we are the chair of asean.

A (10:16)

What is your biggest concern now about the war on Iran and all the consequences that may or may not have been predicted?

B (10:26)

Well, the biggest concern is actually when until when will the situation last because again, as we said, we go back to the very basic issues that we have, our energy security as well as food security. And it's this unpredictability that we are facing. But of course we are not sitting down. The Philippines together with our other ASEAN countries are trying to look into a number of possibilities. In fact, there had been meetings of our ASEAN energy ministers and be again the possibility of helping each other because some of our ASEAN members are also oil producing countries. But we still need a good number of sources.

A (11:23)

Maria Teresa Lazaro, Foreign Secretary of the Philippines, thank you very much for being with us. Thank you and stay with us. We'll be back right after the break.

E (11:41)

This episode is brought to you by Nordstrom. Spring calls for a wardrobe refresh and Nordstrom has the best styles of the season. From dresses and denim to standout tops and accessories. Find the trends and essentials that feel right for you. Discover new arrivals from brands you love like waif, princess, Polly, mango, Adidas and free people. Plus free shipping and returns and free freestyling appointments. Make everything so easy. Shop in stores@nordstrom.com or download the Nordstrom app.

A (12:15)

Now. The immediate toll of this war is not just economic, of course. Dozens of people have been killed in the gulf countries, in Israel and the occupied West Bank. In Iran, more than 1,400 civilians are dead, including over 200 trillion, according to the U. S. Based human rights activist news agency. And in Lebanon, targeting of intense Israeli bombardments and a ground invasion against Hezbollah have caused over a million people to be displaced. And the ministry of public health says more than 1,000 are dead there. Tom Fletcher is under secretary general for humanitarian affairs at the United nations and he's joining me here in the studio. Welcome back to our program. We don't talk very much about the humanitarian catastrophe that's unfolding. Obviously, everything is being viewed in terms of the bombs falling, the assassinations and the economic crisis after the chokehold. What is, in your view, the humanitarian fallout?

F (13:17)

Well, it's massive, Christine. I mean, so we've got thousands dead as you described. We've got millions displaced across the region and we'll be paying for this war for years to come. And people are already, the world is making choices to spend tens of billions, hundreds of billions of dollars on this conflict rather than on dealing with the survivors, supporting the survivors and supporting the 300 million people who already needed humanitarian support. So, I mean, we're deeply frustrated with that. I mean, that's diplomatic speak for saying we're furious because rich people are winning out of this. The arms dealers are winning, those speculating on the stock market are winning. And the people I serve are losing. Absolutely. Well, the victims of this conflict are the civilians.

A (13:59)

Can I ask you, this is kind of the first time that I've sort of been aware of something of such magnitude and massive importance almost being treated in an unserious way. You just talked about, you know, the speculation. I've just talked about the betting, you know, on oil prices and things and stock prices. Can you remember a time when we didn't hear from the major leaders? When we don't hear the big diplomacy and the set pieces and it's just hard.

F (14:30)

It is hard. And you know, diplomacy is not reality tv. The world's not a casino. Statecraft is not a real estate deal. We've got to get serious again. International law is not sexy, it's not exciting. But it's what we built to restrain ourselves from our worst instincts. And we've got to get back to the table. We've got to, we need rational, serious, strategic conversation again rather than this day to day game show approach to the world.

A (14:56)

And not just that, it's almost, oh well, if they don't come to the peace table, we'll just keep bombing. Oh well. Oh well, talking about dropping bombs is fun, you know, letting. It's very weird. I've never heard this kind of cynicism being expressed from the highest podiums in the world. And in the meantime, so tell me, what is the humanitarian crisis? Let's take Iran first and then we'll go to Lebanon.

F (15:20)

Well, just to finish your point there, I mean, what we're not hearing is anything about protecting civilians. And you know, a year ago I wouldn't have thought I'd need to come on and use the talking point about protecting civilian infrastructure. And yet now it seems to be open season that people are talking about bombing schools, bombing hospitals, bombing bridges. All of those things are war crimes. They're completely. But somehow that's become part of the day to day rhetoric here from all sides. So the humanitarian impact is massive in Iran. We're scaling up what we're doing there in response. Particularly looking at the refugee crisis where my colleagues at UNHCR are leading an effort to ensure that people already displaced are getting the help they need. I'll be going to Lebanon in the next few days. A real epicenter, I think of the crisis now, but I fear of the crisis in the weeks and months. We can't get our convoys to the south of Lebanon right now because the bridges have been destroyed.

A (16:12)

I've heard from the former Israeli Prime Minister who had on the program, I think it was last week, who said that even if the Iran war does de escalate and they find some kind of negotiated end to this or whatever, that the Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu will increase and up the tempo of the attacks in Lebanon. So how many dead, how many displaced? And where do you see that ending? And are there the resources?

F (16:38)

We've got over a million displaced. That's one in five people. It's staggering. And remember, many of those people were already displaced.

A (16:44)

Yeah.

F (16:44)

And they're often being displaced from one ethnic area into another, which creates all sorts of tensions and difficult and further dangers. You've also got hundreds of thousands moving back and forth across the Lebanon, Syria border. And I'll be in Damascus later this week as well. So I do fear that we might get to a point on Iran where both sides claim some sort of Pyrrhic victory, but that conflict in Lebanon will continue. And you're hearing some pretty chilling things from Israeli ministers about turning the south of Lebanon into Gaza. I've been to Gaza twice in the last year. As you know. That is a terrifying thing to be talking about.

A (17:17)

But there's another thing. It's like, oh, they say that and nobody really pays attention or reaction reacts. It's very weird. And you talked about potential war crimes. You know, the Democratic Senator, Chris Murphy last week or earlier this week tweeted after Trump said, you better open the to the Iranians, you better open the Straits of Hormuz within, you know, 48 hours or we will destroy and target all your power plants. And Murphy says that's, in fact, a war crime.

F (17:44)

Well, some of us do try and speak out. And the United Nations Secretary General has been very, very firm in calling this kind of language, this kind of behavior out. You know, it's our job, isn't it? Your job in the media, my job in the UN to keep focusing attention on international law. But just talking in those terms will get us a load of blowback from those who disagree, who think that we should just be ignoring this and moving on to the next episode of the game show.

A (18:07)

Can I play? You just mentioned the Secretary General. Let me just play what he said yesterday about the chaos of a widening war

G (18:17)

just hours into the outbreak of the war in the Middle East. I warned that the fighting risked triggering a chain reaction that no one could control. More than three weeks on, the war is out of control. The conflict has broken past the limits even leaders thought Unimaginable,

A (18:40)

you know, that's serious stuff. And you've warned. We're seeing consequences spread faster than we can respond. So the World food program, roughly 45 million more people could be pushed into acute hunger if the conflict continues. On top of the 318 million people who already are, as you said, you know, very vulnerable and suffering, you know, food insecurity around the world. So as you picture this, because we just reported before you came on, it's even going towards, well, very much hitting Asia right now. And it's not just they can't fill up their cars, they can't buy food, they can't afford to feed their children. Many of these workers.

F (19:17)

Well, the Secretary General has been absolutely clear on this and he's really meeting the moment. We are really concerned about those secondary and tertiary impacts. So you look at what's happening in Afghanistan, Pakistan, look at what's happening in Iraq right now. Again, big populations already displaced, fragile economies. I'm particularly worried about East Africa and sub Saharan Africa. If we can't get our maritime convoys moving through the Straits of Hormuz, then actually more people will be tipped into famine conditions. That World Food Program stat is really, really worrying. 45 million more people could be pushed into. So we're now having to adapt our routes. We're actually taking much of the supplies from Dubai now to Jeddah and across.

A (19:58)

So all the way across Saudi Arabia.

F (20:00)

Absolutely.

A (20:01)

And can you use the Red Sea? Because there was the threats that maybe the Houthis in sympathy or whatever with Iran would try to close that and not let it come up. The suicide.

F (20:11)

At the moment we can, but that's a real fragility really in the supply chain. Our air convoys of course are very disrupted, so we keep having to adjust. But you know, these changes alone cost us four or five weeks. And if you're already starving, those four or five weeks are terrible.

A (20:30)

Can I. There are other things as well that are happening under cover of this war, let's say in the west bank. The occupied West Bank. Haaretz has now reported that a 17 year old Waleed Ahmad, who was arrested from the West bank in 24, 2024, starved to death inside Israel's Megiddo prison. He's the first Palestinian under 18 to die. Apparently autopsy found no singular definitive cause, but saw the teens suffered from extreme malnutrition. And a judge ruled that starvation didn't prove the cause of death. Don't quite understand this, but what do you make of it? And there have been others, maybe just not as young.

F (21:09)

So one real worry about this crisis is we only have bandwidth really for two or three stories at a time. And so as a result, bringing them all up, a lot of other issues get completely neglected. I mean, Ukraine at the moment, drc, South Sudan, where I've just been, and this rising settler violence in the west bank, which looks to me to be very organized, very targeted, and which is driving huge numbers of people from their homes. And that again, is storing up problems for the future because it undermines, of course, any prospect of the two state solution on which actually the future peace of the region depends.

A (21:40)

It really doesn't seem like any leader anyway, there has any intention of pursuing that at the moment or ever. What about USAID cuts? Because that helped the international community. Right. All the money that they gave, you know, it makes up less than 1% of the federal U.S. budget. But they were lifesaving programs for the rest of the world. And now groups such as the UNHCR and others are appealing for donations. What actual impact is that having right now?

F (22:12)

It has a huge impact. I mean, over the years, US aid money saved hundreds of millions of lives. And so of course the cuts have a big impact. I'm appealing this year for $23 billion globally, with which we can save 87 million lives. It's a staggering number. We saved, listen, 7 million lives in January alone. And I'll bring you back the stat for February. This is extraordinary when our people are out there literally under attack every day delivering.

A (22:36)

And they are now, right? I mean, UN workers have been killed even in this war.

F (22:41)

Absolutely. I mean, every week I'm calling the relatives of UN colleagues and NGO colleagues who are being killed out there on the front lines. Now some US money is coming back in. We announced at the end of December $2 billion coming back into the humanitarian system. And currently we're allocating that across 18 different country crises. That makes the US the biggest individual national donor. So we're grateful for that. But it's not what it was, of course, but it's not just the us, Christine. I mean, everyone is cutting their budgets.

A (23:09)

I was going to say your own country, you know, the EU and the UK as well. Right.

F (23:13)

So the UK has just cut to 0.3% of GDP, so it should be 7%. It was 0.7. Sorry, before. So a lot of these countries really scaling back. Now we've got some great loyal donors. And I could give you the list, starting from the Netherlands and Switzerland and others who are staying the course, Norway, who are all the ones I've forgotten now get in trouble with, please forgive me, those other countries. So some countries are staying the course. But overall, this has gone from a sector that was probably spending about $50 billion a year on aid to probably about 20 billion.

A (23:46)

And when the UK announced its cutting back and then said it would only give to, there was several, like Gaza and other commitments they would keep. But it's actually, they said because of now the pressure to spend more on military. So it's literally guns and butter right now.

F (24:03)

All I'm asking for $23 billion. It's less than 1% of what the world is spending on guns right now. And that's before this latest escalation where I understand that, you know, they spent that in the first two weeks. The US Alone spent that in the first two weeks of the conflict. So you've got some people who are cutting for ideological reasons, and you've got others who are cutting because they say they feel less secure, particularly the Europeans. They feel less secure on their own continent. And they're saying we have to invest more in guns and weapons. But also you're seeing the brain power of the world spending more time inventing more and more deadly drones. 90% of all drone attacks are against civilians, by the way, including many of our humanitarians. More energy on that. Nine out of every ten attacks from drones are hitting civilians. You've got all that ingenuity and creativity and technological know how going into working out more and more deadly ways of killing each other rather than backing up these laws and systems that are meant to protect ourselves from our worst instincts.

A (24:58)

Well, we are very happy that you were able to come in and explain the current state of affairs. And we'll wait for your next report. Tom Fletcher, thank you very much.

F (25:06)

Thank you.

A (25:06)

And we'll be back after this short break.

H (25:14)

This week on the assignment with me, Audie Cornish.

D (25:17)

I have always believed about myself and told people that I don't have an addictive personality because I don't have a lot of vices. I'm a Mormon, I don't drink. I don't smoke. I've never, you know, tried drugs, anything like that.

H (25:29)

My guest today is a staff writer for the Atlantic. His name is McKay Coppins. He spent $10,000 of his employer's money and an entire NFL season diving into the world of online sports betting.

D (25:42)

I just believed that it would be a funny little side plot in my broader investigation of the sports betting industry. I genuinely did not expect that it would kind of take over my life.

H (25:54)

Listen to the Assignment with me, Audie Cornish. Streaming now on your favorite podcast app.

A (26:05)

On February 28, President Donald Trump announced major combat operations began in Iran. And he added this message to the people there.

I (26:14)

To the great proud people of Iran, I say tonight that the hour of your freedom is at hand. Stay sheltered, don't leave your home. It's very dangerous outside. Bombs will be dropping everywhere. When we are finished, take over your government. It will be yours to take. This will be probably your only chance. For generations

A (26:38)

now, that call has since not been raised so much. And since that call, American and Israeli bombs have killed over a third thousand Iranians. And IRGC enforcers continue to crack down on any domestic protest. US Representative Yasemin Ansari is the child of Iranian refugees and is the only democratic Iranian American in Congress. She says that she feels a wide mix of emotions over what she argues is an illegal war. Representative Ansari, welcome to our program. Can I start by asking you about your family? Where are your parents? Where are your, you know, extended family who might still be in Iran? What do you know about how they are?

J (27:25)

Thank you so much for having me. My parents have a pretty classic story, as many do here in the United States who are part of the diaspora. They fled Iran. My dad came to the United States before the revolution and then stayed here in the US and my mom fled in the midst in the aftermath, in the early 1980s after my grandfather was imprisoned in Iran. So I have spent my entire life hearing about the atrocities of this regime, have had family members impacted and murdered by the regime as well. We have extended family, friends in Iran. My mom's 90 year old great aunt lives in Tehran. And it's been, as you know, largely difficult. Difficult to get in touch with friends and family given the Internet blackouts in the country.

A (28:13)

Exactly. I really do know that. And it's obviously a source of great anxiety for many people, only not only there, but outside. So tell me then, given your history and given what President Trump said and even what the Prime Minister of Israel said, we are preparing essentially the groundwork for you to take control of your destiny. You must have supported that.

J (28:39)

Here is the issue. Donald Trump is a wannabe dictator and authoritarian here in the United States. He doesn't want democracy for the American people. And I have seen over the last 15 months as a U.S. congresswoman, him using ice and turning ice into his own personal paramilitary force. He has gone after the press. He has, has tried to go after his own political opponents. We have seen an erosion of rights all over the map here in the United States. So it's very painful to see the way that himself and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are outright lying and selling a fantasy to Iranian people who are rightfully and understandably desperate for regime change, especially in light of the massacres that took place in January. But if you look at everything Donald Trump has said, he's not interested in actual freedom or democracy for the Iranian people. We don't even know what the exact objective of this war is. But I can tell you in briefings that I have been a part of, I've directly asked this question, is there a plan for a democratic transition in Iran? And it's been made very clear to me that that is not a part of the mission. Meanwhile, Americans are seeing gas prices go through the roof. There are many American troops on their way to the Middle East. It's largely unpopular among the American population, and we're seeing devastating consequences across the region. So it is terrifying that we have really a deranged, a mentally deranged leader here in the United States putting the rest of the world in such danger.

A (30:13)

Can I ask you then, given what you said about no transition plan for democratic democracy or for people's rights in Iran under this, do you think they've also walked back their stated goal of creating the conditions? Even if you said it's up to you Iranians, even if we don't help you, it's up to you. Once, once we finish the bombing, do you think that's been walked back?

J (30:38)

It absolutely has been. Just in the last 48 hours, you've seen the president and his press secretary, Carolyn Levitt, say there's been regime change in Iran. If this is their definition of regime change, then, you know, we know, you know, absolutely, that they, maybe they don't understand Iran, which I think could be very plausible, that they don't understand the history or the country that they're dealing with, the way the regime operates, the way the IRGC operates. But yes, I think that they thought this would be easy. I thought they think, I think they thought this would be a Venezuela style operation. You know, they would kill the Ayatollah and the next day, you know, there would be a big uprising in the country. But that is not reality. This is a country of 90 million people who have gone through horrendous massacres. They're terrified of both the regime as well as bombs, you know, falling from the sky. And I think that, you know, again, we are now in this horrific situation, this costly, illegal war. And I worry that this is to Going, going to leave the Iranian people in an even worse position after. Whenever it becomes that Donald Trump decides he's tired of this or it's too politically unpopular for him and he declares some sort of fake victory and then this, the Iranian people are left with a regime that will crack down even further and there will be no support later on.

A (31:58)

CNN has been gathering voices from inside Iran and been doing it since the beginning. And many people were, as you know, very happy to see this bomb going to the roofs, shouting, you know, that they were happy that Khamenei and the others were killed. Now it appears to be somewhat shifting the sentiment. So we're going to play you a selection of the latest voices that we've collected out of Tehran.

K (32:27)

I am angry. I am so angry that nothing has changed and that more likely nothing will happen or change that will benefit the Iranian people. I had the same feeling last time in the 12 Day War. Why did this happen? For what? Why did they, for 12 days bomb us, force us out of our homes, force us to flee? It created terror and horror for ourselves, our children, our animals. These things are serious. Our lives are at risk.

L (32:56)

Maybe if they do talk, at the very least it can improve the economic situation. If this war continues, our lives will be halted and stopped, meaning we cannot move forward while the situation in Iran remains unclear. We are all up in the air. We've been in this limbo for months, nearly a year, and in the past few years, it's just gotten worse and worse. I'm pissed off, I am hopeful, I am scared. I'm all of these things all at once and it's suffocating, quite frankly.

A (33:24)

So that is a selection. It's about three people, but we jammed them all together. But they're very, very concerned about where this leaves them. What do you say to, in your closed door briefings that you've apparently had several since this war began? What do you say to the administration and what are they telling you about their, their final aims?

J (33:47)

First of all, it's very heartbreaking and difficult to listen to those voices. I think the, the ultimate tragedy in all of this is, is the Iranian people who will have, you know, continue to see tragedy after tragedy in their country. And I only wish the best for them. I, you know, the administration has never made any sort of clear case or justification about what this war is about. One day they will say it's about the nuclear program. The next they'll say it's about the navy or the missile programs. The next day you'll see Trump, you know, say something about Iranian people. It's not clear at all. My hope and my urge to this administration is to not abandon the Iranian people in the sense that if diplomacy is happening or any sort of talks are to happen, it is vital that human rights are part of the conversation, that any future government in Iran does not makes commitments around not massacring their own people about releasing political prisoners. There's thousands of people right now trapped inside places like Evin Prison, the notorious prison in Iran, some of the best and brightest in the country. Those people need to be released immediately and this war needs to end. We need an off ramp that reduces as much harm as possible. This is a devastating situation. And I echo the voice about the economic situation. Anything we can do to support the economic circumstances of Iranians would be great.

A (35:15)

Can I just ask you very quickly, I don't know whether you've seen this, but the Washington Post is reporting that the administration is considering, well, it's notified Congress that it intends to divert hundreds of millions of dollars in funding by NATO countries through a special program. They've already bought from the United States weapons to give Ukraine. Right under orders from the administration. And they plan to take this and use it to restock their own Pentagon military supplies. What do you say to that?

J (35:51)

It's outrageous. Donald Trump has continued to abandon Ukraine and NATO. The fact that he made a statement saying that, you know, NATO should be coming to our defense right now. He creates crises that didn't exist and then tries to force other people to get us out of it. This has been, you know, we've lifted sanctions on Russian oil throughout this time because we're seeing gas prices spike here and Americans are furious, can't pay for gas or their rent or anything. And I just, you know, again, I've heard from Ukrainians in my community and from, you know, partners in Europe that this is, you know, this has worldwide consequences and we're seeing them.

A (36:28)

Congresswoman Yasemin Ansari, thank you for joining us from Washington. And as we said earlier, the Israel Lebanon front is intensifying. The IDF says a third soldier was killed in combat against Hezbollah in southern Lebanon on Wednesday. This as Israel targets bridges over the Netani river and occupies the area in order to try to cut off Hezbollah and isolate its strongholds. Kim Gattas is a Lebanese journalist and author. And as she explains to Hari Srinivasan, the escalation could reshape the Middle east for years to come.

C (37:01)

Christiane, thanks. Kim Gatis, thanks so much for joining us. For most of our audience as the conversation has been about the war, it's been about Israel, it's been about the United States, it' about Iran. But Lebanon is facing a significant crisis right now, and I think most people are not hearing about it in the news. I'm hearing that almost a quarter of the population is displaced. We've got more than 1,000 people killed, 2,500 injured. What's the situation like in Lebanon?

M (37:31)

Harry, great to be with you and thanks for focusing on Lebanon, which is indeed the second big war front in this regional conflict. I would like to point out that since the ceasefire between Lebanon and Israel, or more specifically Hezbollah and Israel In November of 2024, Israeli strikes against Lebanon have continued on a very regular basis. Almost 2000 strikes in just over a year. So those strikes don't make headlines either because they're sort of baked into the normality of things. But they have been very difficult and painful for Lebanon. And now the country finds itself engulfed in this new regional war where Israel has different objectives on the regional front and in Lebanon. For Lebanon, as you mentioned, this is the second war in just a year and a half. A quarter of the population is on the move. It is a huge stress on the Lebanese authorities, on the state coffers for a country that is already, already in dire economic straits. And of course, also very difficult for Lebanese society to be able to absorb so many people on the move. It's causing some tensions between communities. And of course, there is tension at a national level about what is Lebanon's role in all of this.

C (39:07)

So what do the people feel most frustrated, I guess. Is it their own government? Is it at Israel? Is it at the United States? Is it at Iran?

M (39:17)

All of the above. The Lebanese are really fed up with being a battleground for regional proxy wars or regional confrontations. There are many people in Lebanon, I would say a majority, who are angry at Hezbollah for having launched those first rockets at Israel to avenge the death of a foreign leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader of Iran. There are even those in Hezbollah's own community who say you did not avenge any of the people who were killed over the last year in these Israeli strikes. But you Lebanese people, including Hezbollah combatants, and you chose to avenge the death of a foreign leader. So there's a lot of anger and tension there, including in the Shia community, where Hezbollah draws most of its support. There is frustration at the united understanding the details and the nuances of Lebanon's position and the difficulties that it is facing in living up to expectations by the international community. But I guess there is frustration around the world when it comes to President Trump's approach to this war. And then finally there is, of course, anger at Israel for continuing to bomb Lebanon, including infrastructure, and talking now about taking over southern Lebanon and creating a buffer zone there, uninhabitable for anyone that they could occupy and control in the long term. And what is absolutely astounding is that Israel has tried this before and it did not work. It had an 18 year long occupation of southern Lebanon until it withdrew in 2000.

C (41:08)

You wrote recently in the Financial Times, you say this kind of goes back, this interrelationship and this entanglement. Back in the 70s and 80s, you had the Iranian revolution in 79, Israel, you know, invasion of Lebanon in 82. How did Hezbollah that we know today form from those tensions?

M (41:29)

So if I may just actually add a point, there is also frustration with the Lebanese government internally and externally for having not done enough and that everything that it is doing now is too little too late, including trying to stand up for Lebanese sovereignty, calling on Iranian Revolutionary Guards to leave the country and now calling on the Iranian ambassador to leave as well. And the reason why it's important to mention this is because it ties into this question now, Hari, which is about the history of this, which is that in the 1970s and early 80s, Lebanon was a staging ground for attacks against Israel by Palestinian guerrillas from the Palestinian Liberation Organization, led at the time by Yasser Arafat. And there was a certain level impotence by the Lebanese state because it's a small country and there are always outside powers who are, you know, yes. Fighting their wars via Lebanon. At the time it was Syria and President Hafez Al Assad and generally Arab countries who did not want Palestinian guerrillas fighters on their territory attacking Israel. So they kind of press ganged Lebanon into becoming the battleground and the staging ground for these attacks. Israel decided to invade Lebanon in 1982 and to, in their words, get rid of that Palestinian THR threat on its border. And to some extent, that was a successful military operation, although it cost thousands of lives in Lebanon, because the Palestinian leadership did go into exile. But two days after the Israeli military operation in Lebanon started, Iran sent Revolutionary Guards, hundreds of them, to Syria and then onto Lebanon to export their revolution and fight what they describe as, as the Zionist enemy, push America outside of the Middle east and that is the birth of Hezbollah. So you may have tactical victories, as we're seeing today in this regional confrontation, but you need to be able to think strategically long term, at what other problems you may be creating.

C (43:36)

So how has Hezbollah kind of evolved over time, if that was their origin story?

M (43:41)

So their origin story is very much a creation of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards in Lebanon, a tool of both the Islamic Republic and also at the time of Syria's President Hafez Al Assad, to fight against America and Israel. And there's a whole decade of attacks, including the bombings of the Marines In Beirut in 1983, the French paratroopers as well, and also, of course, a decade of hostage taking. And I want to make a very quick mention here of. Of a scandal known as the Iran Contra scandal, in which, at the time, the US and Israel actually gave weapons to Iran in the 1980s to try to gain the release of hostages in Lebanon. So there's also the law of unintended consequences there, where Israel and the US actually, in some ways, it's too long for our show now, enable the survival of the Islamic Republic. So initially, Hezbollah starts out as an export of the Iranian revol. It starts out as fighting America first, and then it turns into what many people in Lebanon described as national resistance, a legitimate resistance against Israeli occupation of South Lebanon. That image begins to change after 2000 when Israel withdraws, and it changes dramatically after 2005, when Hezbollah finds itself involved in the killing of Lebanese citizens, including former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and a variety of other personalities in Lebanon. Because. And that's where the criticism against Hezbollah lies today, is that they have transformed into a group that uses violence not just to liberate occupied land, but uses violence against its own people to hold on to power.

C (45:38)

So came in 2023, Hezbollah joined the conflict between Israel and Hamas. Nearly a year later, Israel conducted several attacks against Hezbollah. Famously, the coordinated pager attack that killed a dozen people, injured more than 3,000 people. Then there was a series of military strikes that even took out the leader, Hassan Nasrallah. The impression at the time was that Hezbollah was significantly weakened. Is that true?

M (46:08)

That was the assessment of Israel at the time, that they had been, you know, incapacitated up to 70%, and that the rest of the 30% should be handled by the Lebanese authorities to make sure that Hezbollah would no longer represent a threat on Israel's border. The Lebanese government today is being criticized for not having done enough to make sure that Hezbollah is no longer. No longer has the capacity to strike Israel. But what is being asked of the Lebanese government and the Lebanese army, which is to disarm, forcibly disarm Hezbollah? I think is wrongheaded, including today, because it can lead to internal strife and violence. We're hearing today from Hezbollah officials threatening the Lebanese government for its criticism of Hezbollah's actions and for its call for the departure of Iranian Revolutionary Guards and the Iranian ambassador. So the Lebanese government is stuck between not even a rock and a hard place, but a rock and Iraq. Between Israel's actions and Hezbollah's threats and Iran's agenda in Lebanon, can it do more? Can the Lebanese government do more? I think so, but I also think that the international community should assist the Lebanese authorities to make sure that they can provide for the citizens at this very dire time and offer an alternative to Hezbollah when it comes to the Shia community. And also one more point, Harry. The Lebanese government has offered to enter into direct negotiations with Israel, which is a historic first since the 1980s. And it's something that is divisive inside Lebanon. Why would we negotiate while we're being bombed? Hezbollah, as I said, is attacking the Lebanese government. But it is a step that is worthwhile supporting when it comes to the international community.

C (48:08)

There have been statements by members of the Israeli government just earlier this week where the Defense Minister, Israel Katz, said Israel will occupy southern Lebanon up to the Litany river to create a defensive buffer. And Finance Minister Bezalel Smorich said the Litany river must become our new border with the state of Lebanon. So is the, Is this a point here to try to increase geographic buffer for the safety of Israel, or is this a land grab?

M (48:39)

It's a land grab. It's a land grab. And there are deep fears in Lebanon that Israel's, you know, militaristic, expansionist approach to its regional policy is going to lead to this land grab in southern Lebanon. And again, I want to emphasize Israel occupied southern Lebanon before and it did not work out. It did not bring safety to northern Israel. And that's why eventually in 2000, Prime Minister Ehud Barak at the time decided to withdraw. He withdrew unilaterally. And I know that the, the, the reaction in Israel is, you know, we withdrew and we left and we gave you back your land and all we got was rock pockets. But unilateral withdrawals are not a recipe for long term, sustainable diplomatic solutions, which is why today it is historic that the Lebanese government is offering these negotiations. You have to remember that this land grab 10, 20, 30 kilometers into Lebanon is below the range of Hezbollah's rockets. So, so if things go terribly wrong and the Lebanese government is not able to assert its authority on the whole of Lebanon's, territory. You could have Hezbollah rockets still landing in northern Israel, even if there is this buffer zone. And again, I want to emphasize that for the long term, you need to have diplomatic conversations. And it is a breach of international law to occupy and grab land like that. Whether it's for your safety or for what reason. The Israeli officials are mentioning, has the

C (50:27)

Lebanese government taken steps to delegitimize Hezbollah and try to decrease the influence of Iran?

M (50:35)

Absolutely. As I mentioned, they have first of all declared Hezbollah's military and security activities to be outside of the law. They have arrested several members of Hezbollah and put them through trial in a military tribunal. You know, for some it looks symbolic, but it is still something. They have, as I said, called on Iranian Revolutionary Guards to leave the country. And now they have asked the Iranian ambassador to leave Lebanon as well. And then you have the two big Shia parties, Hezbollah, but also Amal, which belongs, which is led by Nabih Biri, speaker of Parliament, who have come out and said, we refuse to see the Iranian ambassador leave the country. So this is not just a war that Israel is waging against Lebanon. It is not just a war that Iran is conducting via Lebanon. It is also a war, a battle for Lebanese sovereignty. And I hope that the Lebanese government will not step back from its demand that the Iranians ambassador leave the country. But I also know that Hezbollah could deploy violence internally to impose their vision for how this should go forward. And they've done this before in Lebanon, using violence against the Lebanese and the Lebanese state.

C (52:13)

Journalist and author Kim Gatis. Thanks so much for your time.

M (52:16)

Thanks for having me.

A (52:19)

And finally, in a moving tribute, the dazzling lights of Broadway and London's West West End were dimmed last night in memory of Robert Fox, one of the most distinguished theatre producers of his generation. As the lights went down, the cheering began as crowds gathered to pay him tribute in London. Family, friends and colleagues also sang Happy Birthday to Mark what would have been Fox's 75th. He died last week of cancer. His wife Fiona shared these words with us.

N (52:57)

He was a gentleman producer and this was his avenue for a long time and New York and Broadway. And it's so wonderful that everyone can come and pay and his whole family are here, all his eight grandchildren and his five kids and the theatre community. And we can be proud of, of the work that he's done.

A (53:18)

His avenue, Shaftesbury Avenue there in London, and from the lady in the van to the boy from Oz to the audience and Frost, Nixon. Fox's work spanned decades across theater, film and TV production. He collaborated with everyone from the grand dames Maggie Smith and Helen Mirren to Hugh Jackman and Michael Sheen to David Hare and David Bowie. His calming presence and creative mind will surely be missed by all of those he was worked with. May his soul bask in the footlights forever. That's it for now. Thank you for watching and goodbye From London, I'm Eva Longoria and I'm setting out to really experience France, to savor

M (54:06)

its world, celebrated cuisine and explore the country's rich history.

F (54:10)

Eva Longoria Searching For France premieres April 12th on CNN. And next day on the CNN app,

O (54:17)

I'm CNN tech reporter Claire Duffy. This week on the podcast Terms of Service, there's a growing category of products aimed specifically at addressing women's unique health needs. These tools and services are sometimes known as femtech, and they can provide big opportunities and benefits, but they can also come with some risks. To walk us through all of this, I spoke with Bethany Corby. Bethany is an attorney and CEO of FEM Innovation, where she advises startups, clinicians and healthcare organizations.

P (54:46)

In my opinion, what it really does is gives us a collective language to talk about women's healthcare innovation and the tools that are out there so that we can take control of our healthcare experiences and know how to advocate for ourselves in a system that's probably not been designed to advocate for us.

O (55:03)

Listen to CNN's terms of service. Wherever you get your podcasts.