Loading summary
Transcript163 lines
- [00:00]
Christiane Amanpour
Deck your home with blinds.com.
- [00:07]
David Remnick
Diy or let us install.
- [00:13]
Christiane Amanpour
Free design consultation.
- [00:18]
Plus free samples and free shipping.
- [00:21]
Peter Frankopan
Head to blinds.com now for up to 50% off site wide plus a free professional measure.
- [00:28]
Rules and restrictions may apply.
- [00:34]
Christiane Amanpour
Hello everyone and welcome to Amanpour. Here's what's coming up.
- [00:39]
Walter Isaacson
Europe is going in some bad directions.
- [00:43]
Christiane Amanpour
Rebuffing Europe and embracing Russia Trump sets out a new world order in his national security strategy. The former Pentagon official Celeste Wallander and historian Peter Frank Pan help figure this.
- [00:55]
Jose Manuel Albares
Out, then war is not a way of settling disputes among people or states, and above all, that a war of aggression cannot have reward.
- [01:06]
Christiane Amanpour
Top diplomats from Europe, Qatar and Turkey on mediation and the path to peace.
- [01:11]
David Remnick
Plus these writers are the writers that are at the forefront of thought and literature in our culture.
- [01:18]
Christiane Amanpour
The New Yorker turns 100 and to mark its centenary, a new documentary provides a rare peek inside the magazine. And as it creates its anniversary issue, Walter Isaacson speaks to longtime editor David Remnick.
- [01:51]
Welcome to the program, everyone. I'm Christiane Amanpour in London. Hostile to Europe, warm to Russia the Trump 2.0 National Security Strategy is causing a mix of fury, resignation, even accusations of ignorance. But is it a wish list or a roadmap for a new world order? Moscow has welcomed the plan, saying that it aligns with Putin's vision, while former Swedish Prime Minister Carl Bildt has posted that it's to the right of the extreme right in Europe. The document doubles down on Trump's UN speech in September where he told European allies they were failing and says immigration to the continent will, quote, erase itself civilization. But even though the strategy calls for resisting Europe, the EU top diplomat Kaya Kallas displayed a determination to keep calm and carry on. When I met her in Doha at the annual forum there, that's for sure.
- [02:44]
Kaja Kallas
And you know, us is still our biggest ally. And there I read it as well that we are still the biggest ally and it's in the interest of the United States as well that Europe lost.
- [03:00]
And that we are really still the ally and working together for these things. I think we haven't always seen eye to eye on different topics, but I think the overall principle is still there. We are the biggest allies and we should stick together.
- [03:19]
Christiane Amanpour
Nice try, but here's what President Trump later told Politico.
- [03:25]
Walter Isaacson
I think they're weak, but I also think that they want to be so politically correct. I think they don't know what to do. Europe doesn't know what to do. They don't know what to do on trade either.
- [03:39]
Christiane Amanpour
So not quite on the same page then, but still, what does it all actually mean? Celeste Wallander served as assistant secretary of Defense for International Security affairs under President Biden. And Peter Frankopan is a professor of global history at Oxford University and author of the substack Global Threads and the they are both joining me now. Peter, you're in the studio and you are European. What's your reaction? I mean, there was the strategy document that dropped when we were all at the annual Doha Forum and then there was doubling down in this pretty scorching interview. What's your reaction?
- [04:14]
Peter Frankopan
Well, I think it's not new. That sort of contempt I think we saw with JD Vance at Munich in March of this year.
- [04:20]
Christiane Amanpour
I think the way it's now been officialized and formalized, but I think that's.
- [04:24]
Peter Frankopan
How the mainstream media MAGA movement around Trump sees Europe as a decaying that's the word he in fact used today.
- [04:29]
Christiane Amanpour
It did.
- [04:29]
Peter Frankopan
It's a decaying continent which is unproductive, is getting older, doesn't handle all the existential questions right, and quite frankly is more or less dispensable to the United States. So Trump's America first looks to Europe as it does to most of the rest of the world, which is America alone. And I guess one of the equations is, can the US do without allies and particularly without Europe? And is that realignment that you mentioned of us lining up with Russia, is that a good bet to take? Because I think history would suggest probably you need to be pretty sanguine and pretty careful about what you're doing with the big Russian bear. And the idea that we're the ones who are going to fail, the Russians will come out on top requires several leaps of faith.
- [05:07]
Christiane Amanpour
That's interesting. So let's wallender to the very question that's been posed here. Can America do without its European allies? And yes, Trump for the longest time has hated the eu. Remember, he said it was created just to destroy America or whatever the right words are. Can it do without the allies?
- [05:27]
Celeste Wallander
Well, it is really amazing that you played that clip from President Trump because his own national security strategy, the strategy that was released last week, states that Europe has a hard power advantage over Russia. So what I think you're seeing is a national security strategy that is internally inconsistent, incoherent and doesn't even align with what the president of the United States is saying.
- [05:57]
Not clear exactly what the White House strategy towards Russia is because on the one hand, it is saying Europe has all these assets and should be confident and able to take care of Russia. And then you're hearing that Europe is on its way out because of immigration, because it's losing itsagain. The national security strategy refers to Europe losing its civilizational identity, as if that, you know, is something that is meaningful in a moment where Russia is using hard power to attack a European country, Ukraine. And so it's really hard to even grasp onto something to disagree with because the national security strategy is all over the map.
- [06:36]
Christiane Amanpour
So just, I mean, I'd asked also whether the US can do without its, you know, longtime allies in Europe. And also you said, you know, it's all these MAGA allies around Trump that have their views. Some people see Stephen Miller in there, other people see J.D. vance in there, and as you say, it is very inconsistent. But on the question of alliance, can the US do it alone?
- [07:01]
Celeste Wallander
The US Needs Europe for the assets that Europe brings to the table. America, of course, has the largest conventional military force in the world. But in order to be able to defend and deter, we need to have military bases, overflight permissions from countries across the globe, and in particular in Europe. Europe helps the United States to support goals in the Middle east, access to be able to support allies throughout other parts of the world. And we've, for example, in the operations against Iran's nuclear program, relied upon US Military assets based in Europe. The US Relies upon Europe to defend our homeland, to be able to prevent Russian nuclear submarines from being able to evade detection as they move through the North Atlantic to patrol off of the American North Atlantic coast. So this is why NATO is actually in American national security interests. It's not altruism, it is national self interest. It has been for 80 years. And the Trump White House just seems to lose sight of the reason why NATO was created. It was created to help protect America, America.
- [08:18]
Christiane Amanpour
And in fact, as we all know, we keep saying it on occasions like this, the Only time Article 5 has ever been implemented and called for was to defend America and Support America after 9, 11. Now, Peter Frankopan, can the Europe go it alone without the United States, given the US Power? But nonetheless, what Celeste Wallander has already said, and how long can or should European leaders put up with this unseemly abuse as others have suggested in the wake of this national security doctrine?
- [08:52]
Peter Frankopan
Well, as kaia Kallas told you, you know, you need to separate the noise and watch with Trump, watch the hips and not the lips. You've got to pay attention what's actually going on? And one of the first questions is whether which parts of what Trump is saying or the defense strategy, security strategy, saying are fair and right. But clearly what you have is a set of hierarchies. And in Trump's global vision, there's no space for Latin America, there's nothing for Africa. In this document, the Middle east is significantly downgraded. And so the way that the US Is seeing the world is a hierarchy with China at the top as the significant global competitor. And then how Russia fits into that axis here in Europe, I think we've got to work out how do we deal with our defense, how do we deal with some of these existential questions too? And it's absolutely true that we bring a lot of pieces to the party, including world class universities, defense architecture and so on that we're a key part of and intelligence. Absolutely. There's no question that we are part of those equations. But how it's seen from this White House is that we're not a particularly important piece on the jigsaw puzzle board. And unless we can help navigate the US through some of these discussions, probably we're going to be pushed out of some of these discussions too in the future.
- [09:52]
Christiane Amanpour
Well, I'm going to get back to that in a minute. But you just said about Latin America, so I was going to leave this to the end, but obviously President Trump and Trump 2.0 is doing what it wants to do in Latin America. Look at what's happening around Venezuela, maybe a full blown war, who knows, threatening other Latin American countries, actually having support from a lot of Latin American countries which approve of the Venezuela action and also are going more far right. So let's just put this out there right now. Do you think, Celeste, that this document outlined what we've all been talking about since Trump 2.0 and that is a sphere of influence doctrine whereby America gets to be, you know, in charge of and keeps and only wants the Western Hemisphere. China, which wasn't dealt a very harsh hand in this doctrine, gets to have the Pacific and Russia gets to have its area and who knows what's going to happen to Europe. Do you think that's a sort of, is that the creeping Monroe or sphere of influence thing?
- [10:52]
Celeste Wallander
Well, that seems to be behind the thinking in prioritizing the Western Hemisphere, which the national security strategy that was released does do, and explicitly talks about a new Monroe Doctrine and a Trump corollary to the Monroe Doctrine. And to the extent that there's pushback against China in the document, it refers to preventing China from being able to, to be able to have free rein and relationships in the Western Hemisphere. The challenge there, in addition to the whole concept of spheres of influence in the modern world, is that in order to have influence with countries, you probably shouldn't go around insulting them. As you noted, with NATO allies. And the Trump White House has not been particularly consistent in respecting and valuing countries in the Western Hemisphere who are our partners and allies and who would be important to be able to resist Chinese influence.
- [11:49]
Christiane Amanpour
Peter, this idea of not being consistent is clearly catnip to those who are consistent to Putin, to Xi. They are consistent in their policies. They know what they want and they're going for it. And Putin demonstrates this to President Trump every single day. In fact, they've said Peskov, his right hand man, has said this doctrine mostly aligns with our vision for what's going on. So how threatening should Europe feel and America, frankly, by giving this kind of succor to Putin, especially now? And we'll talk about the talks around Ukraine.
- [12:26]
Peter Frankopan
I mean, if you were cynical, you'd think that a lot of these things in the strategy and how Trump talks are Russian talking points. And you know, I think one shouldn't underestimate the skills that the Russians have in being able to shape global narratives, not just in Europe, in the United States, in Africa too, but, you know, just to pick up on that, Latin America. You know, China's trade with Latin America in 2000 was $12 billion. It's now more than $500 billion. Its trade with Mexico has doubled in the last four years. The idea that China's going to get shut out of the Western Hemisphere looks like it's a pipe dream. I suspect that some of this is around how Russia seems to fit into how the US Sees the new global world order. And Marco Rubio, in his confirmation hearing in the Senate in January said he said the post world War global order is not just obsolete, but acts against U.S. interests. So we see the U.S. using coercion.
- [13:11]
Christiane Amanpour
Do you think that's true?
- [13:12]
Peter Frankopan
It doesn't matter what I think.
- [13:14]
Christiane Amanpour
If you think factually, they might think that. But is that factually true?
- [13:18]
Peter Frankopan
I think that you could make the case that I've never seen in my lifetime the United States this powerful and being this willing to use coercion globally. And to some extent there are different, the optics of what it looks like. And a US Leader who looks like he's willing to use force, use tariffs, threaten invasions and so on, that looks bad whether he actually does it or not. There's a separate degree of belief of what you think actually will happen. But we're in a world where China uses its coercive tools quite aggressively, too, as do Russia. And I think in a world of predators and of carnivores, being vegetarian, which is how the European Union is set up, probably is not helpful. So we need to emerge more in Europe and the United Kingdom from just being a trade bloc where we're willing to buy and sell, have the same standards for our light bulbs, into something that's much more joined up and together. And maybe Trump, ironically, is going to push us together like he helped save NATO by.
- [14:06]
Christiane Amanpour
Mr. By mistake. Celeste Wallander, I want to follow up on this because it is clear that China is the rising superpower. Maybe it already is, objectively, I don't know. But there's a lot of argument about that, and there are, I think, arguments within the Republican National Security Group about how best to deal with China. But do you think that it, that Rubio was right, that the post world order is now no longer helpful to the United States and acts against the United States?
- [14:39]
Celeste Wallander
Well, in the defense sphere, that is clearly not the case. Again, I've already referred to the network of bases that enable the United States to strike at real threats wherever they may be, in Eurasia and through Asia Pacific and in the Middle East. And while it is the case that the Hague summit did succeed, President Trump did succeed in getting a 5% commitment, 5% of GDP spending on defense commitment. That trend was already in the works after Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February of 2022. In 2024, 23 allies had already met or were near meeting the 2% commitment of the Wales Pledge. So the notion that somehow our relationships with Europe in particular, and also allies and partners in Asia Pacific are a negative for American security is just undermined by the facts. And if you look at our ability to protect and prevent the growth of adversaries and their strength, Russia and China, by having those strong relationships, those strong partnerships in the regions of Europe and the Asia Pacific, it helps Americans be safer because those adversaries are kept at bay and their power is limited. So those allies and the partnerships help to protect the American homeland. And that's the part that's completely missing in this national security strategy that has been a common element of strategies of Republican and Democratic presidents for decades.
- [16:20]
Christiane Amanpour
Every single administration, I think, for a period of years has come in with their, you know, with their national security projections and strategies like this one. It's not actually a doctrine. It is more of a vision of what they want. But given that this is very public and very ad hominem and all sorts of horrible words come from the president of the United States against his European allies, they're now kind of doing things sort of on their own, right? They're trying to rescue what they consider a very unbalanced so called peace plan for Russia, Ukraine. They had very important top level meetings here in the UK do you think, Peter, that it is happening and is it possible and should it happen that Europeans now allies, should be quote, de risking themselves trying to go their own way? Can they go their own way?
- [17:11]
Peter Frankopan
Well, there's some irony in all of this, right? So a lot of the discussion here in the UK as you know, is about Chinese supply chains and its over dominance in the way in which we have critical vulnerabilities from minerals through to operating systems and so on. Because the way that Trump talks and it has gone bipartisan now, this is a very standard view in the United States. It's not just about Trump and people around him talking about Europe and the way that Trump is doing. It's something that has caught in the US when you start talking to people in Silicon Valley or in New York or in Washington, you start to hear this from people who wouldn't have talked this way a few years ago. I think the question now is can we rely on American supply chains? Are there vulnerabilities too in the fact that all of our, you know, in the United Kingdom, 85% of our defense procurement comes from the U.S. are there points at which that might get turned off by the president or those around him? And suddenly that sense of vulnerability means we've all got to step up. There's no question about that. And I think that goes one of two ways. Either we do what Trump is saying, which is we decay and we become irrelevant, or there has to be a rebirth and reinforcement. And a lot of that is going to depend on domestic politics and whether leaders here in Europe can articulate confident visions for what the European Union is for, what the United Kingdom is for, and how do we stand up in a world of technological, climatological and biohealth, other sorts of changes.
- [18:21]
Christiane Amanpour
And Celeste, I want to refer to an article that you wrote a few months ago, or rather I think you talked about this in relation to what Macron President Macron said this week. It was reported that he had warned other European leaders that Washington might soon betray Ukraine. And you had said earlier, beware the Europe you wish for in your article, I believe.
- [18:47]
So to continue this bit, Europeans are growing a little bit wary, aren't they, of the United States? Can you see any sort of bifurcation?
- [19:02]
Celeste Wallander
Well, we are already seeing European countries reconsider purchases of American defense, production of defense systems for the very concerns that Peter pointed to. So we're already starting to see that effect. And it is clearly the case that any kind of a peace settlement between Russia and Ukraine that the White House prioritizes and has said that is a major objective of President Trump depends on Europe being on board. It is simply not the terms that have been discussed are not important, enforceable or implementable without European agreement. So while the United States may, I hope we do not take a position of throwing betraying Ukraine and throwing them under the bus and letting the Kremlin just steamroll over the country and reacquire its sphere of influence in Ukraine. In fact, that really can't happen the way that the Kremlin wants unless Europe agrees to it. For example, the Kremlin wants NATO to commit that Ukraine will never be a member of NATO, not just Ukraine to say, not that Ukraine will say this, but not just Ukraine to say it. So it is within the hands of European publics and European leaders to play a role in a peace settlement. And again, I come back to so therefore, you would think if that is an important objective for the White House, that they would work with Europe to be able to go together to that kind of strong negotiating position. So I do think we are already seeing those kinds of divergences and we're seeing the effect of the United States not taking Europe seriously.
- [20:43]
Christiane Amanpour
20 seconds left. Peter, where do you think this topsy turvy negotiating process over Ukraine, Russia is going to go?
- [20:50]
Peter Frankopan
I think that the United States can't force a settlement. Trump can complain as much as he likes, but I think this will depend on what Ukraine wants. And to some extent, the talking points that Trump has been, I think walked into by the Russian side of being promised free lower energy prices, access to metals, all the kinds of things that Putin would have put together in a package, all depends on thinking that Russia will be a good actor if there is some kind of settlement. And I don't think that's a good bet to make.
- [21:13]
Christiane Amanpour
Peter Frankopan, Celeste Wallander, thank you very much. Really interesting to get your perspectives on all of this. And meantime, today, in the wake of Trump's scorching public criticism of European allies, the US ambassador to the UK visited Prime Minister Keir Starmer at number 10 Downing Street. Politico reports there'll be no readout of that particular conversation and stay with us. We'll be right back after the break.
- [21:42]
Claire Duffy
I'm CNN tech reporter Claire Duffy. This week on the podcast Terms of Service, I'm wearing this little gadget around my neck like a necklace. It's called Friend. It's a wearable AI device that listens to everything you say and your surroundings. You can also talk directly to it and it responds via messages in the Friend app here in New York. Friend made a big splash recently when it shelled out $1 million on a massive ad campaign in the subway. I wanted to talk to Friend's creator and CEO, Avi Schiffman, to find out why he created Friend, how he feels about the backlash, and why he thinks we should embrace a new kind of relationship with AI. Listen to CNN's Terms of Service wherever you get your podcasts.
- [22:32]
Christiane Amanpour
Now. Soon after the Trump administration published that new national security strategy, I moderated a panel of influential foreign ministers from around the world at the annual Doha Forum in Qatar to assess the fraught efforts at negotiations, particularly over the wars in Ukraine and Gaza. I started by asking Qatar's foreign minister, Mohammed bin Jassim al Thani, how his country, described as a small state in a turbulent region, became the world's preeminent mediator.
- [23:02]
Mohammed bin Jassim al Thani
I think, you know, overall, if you look at, you know, the region in general, it's not an easy region. It has like a lot of history that kept this region, well, with very heavy baggage. And what Qatar, you know, the way Qatar is situated as a small nation among bigger nations, we have also to make sure that our region is prosperous, our region is stable, and basically our national security stands on the stability of the region. But as a small nation, we cannot become a superpower by military, but of course, by, you know, being reaching out through diplomacy, reaching out through investment, through partnerships. That's what creates really the footprint of the state of Qatar.
- [23:54]
Christiane Amanpour
Just quickly, before I move on, there are some in the world who will say, why does Qatar host Hamas, for instance, negotiators or has supported in terms of, you know, money and things like that in the past. Past. Why does it, you know, host the Taliban? Why does it host, you know, many, many parties and.
- [24:14]
Peoples that some would consider terrorists or bad actors? Can you give the world the rationalization for that part of mediation?
- [24:23]
Mohammed bin Jassim al Thani
Well, when we are talking about mediation, mediation is a conflict between parties. And if those parties are normally, if you have like state action, this is like always sounds normal sometimes. But in our region, unfortunately, it's between states and non State actors and those non state actors. If we don't keep the open channels with them, then none of those conflicts can be resolved. And this has been demonstrated and proven throughout the last few years. If you look at what we have achieved by ending the longest war in the modern American history between the US And Afghanistan, hosting the office of Taliban was for single purpose to facilitate this mediation efforts. And these mediation efforts remained for almost like more than seven years in order to achieve to that result.
- [25:18]
On Hamas also when you look at it, there is.
- [25:24]
You know, all the outcomes that we have seen throughout 23, 24 and 25. Reaching to the peace deal.
- [25:33]
Was only happening because of this open communication. Qatar is criticized for, you know, hosting them.
- [25:42]
Just, you know, for some very short, very short term political goals. Unfortunately, those people who are criticizing Qatar, those are the same people who are, who are in need for countries like Qatar to have an open channel with those state actors. And at the end of the day, Qatar provide the platform, provide the forum for those parties to talk. It doesn't mean that we are taking one side or the other. Our, our role is to make sure that the dialogue is ongoing and the dialogue coming out with a positive outcome or constructive outcome that ends the conflict and ends the humanitarian suffering.
- [26:23]
Christiane Amanpour
Let me ask you then because mediation is hugely important now in a war that threatens Europe. This new strategy describes an expeditious cessation of hostilities in Ukraine is a core interest of the United States. The goal of a peace deal would be to, to reestablish strategic stability with Russia and to enable Ukraine's survival as a viable state. How do you read that given the current negotiations that are going on to try and end this war.
- [26:57]
Jose Manuel Albares
You know, when you're a European, you are constantly asked for what the President of the United States says or what is the foreign policy of the United States. And I think that what we should really be interested right now in Europe is what we can do in this very challenging moment in world history in which for some countries, one of them is Russia. War has become a normal tool of foreign policy. It's not the only one in the Middle East. Israel thinks exactly the same way. We think the opposite. We stick to the UN Charter. We think that war is not a way of settling disputes among people or states. And above all that a war of aggression cannot have reward. What is at stake right now in Ukraine is of course the sovereignty and the territorial integrity of Ukrainian people, which is already huge. We are talking about the democratic state with a democratically elected government. But we are going to decide with whatever peace will come one day and ensure that there is a future in peace for the Ukrainian people. We are to design the future security scheme of Europe and also of the world. If a war of aggression has a reward to more war, and certainly tomorrow's Europe is going to be more unstable. No one will be out of the risk of waking up and realizing that the strong naval wants a part of its sovereignty or of its territorial integrity. So we welcome the efforts of peace of the President of the United States. We think it's good. We have been asking for peace since the very beginning. If it was up to us, the Europeans or to the Ukrainians, this war would have not started. We want peace. We just want to make sure that it's a just and lasting peace. Just and lasting peace means that there is no reward for the aggression, that there is a sovereign Ukraine that can take its own decision, including which international organization is a part of and that at the end that piece stick to the United Nations Charter.
- [29:19]
Christiane Amanpour
Foreign Minister Al Thani.
- [29:22]
In the ceasefire agreement and in the 2020 point plan for Israel Gaza, there was an indication that there would be an effort to move towards a Palestinian state for the second time this year. The Israeli knessed basically, well, they don't want that to happen. And actually Prime Minister Netanyahu and his far right allies boycotted a vote that was to move the phases along because of the reference in the plan to the two state solution. When you're talking about mediation, how do you get beyond that kind of ideology? How do you get beyond the hard liners who don't want even what President Trump has put forward?
- [30:13]
Mohammed bin Jassim al Thani
Well, actually here where the enforcement is needed because.
- [30:19]
One of the lessons learned that we have seen and experienced throughout the last two years, that if accountability is absent and enforcement is absent, things can just keep going and we remain hostage in the hands of the extremists. And that's what we want to avoid. And we have seen that the efforts that all of us, we put together in order to reach to the ceasefire that we have achieved this year.
- [30:52]
Jose Manuel Albares
Needed.
- [30:52]
Mohammed bin Jassim al Thani
For the next phase, which is the stabilization and then the third phase, which is the Palestinian state. If this extremist agenda will just, you know, overshadow all our efforts as an international community, then everyone is recognizing that there is something wrong with.
- [31:14]
The structure that we are working through. And I believe that US Role is key in this because US has the enforcement part of of that in order to put this conflict on the right track for a resolution.
- [31:28]
Jose Manuel Albares
It's time to Work to put in place a real Palestinian state. And that means the west bank and Gaza under one single Palestinian Authority. We have to stop the violence of those settlers that is really out of way. And we have to stop all those illegal settlements that are spreading. We have to go for reconstruction in Gaza. And the day we will have one single Palestinian Authority that will control the west bank and Gaza, connected by a corridor with an exit to the sea and its capital in East Jerusalem, living in good neighborhood with Israel, I think that they we will have achieved what Europe stands for and it's peace and the respect of international law and international humanitarian law.
- [32:29]
Christiane Amanpour
Kayakallis Can I ask you, we're going back to the European war right now or the war on the European continent. The 28 point plan that President Trump put forth a couple of weekends ago was vigorously amended or discussed by Europe and Ukraine. On the other hand, would you agree that Europe has not put a peace plan forward for Ukraine?
- [32:57]
Kaja Kallas
In Ukraine war, there are no both parties because there is one aggressor and one victim. And that's why, you know, if we want to have a sustainable peace, a long lasting peace, we should make sure that the concessions are on the aggressor side, that the aggression does not pay off, it's not rewarded. If we look the last 100 years, Russia has attacked 19 countries, some as many as three or four times. None of these countries has ever attacked Russia. So putting limitations and stress on Ukraine actually does not bring us long lasting peace. Okay, we give security guarantees to Ukraine. It will end there, but it will start somewhere else. Because the problem is the Russian military. Their army is extremely large, their military budget is enormous, and they will want to use it again, if not on Ukraine, then somewhere else. So focusing on really, you know, putting the pressure on the aggressor. Like Jose Manuel said, you know, if aggression is rewarded, we will see it happen again. And not only in Ukraine or Gaza, but all around the world. Because aggression really pays off. That's why we have so many wars nowadays going on that the international law is really under a heavy fire.
- [34:28]
Christiane Amanpour
Okay. But the question really is, what is the leverage that you have? Because the US Is pulling back, which it is, in terms of making you step up and fill that gap.
- [34:40]
Kaja Kallas
Yes.
- [34:40]
Christiane Amanpour
Clearly Putin doesn't feel any leverage right now.
- [34:43]
Kaja Kallas
Well, we have leverage and that is economic leverage. I mean, wars also end when the aggressor runs out of money.
- [34:51]
Christiane Amanpour
Foreign Minister Fidan, can I ask you, I think it was 10 years ago Turkey, Turkey shot down an incursion by a Russian fighter jet. And it was fine. The rules of the world were established. You said, don't come into our airspace. They did. You shot them down. Boom. That was the end of that. So I wonder, I know you're not Europe maybe one day, but Russia upped the ante this week, saying it's ready to wage war on Europe right now. If, if, if, if, if you know, Europe goes to war, how do you see that? And what do you think Europe should be doing to force Putin to a reasonable negotiating position?
- [35:34]
David Remnick
I think up until now, as Kaya has just said, I think Europe is.
- [35:39]
Mohammed bin Jassim al Thani
Trying to do their best to counter this aggression.
- [35:45]
Peter Frankopan
On the other hand, you know, they.
- [35:47]
Mohammed bin Jassim al Thani
Have started partnering with United States, but.
- [35:51]
David Remnick
Now in the absence of the United.
- [35:52]
Peter Frankopan
States, Europe is in need of finding.
- [35:56]
Mohammed bin Jassim al Thani
More creative solutions to become more resilient.
- [36:01]
David Remnick
But I think the only viable way.
- [36:05]
Mohammed bin Jassim al Thani
To go and finish this war is to engage faithfully and forcefully in peace talks.
- [36:13]
Kaja Kallas
And by the way, you know, there was recent study about the peace, different peace talks. If women around the table, then the peace agreements actually last 35% more than those where women are not at the table.
- [36:29]
Christiane Amanpour
Clearly, I'm going to clap to that. So it's a great way to end. Foreign ministers high representative, thank you so much for this discussion. Thank you.
- [36:39]
Thank you. And we'll be right back after this short break.
- [36:48]
Claire Duffy
This message may be shocking to many millennials. If you are one, you might want to sit down. Right now. Loads of people are searching the following on Depop. Low rise jeans, halter top, velour tracksuit, puka shell necklace, disc belt. You likely place these in the dark of your closet in 2004, never to be seen again. But if you can find it in yourself to dust them off, there are a lot of people who will give you money for them. Sell on Depop, where taste recognizes taste.
- [37:19]
Christiane Amanpour
Coca Cola for the big, for the.
- [37:22]
Claire Duffy
Small, the short and the tall.
- [37:25]
Christiane Amanpour
Peacemakers, risk takers. For the optimists, pessimists for long distance.
- [37:32]
Claire Duffy
Love, for introverts and extroverts, the thinkers and the doers for old friends and.
- [37:41]
Christiane Amanpour
New Coca Cola for everyone.
- [37:46]
Claire Duffy
Pick up some Coca Cola at a store near you.
- [37:54]
Christiane Amanpour
Now the New Yorker magazine turns 100 and it is celebrating in style with a new Netflix documentary that takes us behind the scenes, which follows staff as they produce the anniversary issue. From seminal pieces such as John Hersey's 1946 Hiroshima Report to satirical cartoons, the magazine has been a pillar of quality journalism and has remained so relevant for 100 years. Here's a clip from the trailer.
- [38:24]
David Remnick
I think almost everyone who works with.
- [38:26]
Christiane Amanpour
New Yorker is obsessed in some way.
- [38:28]
David Remnick
It's a little bit like whack a mole.
- [38:30]
Celeste Wallander
You think you're done, but all these little things keep popping up.
- [38:33]
Peter Frankopan
We fact check everything that is published in the magazine.
- [38:35]
David Remnick
Yes, cartoons get fact checked.
- [38:37]
Christiane Amanpour
Big cats names are Tiger, Lover Boy and Gummy Bear. Is that correct?
- [38:44]
David Remnick is the New Yorker's longtime editor and he's joining Walter Isaacson to reflect on its precarious beginning to its significance today.
- [38:54]
Walter Isaacson
Thank you, Chris, John and David Remnick, welcome back to the show.
- [38:58]
David Remnick
Thanks for having me, Walter.
- [38:59]
Walter Isaacson
For the 100th anniversary of the New Yorker, you had Netflix come do a documentary on you putting together the 100th anniversary issue. And one of the things in the show is they asked celebrities to say little vignettes about when was the first time you encountered the New Yorker? Let us show the clip and then I'm gonna ask you that question.
- [39:20]
Christiane Amanpour
We actually didn't have very much money, but we did have a New Yorker subscription.
- [39:24]
David Remnick
I think the first time I heard about the New Yorker was on Seinfeld. They had a great episode where Elaine did not understand one of the cartoon captions. You know, I grew up in New Jersey and was very kind of like, starry eyed about all things New York. The first time I ever heard of the New Yorker and understood it to be this important magazine was in an episode of the animated show the critic. Bravo, Mrs. S. And I remember just thinking, oh, that's the New Yorker. It's this important thing.
- [39:53]
Walter Isaacson
I don't know how I knew about.
- [39:54]
David Remnick
It, but it's just there. It's just one of those institutions. It's like saying, like, when did you.
- [39:59]
Christiane Amanpour
First hear about the Statue of Liberty?
- [40:00]
Walter Isaacson
So let me ask you, when did you first encounter the New Yorker?
- [40:04]
David Remnick
In my father's office. My father was a dentist in suburban New Jersey at a very small practice. And on Saturdays and Sundays, it was obviously closed. And I'd go down and read Highlights magazine and Time magazine and Life and Look. And I encountered this thing that I didn't understand very readily. There was a magazine that had drawings on the COVID and gag cartoons and in those days, lots of advertisements. And I didn't quite get it, Walter, to be honest with you. And even when I was a teenager, my favorite magazines were the most the infinitely cooler Rolling Stone. And I like the Village Voice a lot. Esquire was where this was all happening. I got to the New Yorker and got to understand it and Get a feel for it. When I had a teacher in college who wrote for the New Yorker.
- [40:54]
Walter Isaacson
And that would be, of course, John McPhee, right?
- [40:56]
David Remnick
That's right, John McPhee, who these days is 93 and we work together at the New Yorker. And you know, he even made me into one of his fishing buddies. Life works in strange ways.
- [41:08]
Walter Isaacson
And you called the magazine a miracle. Why is that?
- [41:11]
David Remnick
I think it's a miracle. First of all, most publications, if they're lucky, if they're lucky, have a moment in time when they're important or they catch the zeitgeist in some way. To be on the COVID of Time magazine, I needn't tell you, at a certain period in American history was an astonishing thing. Life magazine had a moment because of its visual nature that preceded television. But when TV came along, Life was eclipsed. So to have something last 100 years old at a very, very high quality with the prospect of lasting a lot longer, that's something quite unusual in American culture, in newspapers. Obviously, the New York Times has this. So we're celebrating a centenary year and celebrating some of the things that have been published in the past. But a lot of time is fantastic been spent thinking about what's going to be ahead for us.
- [42:04]
Walter Isaacson
You've only had five editors in those hundred years. Totally amazing. And I think my first encounter with the New Yorker, believe it or not, is I had a favorite book my father had called the Years with Ross by James Thurber. And it talked about Harold Ross and how his personality imprinted the DNA of the New Yorker. Tell me about that founding editor.
- [42:25]
David Remnick
Well, Harold Ross was a newspaperman from out West. Like all great New Yorkers, he's somebody who made his way here and worked.
- [42:33]
Walter Isaacson
On the item in New Orleans.
- [42:35]
David Remnick
That's right. That's right. And I think he bounced around. He must have been in a newspaper every six months. He really bounced around a lot in old style. But he came to New York and he had ideas for all kinds of things. Shipping, news. And then there was this one idea to have a kind of funny Cosmopolitan magazine and mainly comic Walter at first mainly comic. And he got a family, the Fleischman family, that made money in yeast to put a few dollars behind this concabine idea. And at first it was a big flop. It was not good and it was.
- [43:14]
A financial failure as well. And they almost shut the thing down. And Harold Ross, who was a bit of a card player and a bit of a. He was familiar with the bottle occasionally in an all night poker game, Nearly lost the whole thing. Nearly lost the whole thing. So it's a miracle that it lasted to 1926, much less 2025.
- [43:34]
Walter Isaacson
He said this magazine wasn't for the little old lady from Dubuque. I think I was reading in the years with Ross, there's a. They had a cartoon proposed where they had to have Harold Ross go apologize to his aunt from Dubuque at a hotel. Why? What did he mean by that? And is that still what the magazine's about?
- [43:55]
David Remnick
I think he meant that he wanted that magazine to be for a very particular community. It was a really. It wasn't even. The community didn't even extend to the Brooklyn or the Bronx. It was a very Manhattan Jazz Age idea, meant to be a very small publication. It's since expanded. It's expanded in its seriousness, in its reporting and its length and its ambitions. I don't think Harold Ross imagined a magazine that would break the Abu Ghrab scandal or Hiroshima by John Hersey. That came infinitely later, by the way. I just wanted on the record that I'm happy to have anyone in Dubuque reading the New Yorker. It's for whoever has eyes to see and read. So I'm much. My attitude about that I don't share with Harold Ross.
- [44:42]
Walter Isaacson
Harold Ross is succeeded by his deputy for many, many years, William Shawn, Mr. Shawn to everybody. And he did not seem to have a great sense of humor, but he had a feel for the long form, right?
- [44:54]
Christiane Amanpour
He did.
- [44:54]
David Remnick
I mean, he was Ross deputy for a long time. And just as Catherine angel, who became Catherine White, introduced really top level fiction to the New Yorker, William Shawn played an instrumental role in bringing deep reporting to the New Yorker. The apotheosis of this was John Hersey's piece about Hiroshima, Rachel Carson on pesticides, and James Baldwin on race and so on. So it also shows you that a magazine, a publication, really any imaginative process that's not just individual, is a collection of intelligences that come together. And I think a good editor is not somebody that believes that he or she has the answer to everything. And the only person who's generating ideas.
- [45:43]
Walter Isaacson
You mentioned John Hersey's Hiroshima. And I was at the New York Public Library. That's what I do for fun. And that's where your archives are. And they have a display, I'm sure you know, of all the archives. And I saw on the wall the most amazing letter. I actually took a photograph of it and it says, dear Bill, do you think you could tolerate four parts on Hiroshima? I can't say of my material on the bombing that it's wonderful, but it is sobering, moving and newsy. First of all, I can't imagine anybody calling Mr. Shawn. Dear Bill. But also the rest of that letter, that was amazing leap.
- [46:24]
David Remnick
It was at that time. And it's a leap that's since been taken innumerable times. You know, very often a reporter will come back from wherever he or she has been and they have a story to tell that is beyond the imagining of any editor or even, you know, the current media. In his case, he had witnessed something that had not been publicized at all, except in the most abstract terms. The atomic age had begun, but the human cost of it on the ground had not been seen in the United States. So we are at a point now, Walter, where still foreign journalists are not allowed into Gaza. And yet at the same time, we've seen a lot of innumerable images because of, for all the reasons we know, because of the phone. And God bless them, journalists in Gaza.
- [47:16]
And bless the memory of those who have been so horribly killed.
- [47:22]
That was a different world. That was not a world of social media and videos on your phone. And Percy brought that human news to.
- [47:33]
The United States and it made international news. It had incredible resonance.
- [47:38]
Walter Isaacson
In this Netflix documentary, Tina Brown, your predecessor, plays a big role and talked about having to really kind of dust it off and sweep out some of the cobwebs. Tell me what she did.
- [47:50]
David Remnick
Well, you know, you want to be careful at any given moment in time that you're not just admired, but actually read.
- [47:59]
And I think there comes a time in the life of any long standing publication where you can fall into habits or self satisfaction. There's no question that the New Yorker was publishing terrific things during late Shaun and during Bob Gottlieb's reign. But Tina had an outsider sense of how to shake things up. We're not the same people. I don't know that we'd make absolutely every editorial decision the same. Of course not. But I, you know, I work for her as a writer and I was very much behind this idea of shaking things up. And she, I'll be perfectly honest, she made my life a lot easier coming in.
- [48:39]
Walter Isaacson
One of the most iconic aspects of the New Yorker is the magazine's cover, of course. And I wanted to do a clip, we'll see, of the arts editor, longtime arts editor, right. Francois Mouly, is that how you say her name? Discussing what goes into deciding the COVID So here, let's look at this clip.
- [48:58]
David Remnick
Sure.
- [48:58]
Christiane Amanpour
Until you have the COVID you don't.
- [49:00]
Kaja Kallas
Know what the personality of the issue is. You know.
- [49:06]
Celeste Wallander
It'S not something that you.
- [49:07]
Claire Duffy
Can just slap on at the last minute.
- [49:11]
Kaja Kallas
A cover needs to speak to the moment, but also be a timeless piece of art said should be able to be framed and put on a wall.
- [49:22]
Frankly, chasing that week after week keeps me up with anxiety even after 30 years.
- [49:30]
Walter Isaacson
What are your elements where you say, yes, that's the one.
- [49:34]
David Remnick
Well, it has to work the way a grenade works, right? You can't. If you have to explain it for five minutes what's going on, or you have to have explanations about why this may or may not be good, it doesn't work. It has to work immediately. It has to work immediately. Now, people interpret a joke or an image in different ways and that's fine. In fact, it's great. But if you're sort of puzzling over it as if it were an obscure Escher drawing or something like that, that doesn't quite work, then there's a problem. And so Francoise and I are. I mean, it's basically a two person operation. She's generating ideas all the time and sketches. And then she comes to me and we discuss what we like and what we don't like. And once in a while, if I'm on the fence, I'll take that sketch around the office to, you know, a few people that I trust or will put pressure on my presumptions, and we'll make a decision. There aren't that many places that do this kind of super labor intensive, super confronting journalism. I mean, they're not activists, but they are fearless when the facts support it.
- [50:46]
Walter Isaacson
One of my favorite things in New York, of course, is Talk of the Town. And it's evolved. And one of the great writers was E.B. white, who mastered that art. And my favorite is something he wrote, which is, we received a letter from the Writers War Board the other day asking for a statement on the meaning of democracy. Now, it's a beautiful piece he writes, very sort of dry and clever, but it's also about democracy. And that still seems to be one of the causes of the New Yorker.
- [51:19]
David Remnick
It absolutely is. And I'm glad you brought that up because, look, I watch your show and I think you could say the same of your program, is that democracy, to say the very very least, is under great challenge now. It's under great challenge from above all the President, United States. And that's not just something to say, that's something to do. Rigorous journalism about, fair minded, rigorous, accurate journalism. But democratic institutions.
- [51:52]
Are, including Your own, by the way. Public television are under assault. And we are duty bound as a democratic institution ourselves to stand up for it and do the work that we're supposed to be doing at the highest level, tirelessly and without.
- [52:16]
Compromise. And when I say without compromise, I don't mean once, just kind of in some sort of vitriolic way, but to do the work of reporting. I was on a panel about journalism the other day and I looked around and I realized that the lion's share of people at the table were not anybody that had taken out a notebook in 10 years. They had things to say. They were commentators, they were talking heads, they were comedians. But at the heart of this enterprise of journalism is reporting. Finding out what is true, what is hidden, and bringing it to light and applying the real standards of truth as best you can in a given time, knowing all the while you will fail at times, you will fail. And we should be honest about our failures as well. But that is at the center of our work, too. We're not the only ones, to be sure, not even remotely. But I'm, you know, that's my.
- [53:14]
If that sounds sanctimonious, then I don't really care.
- [53:17]
Walter Isaacson
David Remnick, thank you for joining us.
- [53:20]
David Remnick
Thank you, Walter.
- [53:23]
Christiane Amanpour
And of course he's right. It is all about reporting. And finally, as the clock struck midnight in Sydney, millions of Australian adolescents are now locked out of their social media accounts. From Facebook, Instagram and Snapchat to TikTok X and YouTube. The sweeping government ban aims to shield underserved from harmful content online grooming and cyberbullying. Some say this is long overdue. Critics, however, warn that it could isolate young people and drive them towards even more unregulated corners of the Internet. This is what Prime Minister Anthony Albanese had to say.
- [54:01]
Walter Isaacson
Well, we're listening to parents and listening to the community and I want to see kids off their devices and onto the footy fields and the swimming pools and the tennis courts. We want them to have real experiences.
- [54:16]
Christiane Amanpour
With real people, real experiences in real life with real people. Countries around the world are watching closely with Australia being cast as the first domino in a long overdue social media regulation which has been demanded by so many for so long. That's it for now. If you ever miss our show, you can find the latest episode shortly after it airs on our podcast. And remember, you can always catch us online and on our website and all over social media. Thank you for watching and goodbye from London.
- [54:52]
Peter Frankopan
Hey, Ryan Reynolds here wishing you a.
- [54:54]
David Remnick
Very happy half off holiday. Because right now Mint Mobile is offering you the gift of 50% off unlimited. To be clear, that's half price, not half the service. Mint is still premium unlimited wireless for a great price.
- [55:09]
Christiane Amanpour
So that means a half day.
- [55:12]
Claire Duffy
Yeah.
- [55:12]
David Remnick
Give it a try@mintmobile.com Switch upfront payment.
- [55:16]
Claire Duffy
Of $45 for a three month plan equivalent to $15 per month. Required new customer offer for first three months only. Speed slow after 35 gigabytes of networks busy taxes and fees extra. See mintmobile.com this week on the Assignment.
- [55:25]
Christiane Amanpour
With me, Audie Cornish. Over the last year, we've seen plenty of stories about the resurgence of religion in America. While some people are returning to religion, others are moving in the opposite direction towards modern witchcraft and paganism. And across all of these spaces, the pattern is the same. People are overwhelmed, institutions feel shaky, and there's this like growing desire for something more grounding ancient or frankly, something just more meaningful than what they've had before. Listen to the Assignment with me, Audie Cornish. Streaming now on your favorite podcast app.