B (4:50)

And of course, there is no guardrail in the United States around social media. So it's a big, big warning sign that it'll take a huge amount more effort to make this happen around AI okay, Annette on YouTube wants to know. The United Nations 2024 annual statistics showed 66,000 women and girls were murdered as a result. As a result of femicide, and that those rates are increasing annually even as they are underreported. How can the media affect change in our global societies and bring these heinous facts to the forefront of public awareness. Why don't you talk about that from the perspective of a former government spokesman who actually has to address these things? And I can add something from the perspective of the media.

A (5:34)

Look, one of the big challenges for American foreign policy in the last 10, 15 years is to what extent do we insist on our values being applied in other countries. So, for example, the famous, you know, gender issues, the famous issues of gender equality, the famous issues of homosexuality, where the rights of, you know, lesbians and gays, et cetera, were deemed appropriate in our system, to what extent do we try to apply those in other countries? Now, oddly enough, Donald Trump, when he was elected in 2016, gave a speech to United nations saying that it's none of the United States business what goes on in other countries, that sovereign states have a right to decide what to do in their own states, and that the world is made up of sovereign states. Funny. Now he's trying to decide exactly what goes on in Brazil and trying to impose American values on the Brazilian legal system or on the way they're dealing with social media. And he wants to break his claim to believing in sovereign states. The reason I bring this up is because we did develop reporting on gender issues where the oppression of women was reported in regular human rights reports. And we had a famous. Hillary Clinton insisted on having representatives travel the world and propose our belief that when women get a full and equal treatment in societies, the society benefits. But. But the problem is they run into countries which don't believe in that. Let's face it, there are African countries that don't believe in it. There are African countries, some of whom still have a kind of slavery in existence. So the problem here, I think, has to start with getting the facts out and then figuring out a way to put pressure on those countries where this is happening, but not pressure where the United States becomes some dictator of what the values of other countries should be. And I think one of the lessons I learned as a Democrat in the last administration is we probably did too much to insist on our social standards being applied in foreign countries and spent too much capital on that when we should have focused on the big issues of our time, which are things like AI and China and Russia, and leave their internal workings to a large extent to the sovereign states. That doesn't mean we shouldn't talk about it, doesn't mean we shouldn't raise questions, but we should probably. We probably made it too high a priority in our foreign policy and became very unpopular as a result around the world.

B (8:20)

So I'm going to take a completely different attack because I disagree 1000% with you when it comes to the issue of women and femicide. Women make up half the world's population. It is only logical that a country has evolved of the United States should put them and their rights, including the right not to be, you know, femicide, not to be allowed in.

A (8:41)

By the way, I need to distinguish to show that I'm not an idiot. I didn't mean in the case of murder, I just was making a difference.

B (8:48)

I know, but that was the question. The question is that it is increasing according to the United Nations. The United nations needs to have, you know, the support of all the members of the Security Council, which is, you know, difficult. All the powerful countries. And by the way, it's not just Africa that does this about women, it's also many of the Islamic countries and other countries around the world as well. And it is time and beyond time that so called democratic countries that believe in basic human rights, I believe should use human rights and women's rights as a barometer of how their governments are going to deal with said said countries. Now in the case of Afghanistan, we have seen that the country was handed back to the Taliban with only a nominal view and just sort of lip service to the rights of Women. For 20 years while the US was in Afghanistan, the rights of women were upheld to a huge degree, much larger than at any time in the past 50 odd years and women did unbelievably well and it really propelled Afghanistan to a much more solid economic and social standing in the world. And it's, it's, it's in my view, imperative. And I know I differ with you on this Jamie, and you've, you've explained why, but women and should be a barometer. How they treat women and girls should be a barometer all over the world in some form or fashion.

A (10:15)

Let me just say before we go on, because you're right, we have a slight disagreement about the priority, not the whether the issue matters. Afghanistan is a great issue because here's what happened. The Democratic Party on the left saw the war as a forever war. They didn't want to continue the war. And yet the Democratic Party wanted to protect the rights of women in Afghanistan. And this contradiction at the core of the Democratic Party's values, protecting women in Afghanistan came up against the Democratic Party's willingness to keep troops in Afghanistan. And that's how the President Biden decided to pull them out, following up on Trump's plan. So it just shows you how these, these, these needs and conflicts can, can combine to make an impossible situation. You want to end the war, but you want to protect the rights of women in Afghanistan. Show me how you do that.

B (11:09)

I am just going to say that I find it absurd. It's just absurd. The entire US decades of US Policy towards places like Afghanistan and elsewhere is absurd. Because you've just mentioned about Biden and the left and then Trump and the right. He's the one who pulled the troops out or negotiated that. And guess what? Now they're talking about wanting to go back to Bagram. Sorry. It makes no sense. So it makes no sense geostrategically, it makes no sense politically, and it certainly makes no sense when it comes to the rights and the human rights of individuals, especially women. And let's go on, let's move on and say on YouTube, why has there been no pushback by the US government on Israel's illegal arrests of 400 plus activists on the Freedom Flotilla? Jamie?

A (11:57)

Because President Trump is mostly in Bibi Netanyahu's pocket. Until Netanyahu does something so stupid as to try to attack the Hamas leaders in Doha and then infuriates Trump and then Trump pushes for a peace plan. This is what happens when the United States is to support of Israel and doesn't hold them to account. I remember in government, here's a story. I remember going with Tony Blinken to Israel on several occasions and watching him walk through with the Defense Minister in Israel. The number of trucks, the number of blankets, the number of doctors, the number of amount of food, the number of people that were brought in for humanitarian reasons. He was prepared to use his leverage as Secretary of State to walk through all these details. Donald Trump's administration doesn't do that. They basically finally had enough and said that he'd have to agree to the peace plan because of this attack in Qatar. But on a daily basis they did nothing, as far as I can tell, to pressure the Israeli government to let enough food and medicine and shelter into Gaza. That's why people were starving to death and people were dying from starvation. And that's the same issue here. Israel is trying to deny that there's a humanitarian crisis by keeping these people out. And the United States government doesn't want to be any part of it. Because Donald Trump doesn't want to criticize Netanyahu. That's why.

B (13:22)

And for too long, unfortunately, that has been the narrative. And what seems to have happened is a lot of them have been, you know, they landed, they were arrested and deported back to their own countries. Like has happened before. But it is. It is an extraordinary situation. I'm going to go back to my own story reporting under. In Sarajevo, under siege. For four years, it was under siege, and yet the international community managed to have at least a modicum of human decency. They refused to stop the genocide in Bosnia, but they did airdrop food and aid and basic necessities. I cannot believe to this day that the United States did not just take C130s and land them in Gaza with food for starving people and dare the Israelis to shoot down a US plane. It would never have happened. It's an outrage. It should have happened. And now look where we are, the whole world. Isolating Israel, the hostages. Hopefully soon to come back. The ceasefire, hopefully soon, under the conditions Jamie just said, because Trump got pissed off with Netanyahu for bombing Doha soon to get some humanitarian aid and maybe a ceasefire eventually to lead to some kind of peace plan. But it is a disgrace that basic human, you know, necessities to keep body and soul together have been forbidden for all this time. It's a disgrace, and we report on it all the time.

C (14:53)

Hey, what's up? It's Mario Lopez. Back to school is an exciting time, but it can also be overwhelming, and kids may feel isolated, a vulnerability that human traffickers can exploit. Human trafficking doesn't always look like what you expect. Everyday moments can become opportunities for someone with bad intentions. Whether you're a parent, teacher, coach, or neighbor. Check in, ask questions, stay connected. Blue Campaign is a national awareness initiative that provides resources to help recognize suspected instances of human trafficking. Learn the signs and how to report@dhs.gov blue campaign.

B (15:35)

Jamie, you want to read the next one?

A (15:37)

Given that the United States is often the only nation, aside from Israel and a few small island states to veto or reject resolutions calling for peace or ceasefires in Gaza, while nearly every other country votes in favor. Does this not also undermine, weaken or neuter the UN's authority? This is a really good question, and it's one that foreign policy types struggle with. The United nations, as we've said before last week and the week before, is a complicated thing. There are agencies that deliver real goods. Unicef, United nations, human rights groups, the refugee organization. They do actual work. Then there's the Security Council, which purports to rule on how countries behave around the world. The problem is on the Security Council stand, three countries, China, Russia, and the United States. They're Generally, the countries whose vetoes prevent the UN Security Council from actually pursuing international peace and security. Now, Israel and the United States often oppose resolutions like the one that would relate to Gaza that we've been talking about. And why does the United States do that? Well, we've talked about that endlessly because of the support for Israel. And Israel viewing the UN as unfair. Whether that's true or not doesn't matter. It views it as unfair and in cases I've seen, it is actually unfair. And we can go through that some other day. But meanwhile, the big problem is not the US resolutions that it vetoes. That's not the problem with the un. The problem with the UN is two of the permanent members, Russia and China, do not believe in the basic rules of the international system. They believe in the power of the bully and the strong to oppress the weak. The United States, for all its flaws and for all its mistakes most of the time on most issues, believes the states should be not bullied and not invaded. Russia believes it should invade Ukraine and not pay a price. China believes it can oppress the people of its own country and it can potentially invade Taiwan and it can do pretty much whatever it wants in the South China Sea and the East China Sea and it's nobody else's business because they're the big biggest country in the region. So those two countries, one ruled by a Communist party, the other ruled by a Russian dictator, are the reasons why the UN is no longer a serious place to do international business. Because Russia and China have destroyed it. And I think that the United States shouldn't be blamed for the UN's failure. China won't even negotiate an arms control agreement. Christian, Today or yesterday, Donald Trump said he would follow the start, New START agreement that, that Putin said he would continue. Well, here's the problem. China isn't part of any arms control agreement and refuses to be part of it and wants to build 1500 nuclear weapons. How can China be a serious player internationally and say that despite signing the NPT and committing to disarmament, it's going to triple, quadruple and quintuple the size of its nuclear forces? They are violating the article of the NPT that calls for disarmament every day by their buildup and nobody calls them on it. That's how the UN's authority is ruined.

B (18:49)

I just going to go back to the things you said that it does well, which is mostly in the humanitarian sphere. Unhcr, unicef, wfp, all the, the organizations that sustain body and soul around the world. Unfortunately, the United States has cut a lot of aid and support to that, to all those, those, you know, humanitarian agencies. It's in arrears in many of them. It has put sanctions also on Palestinian human rights organizations. It's being called out the United States by, you know, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch. It's very selective, the United States on its issues as well. And I've covered this for a long, long time. But I would say, and it was part of my recommendation a few weeks ago, it wasn't always like this. There's always been, you know, issues of sovereignty and, I guess, imperialism by all the members of the Security Council versus trying to work together to make the world a better and safer place and bring more peace than war. So go back and read Peacemaker about the third secretary general, you Thant, written by his grandson and my friend Thant Mint U. It's so interesting to read what was going on in the 60s and 70s compared to what's going on now. Yeah. Yep. You're the next one, Jamie.

A (20:10)

All right. So as Trump is cutting democratic programs with democratic purposes and ideals in democratic districts. This is Patricia on email. Are Democrats off the hook to support these actions by providing their tax dollars? The short answer to that is no. The Democrats presumably believe in these programs. And frankly, we're going to get to this in the next question. Are committed to facing the heat of a government shutdown in favor of providing assistance to those who need health care. And so in these districts that the questioner asks about local governments, state governments are trying to step in to provide more and more support. And one of the great things that's gone on in the last couple decades without a lot of attention is state governments and local governments are getting better and people are getting more involved in their democracy. Look, we're a representative democracy. We can't have voters decide every single issue. We can't have an Athenian democracy. I was reading about that recently. Can you imagine if 51% of the voters who are poisoned by social media made every decision for our government? That would be a disaster. We have to have representative democracy, which means that you vote in people you respect and trust. And one of the new philosophies that's come out recently is that by controlling the way leaders behave through too much legal regulation, we've taken away the authority of leaders to act and be held accountable and make good decisions where you can't know in advance the situation. There's no regulation. There's no legal processes. For many of the new issues the world Faces. You have to trust your leaders to do the right thing. And if they're not doing it, you vote them out. But to expect us to have legal procedures for every single problem is one of the reasons it's so hard to build a new airport or to have the infrastructure built in California or New York because we have too many of the local politicians who are afraid, afraid to act for fear of being criticized for raising tolls. That's how you build a new bridge, you raise tolls. And if we don't want to have lousy infrastructure, we have to pay for it.

B (22:18)

Yeah, they do it very well in Europe. And actually in this government shutdown, you've seen President Trump already cut off, I think it's hundreds of millions of dollars in infrastructure to places like New York and other places. Ellie on Instagram as a very confused. Scott, can you please explain why the US Government has shut down and the have in addition, can you please explain why Trump's administration is blaming the Democrats for the shutdown? Over to you, Jamie.

A (22:48)

All right, this is interesting and I want to be very, I hope truthful. The Republicans are willing to continue government and what's called a clean resolution, meaning you just continue doing what you're doing now and pay for what you're paying for and what's on the books. And they would be willing to vote to open the government tomorrow if things just stayed the same. And so it is true that the Democrats are insisting on making some changes in current law as a price for their votes to open the government. The Senate needs Democratic votes to pass a resolution to open the government. They need 60 votes. There are enough Democrats who won't vote with the Republicans. That's why the government, government is shut down. The Democrats are saying, if you want us to support you, remember, Republicans own the House, the Senate, the executive branch, the presidency, the judiciary. This is their government. And for them to blame the Democrats is ridiculous. They own the government right now. But the Democrats are saying, if you want our help, then you have to give us something we believe in. And what we believe in is assistance for middle class families trying to get health care in a country that doesn't have a national health Service, that doesn't have the system the French have have, or the, or the Scandinavians have, or the Canadians have, or the British have, or any European country. We don't have national health care. So middle class families have to pay for it. The Democrats are saying we need to give them some help because it's too expensive. And I can tell you as Not a middle class. As an upper middle class person. Healthcare in the United States is obscenely expensive and it really costs a lot of money. And so the Democrats are saying we need to provide some help to the middle class families, the 20 million or so that got Obamacare that the Republicans want to prevent.

B (24:46)

That's what I think it's important to know, in my opinion anyway, watching from overseas, that the first Trump administration, just because it was Obama, decided they were going to torpedo Obamacare. And they tried and they tried and they tried and they couldn't. And in fact, they lost their majority during the midterm elections. Back then, the Democrats successfully campaigned on delivering health care care and keeping health care for people. And that's why they understand that this is really important. This is something the Republicans under Trump and maybe even before, I don't know, but when Obamacare came in, Trump decided, I guess because it was called Obamacare, it's actually the Affordable Care act, that they were going to kill this thing and it survived, but they're trying to kill it by other means. And so the Democrats are saying, no, we need you to actually be very solid, as Jamie said, in making sure that people and its effect, it affects tens of millions of Americans. It's a huge, big deal. Because often if you can't get your health care, you get bankrupted. Bottom line, that's it for us, right, Jamie?

A (25:51)

Yes. I think we've answered questions as best as we can and been as truthful and as honest as we can be. Even forthcoming.

B (25:57)

Sometimes even sometimes forthcoming. So thank you for listening to the Q and A bonus episode of the X Files with me, Cristiana Monpour and Jamie R. Ruben. If you have a question that you want answered, just go ahead and send it to us. You can do it on email on our social media. You can find us on all the major social media platforms. The handle is at Amanpour Pod or The email is amanpourpodlobal.com Our next episode, as always, is out on Tuesday. Wherever you get your podcast, remember, you can listen for free on Global Player. You can download that from the App Store or go to Global Player. You can also watch our episodes on YouTube so sign up for our our YouTube channels. You can watch the episodes and the Bonus Q&As now on that you search Christiana Monpour Presents and subscribe to our channel so that you never miss an episode. And we'll see you next week. Bye bye, Jamie.

A (26:54)

Goodbye from New York. I love saying that. Hey, what's up?

C (27:09)

It's Mario Lopez. Back to school is an exciting time, but it can also be overwhelming, and kids may feel isolated, a vulnerability that human traffickers can exploit. Human trafficking doesn't always look like what you expect. Everyday moments can become opportunities for someone with bad intentions. Whether you're a parent, parent, teacher, coach or neighbor, check in, ask questions, stay connected. Blue Campaign is a national awareness initiative that provides resources to help recognize suspected instances of human trafficking. Learn the signs and how to report@dhs.gov blue campaign.

A (27:48)

This has been a global player Original production.