Return to Transcripts main page
Connect the World
World Leaders Gather For Push To End Libyan War; Factions Fight For Control Years After Fall Of Gadhafi; Violence Erupts In Beirut During Week Of Rage; Rep. Michael Waltz (R-FL) Is Interviewed About Impeachment Process Which He Called Secretive, Unfair, And Partisan; Team Trump Slams Impeachment As "Brazen And Unlawful"; Dershowitz To Make Constitutional Case Against Impeachment; Harry And Meghan Giving Up Royal Titles. Aired 10-11a ET
Aired January 19, 2020 - 10:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[10:00:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GHASSAN SALAME, SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE IN LIBYA, UNITED NATIONS: You need a much larger group of countries to come together and to support and
consolidate this truce and transform it into a real cease-fire.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BECKY ANDERSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: World powers and warring rivals tried to broker a peace deal for Libya. We speak to the UN's envoy for the
country. And Beirut boils over. Frustrated protesters took to the streets once again. And Royal goodbye. Harry and Meghan give up their highness
titles as they prepare to move to Canada.
Our big story this hour, peace in Libya, at least that is the hope. Right now who's who of the world and in particular this region's most powerful
leaders are getting together in Berlin to try and nail down a permanent truce. With all these powerful figures converging on Berlin right now,
they're one focus is peace or at least a ceasefire in Libya, one will last.
Have a look at this gathering. You could be mistaken for thinking this was a G20 summit. Angela Merkel hosting the meeting to get Libya is warring
sides to agree to stop the fighting. U.N. recognized Prime Minister, you see him there on the left, is set to be there. So as his enemy Renegade
General Khalifa Haftar there on the right of your screen. Their fighting has torn Libya apart.
The push for peace is a monumental challenge for everybody in attendance. So let me drill down a little more on who is there. Almost everyone who
matters in what is a conflict dominated by foreign intervention, German Chancellor Angela Merkel hosting, of course, some Russian President
Vladimir Putin too alongside his foreign minister, the British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, and there's the Turkish president Recep Tayyip
Erdogan, French President Emmanuel Macron turning up too, and the American Secretary of State Mike Pompeo there doing the rounds with pretty much
everyone. That is a big deal is Libya isn't exactly front and center D.C. agenda these days.
I want to bring you these pictures in particular. This is Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi, meeting with Chancellor
Merkel in Berlin on Saturday. He made the rare trip from the UAE saying he and his nation supported any initiative that would resolve the crisis. His
being there speaks to just how important this summit is.
And that is why this matters because all the players who could actually fix Libya's roiling conflict are actually in Berlin right now, concentrating on
that one goal because I'm about to show you Libya has become a problem far beyond its borders with many hands at work.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ANDERSON: It had been hailed a moment of hope, the fall of longtime dictator Muammar Gaddafi. But nearly a decade on, this much of Libya looks
like today. The strewn wreckage of a country splintered by conflict between two warring sides.
The Government of National Accord or GNA runs the capital and much of the country's Northwest. In the east, a parallel government controlling nearly
two-thirds of the country. It's led by General Khalifa Haftar and his well- armed Libyan National Army or LNA. Neither side though is acting in isolation and battlefield Libya has many hands at work.
Haftar is generously backed by the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, who view political Islam as a threat and see Haftar as the country's last line of
defense. They are joined by Russia and France. While the GNA sees support from Turkey, Qatar and a handful of E.U. states such as Italy but
importantly it has the rubber stamp of U.N. legitimacy.
Despite that, he only survives through outside friends of its own, and mostly Turkey who've gotten involved directly. President Erdogan recently
receiving authorization from his parliament to deploy troops there.
[10:05:16]
RECEP TAYYIP ERDOGAN, PRESIDENT OF TURKEY (through translator): If Haftar's attacks against the people in legitimate Government of Libya continue, we
will never refrain from teaching him the lesson he deserves.
ANDERSON: Being that is crucial to President Erdogan's strategic interests beyond the Middle East burnishing his regional reputation as a power
player. Haftar though says he is up for the fight.
KHALIFA HAFTAR, LEADER, LIBYAN NATIONAL ARMY (through translator): We hereby accept the challenge. We are announcing a mass mobilization of our
troops. We call for a holy fight.
ANDERSON: Meanwhile, Russia has been bolstering its presence around the Mediterranean. There has been a rising number of reported Russian
mercenaries supporting Haftar's troops on the ground in Libya. Moscow claims they don't represent the Russian stage as they've also claimed in
Ukraine. But from Syria to Libya, President Vladimir Putin's expansionist strategy remains clear.
The United States, on the other hand, has been more capricious. It launched airstrikes targeting ISIS and Al Qaeda in 2015, but then pulled its troops
amid the surging political violence. Its position now isn't quite clear. And in the vacuum of war, chaos. Hundreds of thousands of migrants using
Libya as a dangerous springboard into Europe. The continent, for the most part, calling for a political solution to the bloody conflict.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANDERSON: Well, despite all that, the U.N.'s man in Tripoli, their special representative on the ground Ghassan Salame does remain hopeful. When he
joined me live from Tripoli before this weekend, I asked him directly, what is the point of this Berlin summit?
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SALAME: Berlin was important before the Moscow episode. After the Moscow episode, it becomes wider in the sense that you need a much larger group of
countries to come together and to support and consolidate this truce and transform it into a real ceasefire and to consolidate it through the
appointment of monitors, through the neutral monitoring mechanism that is deployed on the ground and through to acceptance by the two parties of
this.
Turkey and Russia have a lot of influence right now in Libya, but this does not mean that their will is the one that will sort of exclude the national
interests and the will of other countries involved in the Libyan drama by recognize that Russia and Turkey have a lot of influence right now in
Libya. But I wouldn't say that their influence is exclusive of all the other countries who have invested in this issue.
ANDERSON: The concerns are in many quarters is that what we are seeing in Libya is a page being taken out of Syria's playbook here, a carve-up
between Turkey and Russia, and a potential proxy war unfolding. Do you agree with that?
SALAME: This is a possibility. I don't throw it out. However, I don't think it's likely because Libya is not Syria. There is not a geographic
contiguity between Libya and Turkey or Russia. And there is a no real strong state to defend in Libya. You have to almost three establish it from
scratch. Three, there is a lot of foreign interference that goes way beyond these two players, that is Turkey and Russia.
I can count like 10 countries interfering in a way or the other right now in Libya either through mercenaries, or through direct attacks, or through
the provision of weapons. So I do believe that there are cases where there is similarity between Syria and Libya, but Libya is not Syria.
ANDERSON: I want to get to the bottom of something reported exclusively by The Guardian newspaper. The 2,000 Syrian fighters will be deployed to Libya
to support the U.N. backed government. The article reads, and quote, "the fighters have signed six-month contracts directly with the U.N.-backed
Government of National Accord rather than with the Turkish military."
SNA sources saying $2,000 or so a month for these fighters, that's a vast sum compared with the 450 to 550 Turkish Lira month that an SNA soldier
would earn in Syria. They've been promised Turkish nationality we are reading as well. A (INAUDIBLE) is used to cajole fighters in brigades on
its payroll for several years.
These Syrian fighters have been described to me by one very well placed Libyan source that I've spoken to as hardcore Nusrah operatives. How can
the U.N. turn a blind eye to this?
[10:10:54]
SALAME: Well, look, if you live in Tripoli the way I do, you will discover very quickly that the length of the frontline would normally ask for many,
many more warriors than those Libyans ready to participate in this war. This could take tens of thousands of Libyans to fight on both sides.
So the Libyans have made for this, this proportion between the huge size of their country three times than they have France, and the length of the
frontline many hundreds of kilometers by calling on mercenaries. Mercenaries are coming from all over the world to this country and they are
strengthening the ranks of both sides.
And they do have various legal status, some of them are private military firms, some of them are militants, some of them are regular troops, some of
them are consultants and experts, but we have seen them since the beginning of the war and their numbers have increased. And I do confirm that there
are now hundreds of Syrians who have joined the battle in this house of Tripoli.
ANDERSON: These Syrian fighters are allegedly affiliated with Islamic groups. They are on the ground in Libya just a short hop from Europe. That
is going to be of great concern to Europeans. Don't you agree?
SALAME: I do agree that many non-Libyan fight that was on the ground on both sides are a source of worry for the U.N. and certainly for Europe.
ANDERSON: What do you understand to be Washington's position with regard to Libya? There is in some quarters a suggestion that Washington is delegating
Libya, to Russia, and Turkey, as they did in Syria.
SALAME: Well, this is the $1 million question. A lot of players and certainly most Libyans do ask the question you are asking. I don't have a
very clear answer to give them. One thing I am sure of is that the Americans so far have concentrated their action on two areas. One is a
direct fight against terrorism and they are quite active and even more active of late than they had been in the past, and ensuring the free flow
of oil -- of Libyan oil into international market, and they immediately mobilize when there is a threat to that.
So when these two issues are concerned, I do see a clear American policy and sometimes we can count on it -- count on it in order to push for their
own mediation effort. Besides these two points, I don't see a very clear American position concerning the situation on the ground. They have been
quite vocal, critical of the deployment of the Russian private military firm in Libya but beside that, yes, America has yet to decide what kind of
line it will choose in Libya. It doesn't look to be very high on the radar screen of the decision-makers in D.C.
ANDERSON: Would you like it to be higher? What is your message to Washington?
SALAME: You know, a lot of people are interfering in Libya. The whole question, interfere to do what? My own feeling is that if you interfere, if
you engage in order to support the U.N. Action Plan which we are trying our best to push forward, they are welcome. If it is to push for a parallel
plan or to disrupt the U.N. plan, you are not welcome.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
[10:15:20]
ANDERSON: The U.N. Envoy to Libya pretty clear about where he stands. That meeting, of course, now underway in Berlin. My interview with the U.N.
Special Representative to Libya there. The GNA'S Minister of Interior sent me a statement on the back of that interview saying in part, and I quote,
"as long as our country and its citizens are under attack, the Libyan Government is duty-bound to defend them. Any consideration of a permanent
ceasefire should be contingent upon a complete withdrawal and dismantling of Haftar's militia, full departure of his foreign mercenaries, and
upholding international law. Nothing less will be credible."
Well, of course, everyone involved here has their own strategic ambitions, case in point. We are at this hour seeing those contrasting views coming
from two very powerful Middle East leaders. As we mentioned, the Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan in Berlin earlier
this weekend. He said and I quote, "a political and peaceful solution is the best approach for achieving security and stability in the region and
fulfilling the aspirations of the Libyan people."
Meanwhile, Turkey's president shared an op-ed for Politico on the eve of the conference warning, "the European Union's potential failure to
adequately support Libya's Government of National Accord would be a betrayal of its own core values including democracy and human rights. To
leave Libya at the mercy of a warlord would be a mistake of historic proportions.
Well, CNN's Melissa Bell has been really working our sources on this summit for us keeping one step ahead. Melissa, you've seen a copy of a draft
communique being shared among these leaders. What is in it?
MELISSA BELL, CNN PARIS CORRESPONDENT: Well, what's very interesting about Becky is that it is clearly aimed much further well beyond the borders of
Libya and in very much there's foreign powers now known to be interfering so clearly. And if you look at its contents, clearly what it is calling for
a sanctions against anyone who breaks that U.N. arms embargo, which has been founded, Becky, for almost as long as it's been in place. The end of
interference by foreign powers and Libya, that is another crucial point and the protection of the oil.
Now, this is something that also happened in the last few days and that has also added urgency to this particular conference going on in Berlin, and
that has been a blockade by Haftar's forces of some of those oil ports. And that is crucial because until now, that had remained long intact and is a
huge concern, of course, to the outside world.
So a message aimed very much beyond the borders of Libya. But before we can have any hope of seeing that agreed, it is getting the two sides to talk
clearly. That is going to be crucial and it looks far from certain. There had been doubts, Becky, even as to whether either Haftar or al-Sarraj would
actually make the trip to Berlin given the tensions in the region and the tensions between them.
We now understand that, of course, they have both made the trip, but that they will be seeing each other in separate rooms, according to one source
on the ground with the German Foreign Minister going back and forth. They cannot even be in the same room, Becky. And that gives you, I think, an
idea of the mountain ahead before that draft communique can become an actual communique.
ANDERSON: Absolutely. And you make a very good point here. Bringing together these warring factions in and of itself, I guess, is being viewed
as an accomplishment. They are not speaking to each other but having them effectively on the same site is one thing. What is unclear is how we can
move or they can move Libya from this stalemate that has blighted the lives of so many for so long, Melissa.
BELL: And that continues to threaten very much regional stability. I mean, I think that many people would be looking very closely at this conference
because of that added urgency that's been brought to this crisis by the intervention of foreign countries. Of course, you mentioned Russia and
Turkey, they are first and foremost in the minds of the Europeans, in particular, who are watching this very closely, who've essentially left
their role as mediators in this and allowed this to happen. They're keeping a very close eye on that in particular.
But it's very difficult to see how any agreement can be found. You mentioned a moment ago that failure last week to get Haftar to agree
because he feared that Ankara's position would be entrenched if any deal was struck. Well, you can imagine that will remain very much a sticking
point today.
So it is ironically, I suppose, Becky, that much clearer and stronger intervention of foreign forces and foreign money and foreign troops that is
making this so important, but it is also very clearly what is making it so difficult.
[10:20:15]
ANDERSON: Absolutely. Melissa Bell keeping her eyes on this Berlin Conference. What is the future for Libya will become clearer certainly we
hope in the hours to come. Melissa, thank you. Ahead on this show, it is being called a week of rage. We're going to tell you what happened Saturday
on the streets of Beirut that left hundreds of people with injuries.
After months of build-up, accusations and backlash, the impeachment trial of Donald Trump about to begin. We will look at who is defending the
president and what we know about their strategy.
Plus, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex quit the firm, walking away from Royal life, and with it their duties and their titles. The very latest after
this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ANDERSON: Saturday night, Beirut in Lebanon became a battleground. Hundreds of people are reported to be injured. CNN reporters or demonstrators
throwing Molotov cocktails, rocks, and fireworks and shining lasers at police as authorities fired round after round of tear gas. Senior
International Correspondent Ben Wedemann explains what is behind the anger.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BEN WEDEMAN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Protesters charged the riot police in Beirut's Martyrs' Square. The Lebanese Capital witness the
most violent clashes yet in a mass uprising that until this week had been largely peaceful. But peaceful no more.
For months, the country's politicians have deterred and bickered over the formation of a new government while the faltering economy has gone from bad
to worse. The state is ours says this young man. But in this political vacuum, the state is barely functioning.
[10:25:17]
The protesters and police battled it out throughout downtown Beirut. Police fired hundreds of rounds of tear gas, sprayed the demonstrators with water
cannons, and eventually fired rubber bullets into the crowd. The demonstrators responded lobbing fireworks and rocks. Emergency Services
report hundreds were wounded Saturday night including many members the security forces. Protesters surrounded and beat one policeman who managed
to escape although not without serious injury.
Late in the evening, Lebanese President Michel Aoun ordered the security forces including the army to impose order. Dozens were arrested, order was
restored for now.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANDERSON: Well, Ben, joining me from Beirut. And you are no stranger to protests, Ben, reporting as you have done from Cairo, to Hong Kong, to
Gaza, and all that's in between for decades. You talk about the overall anger that is consuming their country that has of course been allowed in
these protests. So what has prompted this to kick off once again and this week of rage as it's been dubbed?
WEDEMAN: I think there's two things Becky. On the one hand, the economy really has started to fall in terms of the drop in the value of the
Lebanese currency, the Lira against the dollar, and in terms of simply increasing unemployment, people not getting paid or been only paid half
their salaries. And the other is the fact that after three months, really nothing has changed.
Now, one of the chants we were hearing before at the protest was (INAUDIBLE) which means peaceful, peaceful. Now, I think people are
concluding that peaceful protest has accomplished nothing. You've had all the many of the politicians are sort of saying yes, we're with the
protests, but they're doing nothing about it. And the feeling is that just like in the first few days of this mass protest movement, violence actually
spurs the politicians, who spent so much of their time squabbling among themselves to actually act.
Now this evening, we know that Hassan Diab, the Prime Minister-Designate who was designated or named as the possible next prime minister exactly a
month ago today is meeting with Michel Aoun, the President of the Republic, in perhaps what may be the final stages of the formation of a new
government.
But given the dire political situation here, it's questionable that even the formation of a new government is going to halt the economic decline or
somehow return quiet and calm to the streets of Beirut and other Lebanese cities. Becky?
ANDERSON: And Lebanon's caretaker prime minister has spoken out against these violent protests saying in a statement, and I'll read part of it
here, "Beirut will not be an arena for mercenaries and deliberate policies to strike the peacefulness of popular movements." Ben, of course, this is a
man who is supposed to have moved out of the political scene by now. What do you make of Hariri's comments?
WEDEMAN: Now, just one small correction, he is the caretaker, not the Designated Prime Minister, but that is sort of typical of the statements
we're hearing from all these Lebanese politicians in a sort of, OK, they're not happy with the violence, but they try to adopt sort of to take on the
rhetoric of what people here are calling the revolution, but they themselves are the cause of the deep discontent here in Lebanon, the
discontent with the massive gap between the rich and the poor.
[10:29:59]
And, of course, Saad al-Hariri is one of the very rich as are many of the politicians here. And so, the -- that the accusation we've heard time and
time again is that the political elite is tone-deaf to the street -- to the protests until the protests turn violent. Becky?
ANDERSON: Ben Wedeman is in Beirut, in Lebanon. Ben, thank you.
Now, you've heard their names -- now, get the background on the men and women who are fighting for Donald Trump's legacy. That is up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ANDERSON: Hi, welcome back. Donald Trump likes to say that he's number one when touting his accomplishments, but in a few days, he'll be third. Number
three. That is the third U.S. president to be the center of an impeachment trial in the Senate.
Here is what will happen over the next 48 hours. The president's legal team have until noon on Monday to lay out their arguments, but they are already
on the warpath, calling the impeachment charges constitutionally invalid.
House Democrats filed their briefings just this weekend. They explained exactly why Mr. Trump was impeached and why the Senate should remove him
from office. They also call his conduct the framer's worst nightmare.
Well, according to a source, Donald Trump told the crowd that he can't understand why he's being impeached. Still, he has assembled a high
profile, high powered team to defend him.
[10:35:05]
ANDERSON: At the job, his White House Counsel Pat Cipollone and Jay Sekulow -- Mr. Trump's personal attorney.
On Friday, we learned about additions to the team, including Ken Starr. You will remember that name, the Independent counsel from impeachment of
President Bill Clinton.
And Robert Ray succeeded Ken Starr is Independent counsel back then, as well as Pam Bondi, the former Florida Attorney General. The biggest name on
the list is Alan Dershowitz. When it comes to high profile trials, he is the expert.
Dershowitz's defended O.J. Simpson, Harvey Weinstein, and Jeffrey Epstein, to name but a few. He's a Harvard professor and he's even wrote -- written
a book called, The Case Against Impeaching Trump.
Well, last hour, he told CNN his role is to show why Mr. Trump's actions are not impeachable offenses according to the U.S. Constitution.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ALAN DERSHOWITZ, PROFESSOR EMERITUS, HARVARD LAW SCHOOL: My argument succeeds, there's no need for witnesses. Indeed, there's no need for even
arguments -- any further arguments. If the House charges, do not include impeachable offenses, that's really the end of the matter and the Senate
should vote to acquit or even to dismiss.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANDERSON: Well, let's bring in Florida Congressman Mike -- Michael Waltz. He's the -- sorry, sir. He's called the impeachment process secretive,
unfair, and partisan. Congressman Waltz, thank you for joining us. What do you make of what you just heard that from Alan Dershowitz?
REP. MICHAEL WALTZ, (R-FL): Well, I think he makes -- he certainly makes sense and certainly has the background to make these constitutional
arguments like at the end of the day, the two articles that were sent over which was basically not cooperating with Congress, which I think sets a
very -- a very, very difficult precedent and one that's dangerous for presidents going forward, and that the Congress does not have the
constitutional right to hear anything it wants that can be claimed under executive privilege.
In the past, we've had the courts determine what that means and make those determinations. But Speaker Pelosi said, on the one hand, we don't have
time for the courts. This is so urgent. But on the other hand, then she sat on the articles for yet another month.
So, look, at the end of the day, I can tell you speaking to Floridians and speaking to voters all the time, they are very frustrated with this entire
process. It looks to them like a lot of politicians doing nothing but fighting, rather than doing things that affect their everyday lives.
Prescription drugs, immigration, the potholes, they hit on the way to the town hall where they were telling me this. All of those other issues. And I
think a lot of this because it's drug on for so long, between lower investigations and then -- and then now this.
For the last several years, it's getting a lot of its getting lost in the noise. People want this to be done and they want to move forward and have
their elected officials do things that affect their everyday lives.
ANDERSON: Right. You have called this process secretive, unfair, and partisan.
WALTZ: Yes.
ANDERSON: And perhaps our viewers will remember you as one of the GOP members, you forced their way into the hearing back in October.
WALTZ: Right.
ANDERSON: Listen. So, with the greatest of respect, the House managers, those who are now prosecuting this trial in the Senate have called
President Trump's conduct, the framer's worst nightmare.
And do you have any sympathy at this point? I mean, do you genuinely think this is all a hoax and a complete waste of time. Hand on heart, sir.
WALTZ: Here it is. Right there on my heart, as Speaker Pelosi said earlier last year, impeachment -- impeaching -- you know, the co-equal -- head of
the co-equal branch that was duly elected by millions of American voters should be bipartisan. It should be compelling. And there should be a very,
very clear crime involved.
We're not seeing any of that in the process that the House went through the accused, which is just basic fair due process was not allowed to call
witnesses. The investigation was done in secret, in a secure compartmented facility. Yet, every one of the briefings that they had was unclassified.
I, as a sitting member of congress repeatedly asked to see the transcripts and were denied by the other side. That's why I went down into that
facility and said, please, I've been asking for months, your voters are no more important than my 1 million Floridians that are asking me questions
about all of this.
So, and at the end of the day, it was a completely pipe -- it was a completely partisan vote.
[10:39:59]
WALTZ: The only bipartisan vote were the few Democrats who said this does not rise to the level of impeachment. There may be some things that are
inappropriate, maybe things that they don't like, but that is not impeachable. That's not treason. That's not bribery, and that is not a high
crime and misdemeanor in my estimation, from the very limited amount of information that we were able to get.
And also, the other side was not able to call its witnesses. So, there are a lot of issues which is --
ANDERSON: Sure.
WALTZ: And it was not in keeping with what was done in Clinton. It was not in keeping with what was done under Nixon. And those are my issues with it.
ANDERSON: Then, a couple of important points that we need to clear up and keep your answers short if you will, so I can get through all of this.
WALTZ: Sure.
ANDERSON: Former National Security advisor John Bolton, claims he is willing to testify. He reckons his testimony would be quote, illuminating.
What does he mean by that do you think and should he testify?
WALTZ: Well, look, the issue of executive privilege has been -- has been invoked since George Washington -- since our founding. And it is a very --
it's a very credible and long-standing issue.
Either branch of government, the legislative or the executive does not have just a constitutional right to the correspondence, the advice to the
conversations of the other side.
Our courts have always worked that out. They should in this case. But Speaker Pelosi said we don't have time for the courts. We don't have time
because this is so urgent, yet cannot then explain why she then sat on the articles that undercut the credibility of that argument.
Look under Nixon and Clinton, those issues were settled in the courts before it went -- before the Congress and it should be here too. And if
that's what happens with Bolton, then, so be it. He will be ordered by the courts to go forward.
ANDERSON: A couple of other things I want to just get your thoughts on.
WALTZ: Sure.
ANDERSON: Mr. Trump's legal team claim that his calls with the Ukrainian president were -- and I quote, perfectly legal, completely appropriate, and
taking him further into our national interests.
I've got a -- don't need to remind you those are the same transcripts being used to impeach him, of course.
WALTZ: Yes.
ANDERSON: Is Washington just too rabidly partisan now to get anything done or be seen clearly?
WALTZ: Yes. I have to tell you this, I cannot overemphasize with six committees in the House of Representatives working on this in one way or
another the things that aren't getting done, the opportunity cost, and that's what I hear from voters.
What happened to prescription drugs, transportation, immigration, health care reform? What happened, all of those things that we're paying you, our
elected officials to get done?
And that there is going to be a real -- there's a real issue there, I think for Democrats and the polls going forward. And we'll see, you know, we'll
see what price they pay at the ballot box in 2020
ANDERSON: Finally, sir, I want to get your thoughts on the U.S. position with regard to Libya.
WALTZ: Right.
ANDERSON: An extremely important conference going on in Berlin, as we speak. With I have to say, you know, the biggest players involved there and
we know this is a conflict full of foreign intervention.
Here is what to Libya experts, right in the New York Times. "Continued American ambivalence on Libya, or worse, active support for General Hifter
could push Libya into greater conflict. This discord could strengthen the Islamic State, which carried out a spate of attacks in Libya last year."
What do you make of these comments? And should the U.S. step up its involvement in Libya?
WALTZ: Yes.
ANDERSON: Back off? What do you understand to be D.C.'s position with regard the country at this point?
WALTZ: Well, look, I think this is a classic case of we intervened under the Obama administration, and then we didn't do what was necessary to kind
of win the peace in the aftermath, and that's really unfortunate.
I am glad to see Secretary Pompeo, National Security Advisor O'Brian, engaged in this conference. At the end of the day, I hope we can get a
ceasefire between the G&A in Tripoli, the internationally-backed government and Haftar. Because I do think there's a real risk of this devolving into
other chaos like Syria did with powers.
Now, we have Turkey on one side, Russia, Egypt, in the UAE on the other side. We have Qatar involved. I do think the Europeans need to step up
their game. I'm happy to see this conference.
I think from the U.S. perspective, we worry about and I worry about the Islamic State and other terrorist groups emerging again in the chaos, in
the violence. I also worry about Russia seeking a warm water port on the Mediterranean in addition to what it has in Syria, on NATO southern flank.
[10:45:01]
WALTZ: So, the United States needs to lead from a diplomatic perspective. I think the Europeans need to step up with this, right on their Southern
doorsteps, and NATO needs to be heavily involved from a military perspective.
But I am glad to see U.S. leadership engaged in this -- in this conference.
ANDERSON: Call it what you will, Sir. Thank you. It's a pleasure speaking to you.
WALTZ: All right.
ANDERSON: And thank you for giving us your time on a Sunday ahead of what is an extremely busy and historic week in Washington.
Still to come, H and M are no longer H or H. Harry and Megan, walk away from their title's duties and some believe the U.K. for good. There is new
news out of our resident royal watcher. That's up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
EDWARD VIII, FORMER KING OF THE UNITED KINGDOM: After long and anxious considerations, I have determined to renounce the throne to which I
succeeded on the death of my father. And I am now communicating this my final and irrevocable decision.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANDERSON: And with that Edward became that rarest of people, the retitle abdicated king. Indeed his nice Princess Elizabeth may never have become
queen had it not been for Edward, walking away from what he was born to be all because of the love of his life.
Standing by him here, the American divorcee, Wallis Simpson. Now, a lifetime later, the queen watching her grandson, well, someone say do much
the same thing. Harry and his wife Meghan waving goodbye, so long, sayonara to the family business or what's that going to look like exactly.
Let's find out with Max Foster. He's coming to us from no less than established within right outside Buckingham Palace. In the couple's new
home, Canada, Paula Newton's been out about looking into their plans.
So, Max, if anybody watching this is confused, we thought we sort of knew what was going on a little bit last week, but now we really know what's
going on. What do they giving up?
MAX FOSTER, CNN ROYAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, it is an abdication, they giving up their royal duties. So, what we had was a situation where they outlines
a sort of hybrid role, half in, half out that they wanted to pursue going forward.
The queen's foot down and the very firm way to say you need to be in or out, and they've chosen out. They have to repay public funds used to
renovate their home. They are going to pay rent on that home. They're going to lose -- but not to lose their HRH titles, but not going to -- they'll
not allowed to use them anymore.
And this is all about trying to have build a future where they can pursue commercial deals without compromising the royal brand. Does raise a
question, Becky, about whether or not they'll be able to keep that Sussex royal brands that's in discussion currently. But you can imagine, it's the
talk of the town.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
[10:50:17]
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's not the best P.R. for royal family, especially, Meghan.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I feel like they are off there to witness of you. Because as much as their publicity is racism towards her down there. I feel
like this is mostly Britain that are tormenting her and telling her to think, to say anything that is to say is. So, I feel like it is better.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And she has had to give up a lot to be with Harry. And I think it's pretty cool that she gets back to America and do what she wants.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I believe its racism, to be honest. Because it's quite different the way they treat William and Kate compared to Meghan and Harry.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FOSTER: So, they're going to spend most of their time we're told in North America. Paula will tell you they can only spend a limited amount of time
in Canada, suggests they could be spending a lot more time in the United States as well.
So, they've extracted themselves from the royal family as working royals. And now they have to build a new future, Becky.
ANDERSON: Yes, absolutely. So, we've heard from some of those that Max spoke to about how they feel about Meghan and Harry in the U.K. What about
there in Canada? They rolling out the right royal red carpet for them.
PAULA NEWTON, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: You know, Canadian way, right? Very, very modest as one person tweeted at me, Canadians are
greeting the Royals with open arms if not open wallets. Becky, take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
NEWTON: It's apparently this snapshot of a low key life in Canada that Harry and Meghan so want to make their own.
Why do you think they picked Canada?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Because we're awesome.
NEWTON: All modesty aside, a good reason for them to live here is because they're wanted here.
You would welcome them then?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: As I would welcome anybody, I would hope.
NEWTON: It may not be a red carpet, but --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: People love the royal family and people just bring some good prestige to the country. So I'm all for it.
NEWTON: And if Canadian taxpayers if the foot part of the bill?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That might be a little different story.
NEWTON: And in Canada, the duchess already knows what she's getting into. She's made a life here before. After living in this house here in Toronto,
the duchess of Sussex pretty much knows what life in Canada will be like. She can walk Archie 'in a stroller, and neighborhoods like this. And it may
give the couple the kind of private life they're really craving.
They had a reminder of that on their Christmas vacation in British Columbia. Harry and Meghan were on a hike and stopped to help this couple
take a picture. No royal fanfare, no autographs, just regular folks sharing a moment.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Wish just a Happy New Year and we said Happy New Year. Thank you so much and they were off.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
NEWTON: What's interesting here is the fact that they have stepped away from those official working royal duties. Actually makes it easier for
Canada in terms of them just being visitors here for a short period of time and it doesn't involve taxpayer money or, at least, it shouldn't.
There is still that issue about security that is very complicated. And discussions are ongoing, Becky.
ANDERSON: Yes. All right. Good stuff to both of you. Thank you very much indeed. Well, Canada may seem cool and all, but one of its -- a little too
cool, depending where they land. Harry and Meggie, Meggie -- Meghan might want to pack their shovels for those harsh winters.
Just look at these pictures from over the weekend. In Newfoundland. A record-smashing snowstorm blew through the region. Now people grabbing
their shovels, unfortunately, to dig their way out.
More news after a quick break. Stay with us folks.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[10:55:57]
ANDERSON: Well, some most of his driving isn't that exciting. But in the U.S. State of Georgia, officials tried to change that. The transportation
department held a contest to see who can come up with some light-hearted traffic signs. So, behold the winners.
First place, says, "If you missed your exit, it's OK, we made more up ahead." Second place, "Better late than never." Third place -- some good
advice here. "Drive like your momma is watching." Also tied for third place, "You are allowed to use turn signals. Dot, dot, dot, we checked."
And with the entire list of winners, it's trending on the web site cnn.com. You know how to find that.
I'm Becky Anderson. That was your first hour of CONNECT THE WORLD. Do stay with us. We'll back for another hour after this short break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
END
