Return to Transcripts main page
Amanpour
Governments Reuse to Act on Climate Crisis; COP25 Failed on Climate Action; John Kerry, Former U.S. Secretary of State, is Interviewed About the Climate Crisis; Trump Impeachment Will Die Quickly Says Senator Lindsey Graham; Former Governor Bobby Jindal (R-LA), is Interviewed About Trump's Impeachment; China Levels Uyghur Cemeteries; Soccer Player, Mesut Ozil, Criticizes China's Treatment of Uyghurs; HIV Threat Rising in Rural America; Interview With Uyghur Activist Ferkat Jawdat. Aired 1-2p ET
Aired December 16, 2019 - 13:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:00:00]
CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CHIEF INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hello, everyone, and welcome to "Amanpour." Here's what's coming up.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If no one starts, then there is no chance.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: Action stalls at this year's climate summit. Former U.S. Secretary of State, John Kerry, tells me how he's joining the fight to get
the world moving on this crisis.
Plus --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY): There would be no difference between the president's position and our position.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: Republicans circle the wagons ahead of a potential Senate impeachment trial. The former Republican governor of Louisiana, Bobby
Jindal, joins me.
Then --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
AZIZ ISA ELKUN, WRITER AND ACTIVIST: This is not a normal state, normal country can't do like this. This is pure evilness.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: Our special report, China level some of the cemeteries of its Muslim minority. I'm joined by a Uyghur-American activist whose mother is
trapped inside China.
And --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STEVEN W. THRASHER, DANIEL RENBERG CHAIR. NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY: I've talked to these sources in West Virginal and rural America where they'll
say that they know doctors who've never done a major (INAUDIBLE) in their career.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: The journalist revealing the surge of HIV in rural America.
Welcome to the program, everyone. I'm Christiane Amanpour in London.
The world is finding it harder to breathe because, yes, the air is getting dirtier as governments refuse to act as they should on the climate crisis.
A two-week summit, COP25 in Madrid, closed on Sunday ending with key nations dragging their feet over regulating the global carbon market.
Despite desperate pleas from activists, carbon cutting was kicked down the road with a comprise that will see new plans negotiated next year at COP26
in Glasgow. The U.N. secretary general, Antonio Guterres, signaled his disappointment saying the international community lost an important
opportunity.
Former secretary of state, John Kerry, is here in London promoting his climate initiative, World War Zero. Remember, he was in the Obama
administration when the 2015 Paris Climate Accords was signed and the United States played a huge part in securing that global deal. And he's
joining me now.
Welcome back to our program.
JOHN KERRY, FORMER U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: I'm delighted to be with you.
AMANPOUR: You know, ever since you left the administration, you have really been doing a lot of work on this one issue. So, tell me, you were
at the COP25 in Madrid. And I said key nations. The United States is one of the nations that is being blamed for holding up meaningful progress.
KERRY: Well, it should be blamed. Unfortunately, I hate to say it as an American. But the fact is, Brazil and the United States were key among
those reluctant to move forward. Australia was another. And to some degree, Saudi Arabia.
But, you know, the absence of the United States of America as the leader is the biggest restraint on the ability to move forward. When President Obama
was in, you know, Vice President Biden, they were all invested in moving forward and getting Paris done. And so, we went to China. I remember
going myself to negotiate with President Xi, we brought the Chinese on board.
And a year later, President Xi and President Obama were able to stand up and offer leadership to the world. And we said we were going to reduce
emissions by the following. That is what created some of the momentum that brought us China.
This time, you have the Trump administration, not just not there in a meaningful way, leading the charge, you have President Trump himself
blaming China for the problem of the global climate change and says it's a hoax. That it's a Chinese hoax. This is ignoring all science, ignoring
all evidence, the fact is we're going to blow by the 1.5, the danger 2.
If you do everything that we set out to do in Paris, you're still going to see a warming of up to 3.7 degrees. So, we're in trouble. And the absence
of success in Madrid is infuriating and everybody ought to be really motivated and angry. And now, we have to go to Glasgow next year, raise
the ambition and get the job done.
AMANPOUR: How is it really going to get done? I mean, do you think it will get done? When you here Antonio Guterres being so disappointed --
KERRY: Yes.
AMANPOUR: -- and when see the three or four countries that you've talked about dragging their feet and putting such a big role on, you know, on the
final sort of communique and the rest of it.
KERRY: Right.
AMANPOUR: And -- but even up until then, countries hadn't been meeting their Paris targets. Even before Madrid.
KERRY: Well countries have been on a track to try to get there. In the United States, for instance, many people don't know this, we have 38 states
that have passed renewable laws for use for renewable energy. We have 1,200 mayors or more, mayor of every major city in America is still in
Paris. So, Donald Trump pulled out of Paris with the American people, 80 percent of them represented in those states are still in it.
[13:05:00]
So, I think we're going to make progress. The raise here, Christiane, is whether or not we're going get there in time. Right now, we're not. And
that's why young people are demonstrating. I mean, they have every reason to be angry about this. And they are the conscience of the world right now
saying, hey, adults, get the job done.
AMANPOUR: Yes.
KERRY: But they didn't get it done in Madrid.
AMANPOUR: So, I'm going to play, obviously, Greta Thunberg. And, of course, Greta Thunberg is really a personality who has mobilized the youth
and she's captured the world's imagination. She gets to talk in front of major world leaders at major conferences. She's been called, you know,
"Time" magazine's person of the year. And she was at Madrid.
KERRY: Which upset Donald Trump who didn't get it. So, we --
AMANPOUR: Now, Secretary Kerry --
KERRY: Well, I mean, it was obvious. He -- troll. You know, they're exchanging tweets, for heaven's sakes.
AMANPOUR: Well, yes. I mean, he is trolling a woman who is on the --
KERRY: He's petty and smallminded, you know, after a young teenager.
AMANPOUR: -- a teenager who is on the spectrum.
KERRY: Correct. For him to do that is disgraceful. He's a bully. And I think everybody understands that.
AMANPOUR: Well, let's just talk about climate for the moment and let's just see what she said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GRETA THUNBERG, CLIMATE ACTIVIST: I still believe that the biggest danger is not inaction. The real danger is when politicians and CEOs are making
it look like real action is happening when, in fact, almost nothing is being done apart from clever accounting and creative PR.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: Is she right about that? Clever --
KERRY: She's telling the truth. Yes, absolutely. You can see expenditures by powerful corporations where they say, we're going green,
and they have wonderful advertisements. Then they're funding some of the people who are pushing denial and pushing the procrastination.
So, look, let me just say something for Greta, and she said it herself, she doesn't want awards. She's not trying to -- you know, she's scolding
adults because the adults aren't getting the job done. And the fact is, that she can't vote in terms of an election in a country. None of these
young people have votes in the board rooms.
So, who's going to get it done, Christiane? A kid in school today in the first and second and third grade is not going to be able to vote before the
10 years scientists have given us are up. So, it falls to us. The adults have to get this done. And it's doable. Moreover, there's a terrific --
there are a number of studies now but business community has been leading and they're beginning, in certain businesses, people like Paul Polman,
former CEO of Unilever and the B-Team, (INAUDIBLE) and people have been successful.
CEOs will tell you, as many of us who are trying to underscore, the energy market, which is the solution to climate change is the biggest market the
world has seen. 4.5 to 5 billion users today is going to go up to 9 billion users in the next 30 years and it's a multitrillion dollar market.
So, any country that doesn't move in this direction is making enormous economic mistake for its people.
AMANPOUR: And not only that, you say these young kids can't vote. You're right. They can't for several years. But a lot of young kids, or young
adults, are voting based on this issue. That's one thing, in the u. U.S. and elsewhere. But the other thing is, what about -- you know, you've come
here because you are, you know, unveiling and trying to move along your initiative.
KERRY: World War Zero.
AMANPOUR: Yes. World War Zero. I spoke to Michael Bloomberg whose know jumped into the president race and who's known for his billions, at least
$1 billion, that he has poured into combatting this change --
KERRY: Yes.
AMANPOUR: -- across cities and states in the United States. Why is it not working? What could you do to make a tipping point and get governments --
the only people who can make a change make a change?
KERRY: A lot of what the private sector is doing is, in fact, working. Mercedes, for instance, has declared they're going to be terminating the
internal combustion engine by 2039. They are going to be at 50 percent towards that goal by 2030. So, some people are moving.
I think that eventually we're going to get to a low carbon, no net carbon economy. The issue is, are we going it get there fast enough? Right now,
we are not. And what is dangerous, Christiane, is what is called feedback loops. You know, you have the ice melting. But it isn't just the ice
melting, as the ice opens up more dark water, that absorbs more heat than the ice melts faster. You have permafrost melting in the Arctic, in the
Tundra, and as that melts, methane is being released.
That methane is 20 times more dangerous and damaging than CO2. So, that's a feedback loop. You have the thawing, you get the methane, whoops. All
of a sudden, things are going even much faster down the -- you know, spiraling downwards.
[13:10:00]
AMANPOUR: OK. So, this, again, brings us to politics because it is actually a political issue, and no matter how much we individually do and
the private sector does, governments have to do it because it's infrastructural.
KERRY: No. Actually, I disagree with that. Governments have to help set the construct.
AMANPOUR: OK.
KERRY: Governments have to set goals and targets. Governments have to create tax credit. Governments have to allocate --
AMANPOUR: Those big jobs.
KERRY: Those are things. But in the end, I don't believe it's going to be a government that makes the discovery of battery storage that's going to
shape the whole deal.
AMANPOUR: No, no, no. I understand that. But lay the --
KERRY: Or new fuel or whatever.
AMANPOUR: But they have to lay the construct for this to happen.
KERRY: Yes.
AMANPOUR: So, and that pushes --
KERRY: They have to lead and do an agreement, as we in Paris --
AMANPOUR: Right.
KERRY: -- Madrid. Now, Glasgow raises more stakes.
AMANPOUR: OK.
KERRY: You've got to raise the ambition very significantly in Glasgow. And a lot of us -- World War Zero, for instance, is an effort to marry the
grassroots and the grass tops. So, we have generals and admirals and national security people, the former secretary of events and others, many
walks of life who want to try to reinforce the grassroots movement that is saying we need to act now. And hopefully we can open a new conversation
with everybody in the world. So, it's not polarizing. People --
AMANPOUR: Well, talking about polarizing, Secretary Kerry, we live in a very polarized world.
KERRY: Yes.
AMANPOUR: Whether it's about this or whether it's about just basic politics. You saw what happened here. You're here in England. You've
seen the election result --
KERRY: Yes.
AMANPOUR: -- that took place on Thursday over one issue, and it was Brexit.
KERRY: Yes.
AMANPOUR: So, what would be the liberals or the left, your kind of people were creamed --
KERRY: Yes.
AMANPOUR: -- to coin a political phrase.
KERRY: Well, I think -- look, I follow British politics. I'm not an expert in it. I don't claim to be at all. But it's very clear that the
Labour leader had a difficult time articulating and conveying to people the sense of confidence about the future.
AMANPOUR: Do you think it has any spin over to the U.S. race?
KERRY: Well, in the sense, yes, I think if you're positions are way out there and people don't have confidence in where you're heading, that's a
problem, for sure.
AMANPOUR: And you've supported your old friend and colleague, Vice President Biden.
KERRY: Yes. But I'm not supporting him. As I said, when I endorsed Joe Biden, I'm not supporting him because he's, you know, been there for a
while. I'm supporting him because I know him so well. And I know that he is a person who is calm and capable, that he is committed to a sensible
approach. He wants to grow Obamacare. He wants universal coverage for everybody. Why are we dividing this notion?
AMANPOUR: But --
KERRY: But he wants to give an option of a choice for people as to what they want to get in.
AMANPOUR: But is there -- so, you're basically sort of tacitly kind of complaining about a Medicare for All, which hasn't --
KERRY: No, I'm not targeting -- I'm not talking about any other candidate. I'm simply explaining why I believe Joe Biden is the best situated to begin
on day one. The world is in disorder right now. There are massive number of failed and failing states. We need leadership more than ever before. I
believe that Joe Biden has the relationships, the experience, the ability on day one to begin to help heal a world, to begin to restore NATO's unity,
to begin to bring Europe back together around the values that have united and motivated Europe ever since World War II. That should not just be
thrown overboard, willingly (ph).
AMANPOUR: It takes a bit of a centrist or a moderate, somebody center-left or center-right to do that. Is there any room for that today? Look where
the parties are.
KERRY: You bet there. You wait and see. I think -- look, I'm not advocating, you know, one ideology. What I am advocating is the United
States of America has to restore its position of leadership. President Trump, regrettably, has attacked leaders who are our allies. He has
attacked NATO. He has actually praised demagogues, people who do not support democracy, who are trying to pull democracies apart. And everybody
notices that.
People feel the impact of that. It is contributing to chaos and disorder. I believe we have to get back to the America that understands its power in
the world to be an entity that goes to the United Nations and goes to the Security Council and enforces the rights of Uyghurs, who you're going talk
about shortly.
AMANPOUR: Yes.
KERRY: Who pushes for the value system that organize the U.N. and the world in the first place. That doesn't mean everything is correct with
every aspect of multilateralism, but the basic values, the idea that we have to work as a planet to push back against Ebola, aids, human rights,
all these other issues, that's still an organizing principle and I believe the United States will reinforce that in our next election.
AMANPOUR: Secretary of State, John Kerry, former secretary, thank you very much, indeed, for joining us. And we're going to get a counter point in a
moment.
Just for instance, when it comes to climate, the Republican Party of President Trump, as you've just heard, is the most powerful party in any
democracy to treat man-made climate change as a hoax.
[13:15:00]
Meantime, it's the impeachment week before Christmas and Democrats had published their roadmap to censuring President Trump, releasing the full
658-page report which lays out in detail the evidence behind the charges of obstruction of justice and abuse of power. And the vote may take place in
the House this week.
But when the trial comes in the Senate, the odds are, of course, in the president's favor. Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, saying that he
will be coordinating with the White House on legal strategy. While Republican senator, Lindsey Graham, has made it clear that his mind is
already made up. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): This thing will come to the Senate and it will die quickly and I will do everything that I can to make it die quickly. I
don't want to call anybody. I don't need to hear from Hunter Biden, I don't need to hear from Joe Biden. We can deal with that outside of
impeachment. I don't want to talk to Pompeo. I don't want to talk to Pence. I want to hear the House make their case based on the record they
established in the House and I want to vote.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: For more on this, I'm joined by former governor of Louisiana, Bobby Jindal. He was also contender for the Republican presidential
nomination in 2016 and he's joining me now from Baton Rouge.
Welcome to the program, Governor Jindal.
FMR. GOV. BOBBY JINDAL (R-LA): Thank you for having me.
AMANPOUR: I guess you were listening to Secretary Kerry, and we'll get to that in a moment, about leadership and about America's role in the world
and the indispensable nature of America's reach and its power for good, alliances, leadership and the like. But can I just first ask you, what do
you make of Republican senators, obviously, a Republican-dominated Senate already saying that their minds are made up, that whatever is presented,
their minds are made up?
JINDAL: Look, I think this whole thing has been political theater from the beginning. The House Democrats were clear even before the debate began,
even before they heard their first witness, they were determined to impeach President Trump. They knew the Senate was not going to remove him. This
has all been political theater from the beginning.
I think the Democrats thought they were going to hurt President Trump by doing this, I think they're hurting the country. Impeachment is a very,
very serious responsibility for Congress. I was in Congress. I take the powers of Congress very seriously. My concern -- and everybody knew at the
start of this, the House was in a vote to impeach him, the Senate is going to vote to acquit him.
My concern is, what kind of president are we setting for the next president? What happens when the next president faces a House run by a
different -- the other political party? Does that mean the next Democratic president facing a Republican House is also going to be impeached?
And so, I think the House Democrats have had a very bad precedent here. I don't think Speaker Pelosi actually wanted to do this. I think she
understood how bad this was for the country, how bad it was for her party. I think she was forced to do this by the radical elements in her party.
So, I think the quicker we get done with this and move back to the business of the country, the better. Especially in an election year. If the
Democrats feel that strongly, they should make their case to the American people and let the voters decide in November.
AMANPOUR: I want to ask you a question, because, you know, we hear -- I can only say we hear, that there are a number of Republican grandees, a
number of traditional conservative Republicans, maybe you're one of them, who have a huge amount of discomfort with the person and personality of
Donald Trump, even if they're happy that the Republicans are in government, that the certain policies are enacted that you like, but nonetheless, are
quite unhappy about him.
You wouldn't know that from what they say in public. Here is Carly Fiorina who was once a GOP presidential contender. She's a businesswoman,
obviously. And she's recently just been talking to our Poppy Harlow. Just take a listen to what she recently said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CARLY FIORINA, FMR. U.S. REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I think it is vital that he be impeached. Whether removed this close to an election, I
don't know. But I think the conduct is impeachable.
POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR, NEWSROOM: What does the Republican Party today stand for?
FIORINA: I don't know. Loyalty to Trump is what I think it stands for.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: And when pressed, she said she didn't know who she would vote for in 2020, presumably depending on who the Democrats put up.
I mean, what do you say to that? Here is a Republican who says the president should be impeached. And yet, might even vote for him again.
JINDAL: Well, I would say two things. One, certainly, the president is guilty of whacky tweets and he gives many examples of intemperate behavior
but you have to contrast that with record highs in the stock market, record lows unemployment. You look at just last week what he was able tok
accomplish, his 50th conservative judge appointed to the federal pallet courts. He looked at a new trade deal with Mexico and Canada. You saw
interim deal, trade deal with China.
[13:20:00]
You saw a new parental leave policy in the Defense Authorization bill. He had a pretty good week despite that the impeachment article is being drawn
up in the House of Representatives. The second thing I would do is look at the contrast.
So, on the one hand, you've got a president that's actually delivered far more conservative policy wins than even I expected, and I ended up
endorsing him in the last election largely because of the judges I thought he would appoint and because of my concerns the Democrats would keep and
expand Obamacare. He's done more than that.
But then the second thing, is if you look at what the Democrats are actually promising in the Democratic presidential primary. You look at the
Green New Deal, you look at open borders, you look at gun confiscation, you look at Medicare for All, that would take away private health insurance
from tens of trillions of American, you will get tens of trillions of dollars of new spending.
You look at these wacky socialist policies and there's no wonder Republican and conservative voters are saying, we would rather President Trump. Now,
some of them, like you said, they may not like every tweet, they may not like everything he does, but they do like the results and they certainly
don't want the socialists.
You know, you had a very good question for Secretary Kerry previously when you talked him about some the far-left things that were happening in the
U.K., and you asked about whether that translated over into the States and what concerns the Democratic Party should learn from the recent results in
the U.K.'s election, I think there are great large warning signs for the Democratic Party. If they don't heed those warning signs, I think they're
going to the far-left and I think that's going to be very be bad for them, not only in 2020 but going forward.
AMANPOUR: So, as you know, the centrist moderate candidate is ahead in this race. We'll see where it goes. But let me ask you about your party
and yourself.
Look, you are a a governor of -- a former governor, you've lived the immigrant dream in America, right? Your parents, yourself, you've been to
great schools. You've had great success. How do you marry the really anti-immigration policies that come out of the White House, and you know
they are, and what people have called in other instances, you know, borderline racist policies? Is that worth it, a high stock market, you
know, all these federal judges, cutting taxes for corporations and stuff? I mean, I guess, where do you draw the line in terms of conservative
principles?
JINDAL: Look, I think -- I don't think there's anything wrong, I think we should secure our borders, that shouldn't want people to come into our
country illegally. That's been longstanding Republican policy. My personal views on immigration is that immigration can be very, very good
for our country. I think people that want to come here legally, that want to work hard, that want to assimilate make huge contributions. I think
it's good for them, I think it's good America that they come into our country.
And so, for me, there's nothing inconsistent with saying, let's stop illegal immigration, but I also think we did make legal immigration
something that's easier for folks who want to follow the rules. And one of the things that doesn't get talked about enough in immigration debate is
this whole issue of assimilation. For me, it's about more than just learning English. It really is. For people that want to come here, they
have to want to adopt our values.
The great thing about America is, it doesn't matter whether you've been here five minutes or if you're family has been here for hundreds of years,
we're all the same, we're equally American, but you have to embrace basic principles, principles like religious liberty, principles like the
protection of minority rights, principles like equality for all irrespective of gender. For example, promoting women's rights. It also
means principles, for example, like limited government.
And as long as people are ready to embrace those principles, they don't want to come here and change fundamentally what it means to be an American,
I think that we should welcome folks who want to follow the rules and come. Again, I think, not only is it good for them, I think that's actually good
for America as well.
AMANPOUR: Well, that's where you stand a little bit apart then from the administration because they're also trying to limit legal immigration. But
let me ask you this, regarding America's place in the world. You heard Secretary Kerry, how do you feel, you know, with President Trump who's made
it almost like a principle of his disruptive foreign policy, as he himself called it, you know, putting allies, you know, almost treating them like
adversaries, you know, bracing questions about whether the United States is so committed to being the leader of NATO?
And particularly, you know, your own state has had massive climate and weather issues. How do you feel about your party now in government
basically calling it a hoax and doing deregulation instead of regulation on these issues?
JINDAL: Ever a good question. So, first of all, I think it was a good thing that President Trump got us out of the Paris deal. I think it was a
good deal he got us out of the Iran deal that Secretary Kerry both -- both of those were done by the Obama administration.
I do think it has been a good thing that he has come back and renegotiated the deals with Mexico and Canada, the new NAFTA that strengthens the
interest and protects American workers. I think he'll get more Democratic and Republican votes for this trade treaty than any previous trade treaty.
I think it is a good thing he's taken on China.
Now, I think that many presidents have talked about taking on China for intellectual property theft, for currency manipulation, for structurally
keeping American firms and exports out of their economy, but that's all they did. All they did was talk about it. President Trump is actually
been the first president to do something about it.
[13:25:00]
To your question, to your point, I would prefer that he actually build coalitions to take on China. I think that's an area where he's been very
strong and he's taken strong action. I think he could be even stronger if, for example, we brought Germany and the E.U. to the table with us as well
because they have some of the same manufacturing concerns that we have about China and they have some of the same concerns our companies have
about accessing the Chinese market. So, I think it has been a good thing.
You know, people talk about what is America First mean? And I think there are echoes of this in the U.K.'s election. The U.K. election was about
Brexit largely, I think it was about rejecting this multilateralism without (ph) embracing nationalism. I think you see echoes of that in President
Trump's foreign policy as well where many of his voters feel like some of these past multilateral agreements, for example, the Paris agreement
sacrifice America's economic interest to benefit other countries.
So, I think many of those voters, myself included, continue to applaud him for putting America's interests first, but I do think there's room for it
to bring our allies along. And when we confront China, for example, not only the E.U. --
AMANPOUR: OK.
JINDAL: -- you think about Japan, you think about South Korea, there are others that can work with us as well.
AMANPOUR: Thank you so much, Governor Bobby Jindal, for joining us from Baton Rouge.
And now, we turned to the underreported story of what is happening to China's Muslim minority known as Uyghurs. Arsenal star, Mesut Ozil, has
criticized China's treatment of Uyghurs and also the silence of the Muslim world. He is Turkish and Muslim himself.
In response, immediately pulled coverage of an Arsenal game from state TV and later, invited Ozil to Xinjiang where most Uyghurs live to see for
himself.
In our latest special report on the Uyghurs, Correspondent Matt Rivers, shows us the crack down by way of Uyghur cemeteries which are being
levelled and built over.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MATT RIVERS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: When Aziz Isa Elkun's his father died, it was too dangerous for him to go to the funeral in China. Aziz is an ethnic
Uyghur who lives in exile in North London but he grew up in a western Chinese region called Xinjiang, an area activist say is the center of an
unparalleled human rights crisis in the world today.
AZIZ ISA ELKUN, WRITER AND ACTIVIST: This is not a normal state, normal country can't do like this. This is pure evilness.
RIVERS: Xinjiang is where The United Nations says the Chinese government has detained hundreds of thousands of Muslim ethnic minorities including
Uyghurs over the p several years. Critics says China is doing that to try and to eliminate Islam within its borders. Some detainees are seen in
leaked video blindfolded and shackled as they're transferred between places.
Former detainees have told CNN they're kept in a massive network of detention camps where inside, allegations of torture abound. China's
government denies that and says they're just offering vocational training designed to fight extremism. But earlier this year, we tried to see those
camps for ourselves and were met with police.
Ma'am, can you tell me what is? Is this something that you don't want us to see?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Why are you here? You tell me, why are you here? Why you are here?
RIVERS: We're here to film what we believe is a camp.
In London, Aziz tells us his father was buried in this tomb near his family home in Central Xinjiang. In the past, he visited him the only way he
could, by using Google Earth to see to the tomb from above. But in June, the satellite image changed. Before rows of tombs, now a largely empty
flattened field.
What happened to your father's remains?
ELKUN: I don't know. I don't know. I have no idea.
RIVERS: In a month's long investigation, working with sources in the Uyghur community and analyzing hundreds of satellite images, CNN has found
more than 100 cemeteries that have been destroyed, most in just the last two years. Like this one, in the Town of Aksu, a cemetery first demolished
and redeveloped with a manmade pond, or this one in Xayar, distinctive white tombs levelled and simply built over.
The AFP first reported on this destruction and visited some sites. At three different places, they said they found human bones. CNN has also
found multiple government notices online. In one case, giving families just 15 days to move remains. We showed these images to Rian Thum, an
anthropologist who studies Islam in China and uses satellite imagery to study this region.
There's no doubt in your mind what that is?
RIAN THUM, UYGHUR HISTORIAN, UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM: Right. No. This is absolutely clear what it is. You can see the destruction encroaching.
And now, if you look at Google Earth today, you'll see that this sort of flat surface now covers everything. And that is a phenomenon stretching
right across the region of Xinjian.
RIVERS: In response, the Chinese government did not deny the cemetery destruction. They said in part, "governments in Xinjiang fully respect and
guarantee the freedom of all ethnic groups to choose cemeteries and funeral and burial methods."
[13:30:00]
In public documents, official reasons for the destruction include wanting to build -- quote -- "civilized cemeteries to promote progress."
Uyghur cemeteries are central to village life, a place to meet and connect one generation to the last.
THUM: It's akin to, for an American, seeing Arlington Cemetery razed and the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier dug up and paved over. It's a great act of
desecration and a kind of open insult to Uyghur culture.
RIVERS: Aziz believes it's a desecration that will have a backlash.
AZIZ ISA ELKUN, WRITER AND ACTIVIST: We cannot do anymore with them together, because they're committing genocide against the Uyghur people.
RIVERS: In Xinjiang, it seems even the dead can't rest.
Matt Rivers, CNN, London.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
AMANPOUR: So let's get more on this with Uyghur American activist Ferkat Jawdat. His mother has been caught up in Beijing's Uyghur reeducation
program, and she's still stuck in Xinjiang.
Ferkat, thank you so much for joining us from Washington. Welcome to the program.
Let me first ask you -- you just saw this report -- what do you think when you see that element of Uyghur culture and heritage being destroyed,
according to this report?
FERKAT JAWDAT, UYGHUR ACTIVIST: First of all, thanks for having me here today.
And then, second, it is really hard to see, because we most often talk about the concentration camps, but except the concentration camp, there is
many different aspects of the Uyghur culture, Uyghur identity are being destroyed.
Like, the kids like a couple of months old to teenage ages, they are being forced to separate from their own families, and then put into the state-run
orphan centers.
And then the adults, including my mother and my other relatives, my aunts, uncles, cousins, they were forced to send to concentration camps and then
stayed indefinitely. And then many of them, they are still in those places.
On the same time, there is destroyed cemeteries where the old people, even the old dead people, they can't even rest peacefully. So that's the
destruction from every single side of the Uyghur culture, Uyghur history, Uyghur identity.
And then it is -- it fits all the description, all the labels of the genocide and the cultural genocide.
AMANPOUR: So let me ask you, of course, about your mother, because, as we said, she was taken to the camp. Eventually, she has been released from
those camps. She spent time in prison, but she's now at home.
What are you able to -- how are you able to communicate with her? How is she? Is she free to come and go? Are you free to come and go?
JAWDAT: So, first of all, yes, she is released after spending more than 15 months between multiple camps and then a factory, and then also more than
three months in the prison.
But she was released from the camp or the prison, but, actually, she is in an open air prison right now. All the moment and then everything that we
talk to is, like, monitored by the Chinese police. So I can't even ask her about what was her experience during the 15 months in those places.
She just left from the hospital for the seventh time in six months that she was released yesterday. And then, this morning, I spoke to her only for
three minutes, because she had really high blood pressure.
Her blood pressure is already over 200. That's the condition that she is in right now.
AMANPOUR: Yes, we just saw a picture of her lying down, obviously in bed, looking in distress. And I know that she has not been well.
Can you tell me why she was hauled in? What is the aim of the Chinese government with the Uyghurs? We have seen this trove of papers that has
been released and gives a road map of what the Chinese think about this issue. Why, though, is this happening?
JAWDAT: The Chinese government used to say or still say that those camps are for vocational training or job training for the terrorists or the
separatists.
But the 403 pages from "The New York Times" that shows those camps not for the terrorists, actually for the normal people, like my mother.
She -- we are Muslim, but she doesn't even wear a scarf. She doesn't go to mosque. And then my aunts and my uncles, they were sent to prisons right
now. They were the government officials, worked for the Chinese government for more than 30 years.
[13:35:05]
Those documents saying that, like, the people who were put in those camps, they got infected in their minds.
But there is -- there is -- it's just, I will say, bullshit that they are using as a reason to lock up more than three million people, by the
estimates from the U.S. Pentagon.
But, actually, what they are doing is just destroying the culture, the identity, and then just getting rid of the whole Uyghur nation as a whole.
AMANPOUR: Can I ask you a question? Because, obviously, we see terrible things happening to Myanmar's Muslim population, the Rohingyas, who've been
chased out, essentially.
And you saw -- and you have had many sort of prominent people support the Uyghur cause. Like, the latest is Mesut Ozil.
What do you think of tweets like his? And, also, what do you think of his complaint that the Muslim world is silent on the treatment of this Muslim
minority in China?
JAWDAT: It is really important.
As a Uyghur American myself, and then especially who got his mother spent that long time in those camps, seeing that international soccer star
speaking about the Uyghur people gives us the hope that our stories are being listened by the world, that people are knowing, they're paying
attention about it.
And then, also, it's really important that he pointed out the many Muslim countries, they are still staying silent. What happens if a Western, like
U.K. or the U.S., locks up maybe 1,000 or 1,500 Muslims in the camp, force them to eat pork or drink alcohol?
What will be the response from the Islamic countries, like Saudi Arabia, Turkey, or Qatar, or many others?
But there is more than couple million people in those camps are being forced to drink alcohol, eat pork, and then the Muslim girls, our own
sisters, are being forced to -- Han Chinese, and then they are being sold as a sex slave with the forced labors.
AMANPOUR: Oh, dear. Oh, my God. It sounds so awful.
I want to ask you, because you're talking out. You're an activist. Your mother is still there. Other members of your family are still there.
Obviously, China has reacted furiously to outside intervention.
What -- are you -- do you think it could make things worse for your mother, the fact that you -- that you speak out? Or are you afraid?
JAWDAT: It did.
My mom was detained last year February, and then I waited more than seven months for her to be released, because I was scared that, if I speak out,
the Chinese government will punish her.
But, instead, they locked up my aunt, uncles, cousins. Eight people from my direct family were sent to those camps. And then, when I start speaking
out, every time when I speak to a media or give speeches at different events, they threatened my uncles, cousins, and even my 75-years-old
grandmother.
They bring them to the police station and force them to sign contracts. Three days after I had a meeting with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in
March this year, they transferred my aunt and my uncle to the prisons, and then later on sentenced them for seven and eight years.
So even -- even just speaking to you here for my people, my family, yes, it is going to put my mother and then my other family members' life in the
risk.
But it is the only way to let the world know, because the Chinese government, they don't allow the CNN or the BBC, as you showed earlier.
They don't allow the international media to access those places and then let the world see what's really happening in those dark cells.
AMANPOUR: Ferkat Jawdat, thank you so much. We're glad to hear from you. And we wish your mother well.
And we turn now back to the United States, where an estimated 1.1 million people are living with HIV. And it's gay black men who are most at risk
right now.
Steven R. (sic) Thrasher is the Daniel Renberg chair of social justice journalism at Northwestern University. He says that, while new HIV
infection rates are dropping in cities around the United States, the virus is actually on the rise in rural America.
And he told our Hari Sreenivasan why the U.S. is not prepared to deal with this crisis.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
HARI SREENIVASAN, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: So, Stephen, it says that there are 1.1 million people in the U.S. living with HIV today.
And you had a recent article in "The Times." How is it that cities like New York, San Francisco, Chicago, the HIV rates are declining, but, in
rural areas, they're climbing, and you're saying it's going to get worse?
STEVEN W. THRASHER, NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY: it probably is going to get worse in rural areas.
Cities have been very proactive about addressing the crisis and trying to do things about it that are effective. And this has happened at all kinds
of levels. So, at one level, they just have better public infrastructure in the first place in terms of dealing with health.
And even though cities are places where HIV rates have been very dense, they have had decades of working on ways to address it, and then very
directly trying to address the populations that are at risk.
[13:40:13]
The biggest population at risk are young men who have sex with men, particularly of color. And so cities are very aggressively trying to
create interventions around those people, getting drugs to them. The drugs that we can get to people, once they have become HIV-positive, not only
help their health, but it prevents onward transmission to other people, so getting those drugs them, also getting them preventive medication.
Truvada is the brand name for this drug PrEP that people can take as a preventive measure.
SREENIVASAN: Yes.
THRASHER: And then also just having ways to get people tested in the first place.
And cities, particularly in New York, they're very aggressive about trying to get people tested at all kinds of levels. And that just simply doesn't
exist in rural parts of the country. The infrastructure doesn't exist. The culture of getting people tested -- I have talked to sources in West
Virginia and rural America where they will say that they know doctors who've never done an HIV test in their career.
SREENIVASAN: Wow.
THRASHER: And cities are just much more aggressive about doing those things.
And, also, they have been really good about addressing the specific health challenges of these populations, having queer-specific sex education,
having trans-specific sex education.
And then the epidemic that's really taking the country right now, they're also going after the drug crisis and having safe needle exchanges. And
some cities or even having safe injection sites. And very little of that exists in rural America.
SREENIVASAN: So, really, the opioid crisis is having an impact on HIV rates?
THRASHER: Very much so around the country.
I tried to think -- as an AIDS story, an AIDS scholar, I tried to think about how the story of AIDS is a story of deindustrialization.
LaToya Ruby Frazier talks about how industrialization uses workers' bodies up. And when their bodies have been used up, what has been left behind?
And so when you look at places where -- where the mill has closed or coal mines have closed, people's bodies have been -- had a huge toll taken on
them.
They have had lots of injuries. They have had lots of pain. And as that's happening, Purdue Pharma is sending in all these drugs. You can see towns
where 100 pills per person have been sent into these towns. And this is happening as people are losing their jobs and they're losing their health
insurance.
And when they lose their health insurance and their bodies are in pain and they can't get that prescription high anymore, they often turn to injection
drug use.
And so this happened -- kind of most saliently, we saw this happen in Scott County, Indiana, in 2014 and 2015, in Southern Indiana. Mike Pence, the
now vice president, was the governor at the time.
And, infamously, his health people came to him when they started to see that there was a crisis happening and said, we need to do some kind of
needle program. And he infamously -- infamously said that he needed to pray about it and took some time to pray about it before he had an answer.
And two of my colleagues at the Yale School of Public Health, Forrest Crawford and Gregg Gonsalves, did research looking at, that years before,
they had really cut all the surveillance mechanisms for even looking at HIV in the first place.
And so, at that time, the Centers for Disease Control outlined that there were 220 such counties throughout the United States that were like Scott
County. They were sort of sitting ducks waiting for the potential hepatitis or HIV outbreak to occur, because they didn't have prevention
measures. They didn't have proper harm reduction programs. They didn't have education around these things.
And so they are just sort of waiting for an outbreak that could occur in those places, because there's -- there's not really counting happening
until you know that there's something bad is going on. And that's what's now happening in West Virginia.
SREENIVASAN: So you're saying, essentially, that the culture clash and the conservatism ends up fueling policies that actually endanger communities?
THRASHER: Yes, that's very much true. And it happens at various levels.
So, at the emergency level, the thing that needs to happen quickly when we understand something like this happens is getting clean needles into
people's hands, particularly because injection drug use is one of the fastest ways that HIV and also hepatitis can move between people.
And there's a lot of conservative misinformation about what these programs do. They will say that they make people more likely to use drugs. They
will say that it makes unclean needles more likely to be left out in public, and that it's going to bring crime.
And we actually know all of these things are not true. Research has been pretty consistent for decades that these kinds of harm mechanisms get
people into care, make them less likely to have needles out in the open, and they don't increase crime or anything like that.
So that's sort of at the emergency level. And then, at the bigger cultural level, there are these things that are really putting people at harm.
One is that many of these states -- and I see this in my own research in Missouri, where I have been studying the criminalization of HIV for about
five, six years now. I have seen this in Missouri as well, is that, when you have states and localities that have abstinence-only education, STI,
rates are going to go up, HIV rates are going to go up.
[13:45:07]
And so there are huge parts of the country, particularly where these 220 counties are, that have either abstinence-only education, or they have
pregnancy-only education.
And we're not teaching the young people what they need to know to be able to protect their bodies as they become sexual beings.
SREENIVASAN: There seems to be kind of a geographic cross-section here.
I mean, on the one hand, Georgia has the highest rates of new HIV infections in the country. I mean, the South is only responsible for a
little more than a third of the population, but more than half of the new HIV diagnoses are happening in the South.
Why?
THRASHER: Yes, that's a really interesting and sad story.
So, cities have some infrastructure, and these rural parts of the country really don't. And the South has had some of the worst rates of HIV that
have to be read in the context of a bigger health crisis in the country, which is access to medication, access to health care.
So, in the South, where you have some of the lowest rates of access to medication at all -- or health care at all, you have the cases not just
going -- not just being a matter of HIV exposure. If someone is exposed to HIV, and we find out about it, and they had an HIV test at their annual
physical, and we got them the medication, they would go on and live the rest of their life normally.
It's actually easier to deal with in diabetes or any other number of chronic conditions. But when somebody doesn't get access to the
medication, it can progress on to AIDS. And during that time, they're also trans -- the transmission can happen through them, because we're not able
to suppress their viral load.
So, the South is a real -- is a real vector of places where people don't have access to the medication. They don't have access to regular health
insurance. And so the rates are going up and up. And there's such stigma and shame that even people who probably know what's going on, the symptoms
have gotten so bad, they're just so frightened to get care, that they don't until it gets too bad.
And then the virus keeps moving and getting more prevalent within their communities.
SREENIVASAN: Let's talk a little bit about the medication that is available. How is this rolling out around -- across the United States?
THRASHER: So, since 1996, we have had a drug called -- they're most often called antiretrovirals, or ARVs.
And these very effectively not only save people's lives, but they make transmission not happen through sex once people are on them. And 1996 is
the banner here that we have to look at, because the AIDS rate -- the AIDS death rates dropped precipitously that year.
But they moved out. And they got rolled out very unequally racially and geographically. And that's why we're seeing very different stories in
cities and in the rural South.
So, for people who got the medication, the virus started to cycle out of the population, and the rate went down. And for people who didn't go --
didn't get the medication, groups that didn't get it, the viral rate actually got dense around them and went up.
And from the CDC's own data, you can look at the rate of AIDS in the population amongst white people and black people in 1995, before there were
drugs, and 2015, almost 20 years after there are drugs. The rate for black America in 2015 was actually slightly higher than it was for white people
when there were no drugs.
SREENIVASAN: Wow.
THRASHER: And that's not because black people have more sex or unprotected sex or use I.V. drugs more. They actually engage in those activities less.
But because black people en masse did not get the drugs, the virus -- the rate has actually gone up in black America. So we have these drugs that
are available, and they're extraordinarily and unconscionably expensive.
The drug is up to $2,000 a month for people to get. So, at an emergency level, we need to get it into these places where these outbreaks are
happening, but also, very proactively, we need to get it into young men who have sex with men and people of color who are in communities where the rate
is very high, because if we can just start -- if we can just start addressing it, then the rate HIV will start cycling down in those
populations.
SREENIVASAN: Some of your reporting lays out this racial dimension to this.
If I was a straight white man, I have a one in 2,500 chance of getting HIV, but one in every two black, gay and bisexual men in the U.S. are projected
to become HIV-positive in their lifetimes.
THRASHER: That's correct. It's really -- it's extraordinary.
And so who has power in this country and who's affected by this are very different populations.
My colleague Linda Villarosa, who I believe has been on this show, wrote the "New York Times" cover story about black gay men in the South. And she
phrases it very poetically, pointing out that Swaziland, the tiny country in Southern Africa, which has about a million people, has the highest rate
of HIV on Earth. It's about 28, 29 percent of the population.
But black gay man, we're on record to go to 50 percent. If black gay men and men who have sex with men, bisexual men, were a country, we would have
the highest rate of HIV on the Earth.
And it's not because -- as I said before, it's not because we engage in riskier sex or drug use. We don't. But, because we didn't get the drugs,
the rate has continued to keep going up and up in our -- in our network.
[13:50:13]
And this has both to do with not having access to the drugs, with also because black people have sex with other black people across age. So,
someone who's 25, 30 might have a sexual partner who's 50 who's in the group that was around when HIV was much higher.
Unlike the 50-year-old white person and their group that got the drugs, a 50-year-old black person isn't -- in a group that largely didn't get the
drug, so the risk is more, and engagement and activity is more.
And it's really heartbreaking that this is not front-page news all the time. I can't imagine if one in two white women were going to become HIV-
positive that it would be such an uncovered story most of the time.
SREENIVASAN: Do we care less about it today because we feel like, well, there's medical out there, it's suppressing it, we don't really have to
worry about it?
We don't have the same level of, oh, my gosh, this person died, this person died, this person died.
THRASHER: It is a -- it's a hard thing to battle when people think, I can just take a pill to manage it.
You have to be on that pill for the rest of your life, which means not only having health insurance in this country, but also housing and a lot of
other things with that.
And it's also really hard, because there has been almost a revanchist idea around sex education in this country, that we need broader sex education.
And the cities that are doing well not only have sex education that includes sex, pregnancy, and queer and trans sex, they also are looking at
broader things that help.
So, in Illinois, where I now live, Illinois is rolling out next year a comprehensive LGBTQ curriculum statewide for public schools. And that's
great, because it will help young people feel less bad about their bodies and will help them understand their bodies and that there's nothing wrong
with them.
That will decrease stigma and help them be able to make the decisions they need when they are becoming sexual beings that need to protect themselves.
SREENIVASAN: Let's talk a little bit about the global picture as well; 37.9 million people around the world are living with HIV.
About 1.7 million people became newly infected. That's just ending in 2018. Where are most people or more of the people that are infected with
HIV living now?
THRASHER: So, about two-thirds of the people are living in sub-Saharan Africa. And there's variations within that, but a good concentration of
people are living in sub-Saharan Africa, some in Central Asia.
The United States are about a million of the 37, 38 million people globally.
SREENIVASAN: Are the new infections also in sub-Saharan Africa, because that's where the largest population is, or are we seeing it in other parts
of the world where we weren't seeing it before?
THRASHER: We're seeing it all over the world.
And it's hard to paint a general picture. Things change from year to year as countries try different approaches. Deaths are down. That's good news.
SREENIVASAN: Yes.
THRASHER: The peak deaths, I think, in 2004 were about 1.8 million. They're down to about 750,000 now.
But new infections are either stagnant or rising in certain places in the world.
SREENIVASAN: But one of the things that the U.N. AIDS stats reveal is that more young women are getting infected than men. Why does that happen?
THRASHER: Well, in the United States, we tend to think of the HIV moving through populations of people who use intravenous drugs and men who have
sex with men. Those are the primary ways they have happened in this country.
But in other parts of the world, the vectors have moved very differently. They have moved through heterosexual sex. They have moved through what's
called vertical transmission, where it goes from a parent to a child in birth.
And in the same way, in the U.S., gay men were often thought to be promiscuous. We actually are often the ones who are protecting ourselves
the most. People who are married often -- of course, they often don't use birth control or they don't use STI control.
So, for women, one of the things global that can be the most dangerous for them is to have a husband, to have someone they're having sex with, where
they're not having any kind of protection. So that's one of the reasons we see things moving internationally in that direction.
And there's a similar dynamic happening globally and in the U.S., that one of the largest areas where transmission is happening as people who don't
know their status.
So, I think UNAIDS said recently that about one in five people living with HIV globally don't know their status. In the U.S., that differs by the
populations you're looking at. I believe that's about normal here.
But then, when you go young, when you look at young people, maybe half of people don't know their status. And my colleague Brian Mustanski at
Northwestern in the Institute of Sexual and Gender Minority Health and Well-Being, he was -- he's been doing research recently where they have
seen that only one in five young men who have sex with men under 18 have ever had an HIV test. They have just never had one.
And they're the population that is most likely to transmit in this country. He also found, which I found really disturbing, he was telling me he had
conducted a focus group with teenage boys who had sex with other boys.
[13:55:09]
And they asked them about their sex lives. And they said they'd never -- they weren't ever using condoms. And when Brian asked them why, they said,
well, we knew we couldn't get pregnant.
So they had been taught that the only use for condoms was pregnancy, and they're not being taught that this is something that protects people from
diseases. And, of course, it is very specifically a concern of LGBTQ young people.
SREENIVASAN: Steven Thrasher, thanks for joining us.
THRASHER: Thank you so much for having me.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
AMANPOUR: Such an important warning there.
And, finally, back here in London, there is supporting a friend, and then there is this. You would be forgiven for thinking that Nyekachi Douglas
from Nigeria had won the Miss World contest, but she was just super excited for her friend from Jamaica who was crowned the winner.
Douglas, who placed in the top five, has become an Internet sensation for her reaction. It marked the first time that black women have
simultaneously won all five of the world's top beauty pageants, which is a huge step forward in an industry that has struggled with racism and gender
stereotyping for decades.
Thanks for watching, and goodbye from London. That's it for us.
END
