Return to Transcripts main page


Politics of Oil; Queen Elizabeth II Celebrates Platinum Jubilee; Interview with Princeton University Institute for Transregional Studies Director Bernard Haykel; Interview American Enterprise Institute Senior Fellow Emeritus Norman Ornstein. Aired 1-2p ET

Aired June 02, 2022 - 13:00   ET




Here's what's coming up.


GOLODRYGA (voice-over): An historic day for the United Kingdom, as Queen Elizabeth II celebrates 70 years on the throne. We look back on her reign

and to the future. What next for the British monarchy?

Then: the war in Ukraine, inflation, spiraling energy costs all signaling an economic crisis. Amid reports President Biden will visit Saudi Arabia in

a bid to drive up oil supply, I will speak to Professor Bernard Haykel, an expert on Saudi Arabia and its controversial leader, Mohammed bin Salman.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's very scary. You can't even go to a store. You can't even go to school.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Now you can't even go to the doctor.

GOLODRYGA: Yet another mass shooting in America, as a gunman kills four people at a hospital in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Political scientist Norm Eisen on

what can be done to end this bloodshed.


GOLODRYGA: Welcome to the program, everyone. I'm Bianna Golodryga in New York, sitting in for Christiane Amanpour, who will be back next week.

Well, it's a big day in the United Kingdom, as the country celebrates the 70-year reign of Queen Elizabeth II. Four days of festivities are getting

under way to mark the Platinum Jubilee, an unprecedented event. To kick it all off, the queen was joined by members of her family on the balcony of

Buckingham Palace for a 70-aircraft fly-pass.

Queen Elizabeth is being commended for her 70 years of service, not just in Britain, but by world leaders too. France's President Macron gifted the

queen a horse and described her as the golden thread that binds Britain and France.

And here is president of the United States and first lady Jill Biden.


JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Throughout your reign, the relationship between the United Kingdom the United States has grown

stronger and closer than ever.

JILL BIDEN, FIRST LADY: Throughout the years, the joy your visits to the United States have brought Americans and your solidarity with the American

people in times of tragedy have deepened the friendship and profound connection between our countries.


GOLODRYGA: An incredible statistic: Joe Biden is the 14th U.S. president of the queen's reign. She's also dealt with 14 British prime ministers at

home, and she has played witness to some of the world's most tumultuous events over the past seven decades.

But, sometimes, the greatest threat to her reign was the tumult within her own family.

Correspondent Max Foster takes a look back at her time on the throne.


MAX FOSTER, CNN ROYAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): After the death of her father, King George VI, 25-year-old Elizabeth, known as Lilibet to friends,

assumed the throne, crowned at Westminster Abbey on June the 2nd, 1953.

This was the first time the public was able to witness this sacrosanct event. Elizabeth allowed live television cameras in to capture the

ceremony, in a powerful signal that hers was a new open and relevance monarchy.

QUEEN ELIZABETH II, UNITED KINGDOM: I declare before you all that my whole life, whether it be long or short, shall be devoted to your service and to

the service of our great imperial family, to which we all belong.

QUEEN MARGRETHE II, DENMARK: That was an example which I very much felt that, when I grew older, that that was what it was about. You dedicate your

life to your country.

ANNOUNCER: It was with her marriage to the duke of Edinburgh that perhaps we first realized the personality of our queen to be.

FOSTER: On November the 20th, 1947, Princess Elizabeth had wed her childhood sweetheart, the tall and dashing Prince Philip of Greece and

Denmark. The following year, their marriage bore Elizabeth's heir, Prince Charles.

ANNOUNCER: Sir Winston and Lady Churchill came to receive Her Majesty.

FOSTER: Her first prime minister was Winston Churchill. And during her rule, she's met every acting U.S. president, bar one, meetings she always


Stiff-upper-lipped in public, there's little it is to show the sense of humor this wife, mother and grandmother is reputed to show behind closed

doors. On occasion, there has been little to laugh about, however.


QUEEN ELIZABETH II: It has turned out to be an annus horribilis.

FOSTER: During the 1990s, three of her four children would divorce, Charles most famously, and then that crash.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Getting worried that the French government has informed all of us that Princess Diana has died.

FOSTER: The royal family's restrained response collided with a British public convulsing in heartache. Elizabeth learned she's never merely a

mother or grandmother, rather, a queen to her people, no matter what.

Over more than a decade, public faith in the royals gradually rebuilt. The queen was visibly thrilled by the show of support for the wedding between

her grandson, William and partner Kate in 2011. The family soon welcomed several additions, including Prince George, future heir to the throne, born

in 2013.

In 2021, at the age of 99, Prince Philip, the duke of Edinburgh, passed away. Senior royals attended a funeral, scaled back due to coronavirus.

Elizabeth was forced to stand alone as she watched his coffin lower into the royal vault at Windsor Castle, bidding farewell to her husband of 73

years, the man she described as her strength and stay.

For more than half-a-century, Elizabeth had led an empire before overseeing its managed decline.

ANNOUNCER: The royal pair stopped first at this soon-to-be-independent colony before touring their dominions in the West Indies.

FOSTER: Known as the Commonwealth, an association of now independent countries, 15 of which have kept the queen as a symbolic head of state.

After 70 momentous years, Her Majesty celebrates her Platinum Jubilee, the longest serving British monarch in history.


GOLODRYGA: And so seven decades marked by both triumph and disaster.

Let's get more now on the significance of this all.

Joining me are CNN's Max Foster, whose report you just heard there, and royal editor of Britain's "Hello" magazine Emily Nash.

Welcome, both of you.

So let me start with what we saw today, the kickoff to a four-day celebration of the jubilee.

Max, did it live up to expectations?

FOSTER: I think it did. It was all about the crowds. We were lucky with the weather. I mean, these things can be ruined by the weather, but the

weather was good. And we have got the big fly-pass of 70 aircraft, stunning scenes.

And to see the queen smiling up genuinely, enjoying it with her loved ones around her, I think that was very heartening to people here, who came out

not just for her, I don't think, but also for this new phase hopefully after the pandemic, after the divisiveness of Brexit. They all came out.

They wanted a party.

They saw she was happy. It was reassuring. And I think a lot of people did want to pay tribute to her. They want to see someone that represents

continuity and consistency. It's been a very unsettling time. And she is all of those things to the British public.

GOLODRYGA: Yes. And there you see her standing next to her great-grandson, Prince Louis. And we saw them have a few cute exchanges there on the

balcony during the flyover.

Emily, you talk about her reign and the length of time she has spent there, the record length of time she has spent on there, surpassing even Queen

Victoria, her great-great-grandmother.

In terms of what we just heard from Max's piece and what she promised at the age of 25, an open and relevant monarchy, has she lived up to that


EMILY NASH, CNN ROYAL CONTRIBUTOR: I think she's more than lived up to the promise.

I mean, it's hard to imagine at that tender age having to commit yourself to this role. And few could have predicted quite how long she would be in

this position. And yet here she is at 96 years old still coming out onto the balcony and still absolutely adored by the British public and people

further afield.

She represents, as Max said, this continuity, a stability, which people really value here. And she is so ingrained in our national psyche that

people are attached to her, whether or not they're fully invested in the idea of monarchy at all.

GOLODRYGA: And, Max, you mentioned the chronicles, the trials and tribulations throughout her reign.

And it's interesting because she, one could argue, has not changed. Obviously, the world around her has. And yet she remains as popular as ever

today. Why do you think that is?

FOSTER: Well, that's the great mastery of Elizabeth II, I think.

She does represent continuity and she does represent something that hasn't changed, but, actually, she has been utterly revolutionary in how she's

carried out her role. She came to her position, as Emily says, at a tender age. The empire was collapsing.


Everyone assumed there wouldn't be a future for the monarchy. She reinvented the empire effectively as the Commonwealth. So she retained her

international footprint. Then we had the media revolution, which she could have pushed away. But she embraced that. She went on walkabouts. She got

cameras to come in and film her on walkabouts. That made her relatable.

She televised the annual Christmas address, and she got into the heart of people's homes, and that most intimate time when families come together in

the United Kingdom. And she was the first person to go on social media. She invited cameras into her coronation. She opened things up in an

extraordinary way and did things very, very differently.

And imagine her father allowing the heir to the throne to marry a divorcee. She was revolutionary in how she's carried out her role. Her skill is

making it look as if she wasn't.

NASH: Absolutely.


And yet some of her hardest tasks have been directed at scandals within her home and within her family. And I'm just curious, Emily, from what we even

saw today, signs of some of those scandals and scab wounds for the world to see on display. There were some notable people who were not on that

balcony, her grandson, right, Prince Harry, her son, Prince Andrew, both mired in scandals of different sorts.

How has she navigated those domestic issues, in your view?

NASH: Well, I think the queen is brilliant at compartmentalizing her family life and her public life.

So she is very pragmatic when she comes to duty, and she understands that there wasn't a place for Prince Andrew in particular on the balcony. And

she had to make that distinction between people who are part of her family and much loved members of the family, as Harry and Meghan are often

described as, from those who are officially working for her and are part of the institution still.

So she's able to separate these things out. And however much pain these recent scandals have caused her, she has remained with that stiff upper

lip, in public, at least, and just carried on.

GOLODRYGA: And, Max, as we mentioned, 14 U.S. presidents, met with every single one of them, minus LBJ, 14 British prime ministers. She obviously

didn't have any political or legislative power.

But what was fascinating to watch as she navigated through all of these different administrations, various parties is, she seemed well aware of

what was happening politically, both at home and abroad, throughout the course of her reign.

FOSTER: Yes, she's very well-informed, and any prime minister that she's worked with will tell you that and other world leaders will tell you that.

You're right that -- to point out that she wasn't a political figure, which made her, I would say, the most revered head of state. She still is,

certainly the longest serving. You had President Putin, President Xi coming here. You have had some despots coming here. She would always carry out her

role impeccably.

They want that photo with the queen, who is the one living historic figure, someone who has got a guaranteed place in the history books. And I think

that's immensely powerful and immensely useful to the British government. And it allowed the British government to punch above its weight on the

world stage.

And that's going to be a big challenge, when she eventually moves on and we're going to have Prince Charles in that position, who's also very

effective in those moments. And if you see him, he's very engaged. And people like speaking to him, because he's so well-informed as well.

But it's that discretion you get with a queen which people really look up to, and just the fact that all your predecessors, if you're a head of state

or a prime minister, have had that photo, and you want that photo as well.

And President Mandela, would you believe, actually described his state visit to Buckingham Palace as his favorite state visit. So you don't get

more complimentary remarks than that.

GOLODRYGA: Yes. And even U.S. presidents, you get a sense that they are nervous when they travel to meet -- to meet with the queen there for those

state dinners.



GOLODRYGA: Go ahead.

FOSTER: And I will say, I was in this position when President Trump came here. And he was completely out of sorts.


FOSTER: And he didn't know quite what to do. You will remember he got confused doing the lineup, and that was actually the fact that Prince

Philip wasn't there.

I spoke to someone close to President Trump, and he actually -- and they actually told me that the one figure on the global stage that President

Trump was reverential to was the queen. And you can imagine the power that has for the British government, and also for our relationship with the

United States.



And, Emily, in terms of relationships, some more muted responses, I would say, in forms of celebration today in some of the Commonwealth nations. How

has she navigated the relationship with those nations around the world throughout these years and how have her family members? I know there had

been mixed response to the visit there from Prince William and Kate, when they went just a few years ago.

NASH: Absolutely.

I mean, the world has changed immeasurably over the last few years. We have had the Black Lives Matter movement. We have had all manner of changes in

society. And I think that the royal family recognize that times are changing.

But while the queen is still at the head of the Commonwealth, I don't anticipate those things happening immediately. But we do you know there's a

growing republican movement in a lot of her overseas realms. And I think, in the future, that will continue to be the case. Countries are going to

move away. They are going to sever their ties with the monarchy.

And I think it was interesting that, on that tour of the Caribbean, Prince William spoke about forging new relationships and new friendships, I think

there's an acceptance there that people are going to go their own way. But there is still a place for strong ties between countries that have these

deep historic relationships.

GOLODRYGA: Max, I think it's appropriate now to talk about what the monarchy there looks like after the reign of Queen Elizabeth. She seems

very sharp and astute. There we saw her on the balcony at the age of 96.

She's lessened some of her appearances now over the course of the past few months, but she's still clearly of sound mind. What does the monarchy look

like when we have a king, King Charles? Is the country ready to accept him?

FOSTER: Well, you know what? I -- my answer to that question is, we won't know until he's actually king, because that's when you see him in context

and without the queen.

And there will be a huge amount of sympathy for him, because he's been utterly endorsed by the queen. And that's what we're seeing today. He's

constantly at her side. He's the person she brings in to represent her whenever she can't make an event. We're going to see more and more of that.

And it is all intentional, all strategic. It's about transition. It has been happening for years. Part of a monarch's role is to make sure that the

monarchy continues, the monarch never dies. And she's very much got that in mind. So she's constantly supporting him.

But you're seeing something slightly interesting here. I don't know if Emily will agree with this. But we are seeing, for example, at the opening

of Parliament, where she couldn't attend, a core constitutional role, she asked Prince Charles to be there. But she also asked Prince William to be


I don't know whether or not that's an awareness that Prince Charles isn't as popular as Prince William. There's certainly no discussion whatsoever

about the crown skipping to William. But I feel it's a bit like a -- you get a bit of a job lot. You get William and Charles in the next monarchy,

and so they will be sporting with each other, and also with the duchess of Cambridge, who is very much modeling herself on the queen.

Between the three of them -- and I think people will get to know Camilla as well. She's a formidable character and very likable behind the scenes, and

they need to work on that. But between the four of them, they have actually got a very strong monarchy coming up. And the queen's aware of that.

GOLODRYGA: Well, Prince Charles -- you make a good point.


NASH: Absolutely.

GOLODRYGA: Go ahead, Emily.

NASH: Yes, it's safety in numbers. I think it's very much about shoring up the whole institution. So we're looking beyond just the individual that

Prince Charles is and looking at the support team he has.

And it's really her saying, look, this is the package. We're in safe hands.

GOLODRYGA: Right, because Prince Charles is, what, 76 years old, and there have been now many, many years of speculation as to whether she would even

bypass him and go directly to Prince William, Prince William 39 years old.

Emily, does that speculation, do all of these years of wondering what that line would look like to the throne, has that hurt Prince Charles in any


NASH: Right. Constitutionally, he will become king when the time comes. So there's no question of William leapfrogging him, unless he is to abdicate

or unless the queen outlives him.

But, inevitably, it is damaging, and it's hurtful, I'm sure, because he has been in this role. He's worked very hard for all these years waiting for

the big job. And let's not forget it's a very double-edged sword for him, because it's the moment that his mother passes away.

And it's not something that any of us...

FOSTER: Right.

NASH: ... not least the prince, wants to dwell on.

FOSTER: And, also, the thing that people don't think about enough in that situation is, does William want to leapfrog Charles?


I mean, you speak to him privately, no. He's in no rush.


NASH: And I think she recognizes that as well. She understands what it's like to have to put duty first at such a young age.

She wasn't able to enjoy her children's early years in the way that William now is. And I think he's been given quite a lot of leeway to spend that

quality family time with them while he can, before he effectively begins this lifetime of duty.

GOLODRYGA: Max, how has this year, the first year without Prince Philip at her side -- we noted in your package he passed away last year.

It must have been difficult for her to not have him there with her.

FOSTER: It is.

You have got to remember that not just sort of her soul mate her. This was her closest colleague, the one person on the planet that wasn't deferential

to her. He -- everyone else in the family, everyone else in the world bows or curtsies to the queen. Prince Charles -- Prince Philip didn't do that.

She would always refer big decisions to him. She wanted to brainstorm stuff. He was the one person that would say no to her. I don't get the

impression that Charles and William even do that. They're so reverential to him -- to her. So she's lost that. And I think it's the professional side

to her life where he's -- of course, he's -- this is a soul mate, but that's her private world.

I think, professionally, that was a massive blow. And there is speculation. I mean, it was a few years ago that he retired. And he certainly stepped

back from his public role, but I get the impression that he did so behind the scenes as well, because you will hear a lot of people in the palace say

you wouldn't have had the crisis with Harry or with Andrew blow up as they did if he was playing the active role that he did behind the scenes.

He was very much in charge behind the scenes.

GOLODRYGA: There's no doubt.

FOSTER: She was always in charge of the role, but he was in charge of family.

GOLODRYGA: No doubt. Theirs was a true partnership.

Max Foster, Emily Nash, thank you so much as we kick off a historic day, a historic weekend celebrating the queen's jubilee there in London. Thank you

so much for joining us.

And coming up after the break: balancing the politics of oil, human rights and the war in Ukraine, President Biden's delicate dance with Saudi Crown

Prince Mohammed bin Salman.


GOLODRYGA: Welcome back.

Brace yourselves for an economic hurricane. That's the warning from J.P. Morgan Chase boss Jamie Dimon. The war in Ukraine, inflation, rising

interest rates and sky-high energy costs are hitting consumers hard, setting in motion a series of crises for U.S. President Joe Biden.

It's now expected that he will visit Saudi Arabia later this month. That's the world's largest exporter of crude oil. It would all certainly mean

meeting Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who Biden has vowed to make a pariah over his record on human rights.

So, how will the president navigate the complex politics of oil, human rights and protecting the economy?


A little earlier, I spoke to Princeton Professor Bernard Haykel, who is an expert on Saudi Arabia and the Middle East and often speaks with Mohammed

bin Salman.


GOLODRYGA: Professor Haykel, thank you so much for joining us today.

First, let me get your reaction to the news out of OPEC Plus reaching an agreement to increase its production by 50 percent to 648,000 barrels a day

for oil for July and August. How significant of a move is that?

BERNARD HAYKEL, PRINCETON UNIVERSITY: I think that it's a positive signal that OPEC and OPEC Plus, meaning the Saudis and the Russians, have agreed

to a small increase.

But I don't think it'll affect price. It's too small an increase to really -- for us to see that at the gas pump. The question is whether the Saudis,

along with the United Arab Emirates and Iraq, the only three countries that have significant spare capacity, are likely to increase it -- increase

production much more significantly, should there be a massive reduction in Russian oil supplies going forward in the summer.

GOLODRYGA: So do you think that this announcement today from OPEC Plus is perhaps the first of a few steps to come in increasing supply to the market

in the coming weeks or months?

HAYKEL: It is potentially, yes. It's a signal certainly in that direction. And if there are significant shortages, meaning that they're -- meaning

that the energy system, global energy system, is disrupted by a serious reduction in supply, then I think the Saudis, the UAE, and Iraq will try to

fill that gap.

Because the Saudis have been very clear all along that they are a market stabilizer, and they will act accordingly. And they have very significant

spare capacity. They can easily pump 11 million barrels of oil a day, and potentially up to 12 million barrels of oil a day, with some -- with some

lead time.

GOLODRYGA: Why have they chosen not to do that up until this point? There have been reports that the Saudis, MBS included, have avoided President

Biden's phone calls.

Obviously, they see the spike in gas prices around the world in large part not only due to inflation and supply chain issues stemming from the

pandemic, but obviously the war there impacting Russia's production and export of oil.

HAYKEL: So the Saudis have been, again, quite clear that, in fact, the spike in prices has more to do with refining -- problems with a refining

capacity, rather than actual shortages of oil in the global market.

If you look at how much Russia has exported to China and to India, there's been virtually no decline. In fact, there's been an increase at a

discounted price. Russian oil now is about a million barrels less than -- production than what it was a year ago. And that has to do more with

domestic decline in demand within Russia, as well as with refining problems that the Russians are having.

So the Saudis are saying there's plenty of oil in the market, and there's no need for extra oil.

GOLODRYGA: Yes, it's interesting. It's an important point you make to reminder that oil really is fungible on a global scale, right?

So if even we have seen headlines over the past few weeks and months that the E.U. may be cutting back and banning Russian oil, you continue to see

Russia supply oil to neighbors like China and India.

At what point will more production and what does that level need to be for consumers, in particular here in America, to see relief at the pump?

HAYKEL: I mean, to see serious relief at the pump, you would need two things to happen. One is for some of the refining problems to be resolved,

and, two, a significant increase in production from countries like Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Iraq.

And just to back up a little bit, I mean, the Biden administration has been asking the Saudis for more oil production since last fall, in fact, since

September of last year.


HAYKEL: And that is with an eye to the elections in November. And the Saudis have not been willing to do this, on the basis of two arguments.

One is that there is no need for more oil, and, two, they don't pump oil for -- to ease the electoral anxieties of the Democratic Party in the

United States.

GOLODRYGA: Well, it speaks to more than just that, no?

I mean, you can't ignore the history there between this administration and MBS and Saudi leadership there, the president, Biden, having called him a

pariah and with very little social redeeming value in 2019, obviously, their human rights record, and the war in Yemen.


We are anticipating, perhaps, a meeting between President Biden and MBS, even within the next month or so. Do you think the announcement today from

Opec Plus is the first step leading up to, perhaps, that relationship alighting a bit?

HAYKEL: Yes. I mean, I definitely think that the U.S. relationship with the Saudis is getting -- is going to get much better despite what President

Biden has said. And that's because there are several factors for that. One is that the Saudis have been playing a very positive role in trying to end

the war in Yemen, and there's a cease-fire that was, in fact, just extended by another two months today with Saudi help and support.

The deal with the Iranians on nuclear seems to have solved, and that is something that, I think, is welcome in both Jerusalem and Israel, as well

as in Saudi Arabia, because both countries see Iran as the main destabilizing actor in the region. And also, I think that the Biden

administration has realized that Saudi Arabia can play a very important stabilizing role.

I'll give you one example. As you know, there are very serious shortages in grain and wheat supplies because of the war in Ukraine, and the disruption

in exports. The Saudis have Egypt $5 billion to buy more wheat so that we don't see starvation in a country like Egypt that this highly dependent on

Ukrainian grain. Similarly, the Saudis have given 3 billion to the Pakistanis, also to reduce the possibility of hunger and famine there.

So, I think the Biden administration, in its recalibration, using their words, of their relationship with the Saudis, are realizing that this

relationship is an extremely useful one for American interests.

GOLODRYGA: An extremely useful one, but again, noting their past, noting the president's own past comments on MBS, and in Politico today, obtaining

a letter sent to the president from 9/11 families united, demanding that President Biden bring up accountability for 9/11 and any conversations he

has with MBS.

Just optically and politically even, how does that look for a president who has cut off relations with the leader there to suddenly want to turn things

around when it becomes a political liability for him at home?

HAYKEL: So, you know, American foreign policy is based on interests as well as values, and that's a very difficult balance to keep. And it's clear

that the Biden administration has, at the moment decided that American interests trump questions to do with values and human rights and democracy.

And this is not just vis-a-vis Saudi Arabia, it's also true for countries like Egypt and Turkey and elsewhere. And it's just a dose of reality. It's

just the way the world is.

I think, as far as the 9/11 families are concerned, the Biden administration should absolutely raise the question of 9/11 with the Saudi

leadership, because the Saudi leadership has been at war with Al-Qaeda for a very long time, and I think it would be very helpful and has been very

helpful to the U.S. in fighting this extremist group.

GOLODRYGA: In the meantime, we see the relations in the region continue to evolve. The UAE and Israel have signed a historic trade deal, free trade

deal this week, and we see the relations between Saudi Arabia, which, behind closed doors, at least, with Israel, have been increasing over the

past few years, but to come to the public fray the way they are right now, that's quite a historic moment and change in terms of the dynamics in the

region, no?

HAYKEL: Absolutely. And, in fact, nothing has brought the Saudis and the Israelis closer together than Iranian activity and aggression across the

region. But I think the Saudis are nowhere near signing the peace agreement with Israel normalizing relations, because, you know, Saudi Arabia has been

very clear that the Palestinians have legitimate rights, and that the Israelis will need to accommodate those rights before Saudi normalizes.

Also, I think the question of Palestinian rights is a deeply felt issue amongst Saudi, ordinary Saudis, the Saudi public, and the leadership in

Saudi Arabia will have to be responsive to that sentiment.


GOLODRYGA: So, from a realistic standpoint, just in closing, if we do anticipate to see a meeting between President Biden and Mohammed bin

Salman, I would imagine both sides would be presented with a deliverable. What would that look like? What would that need to look like from both

President Biden and, obviously, from MBS? It's all that MBS need to do is pump more oil into the world?

HAYKEL: No. I think that, actually, the Americans -- let's take the American side first. The Americans have to acknowledge the strategically

important relationship they have with a country like Saudi Arabia, and the stabilizing role that it plays in the region. This includes ending the war

in Yemen, supporting countries like Jordan and Egypt that will face very serious difficulties, financial and budgetary as the crisis of food stuffs


Also, on Iran, I think there will have to be some coordination and the U.S. will also have to make commitments to defending Saudi Arabia against a

missile and drone attacks from Iran and the Houthis, who are their allies in Yemen.

In return, the Saudis will also make a series of commitments, hopefully, on questions of human rights. Of course, support also for ending the war in

Yemen and stabilizing Yemen and giving Yemen money and support, financial support, to rebuild that country. In addition, hopefully, also more oil, or

at least, a commitment to stabilizing the global oil market, should there be serious disruptions.

So, I think there's a lot, actually, to be gained from a much better relationship. And one that is not just about personalities, it's not just

about Biden and MBS, it should really be about institution-to-institution, connections and commitments on intelligence. For instance, on business,

finance, oil, and many other issues that are of common interest between the two countries.

GOLODRYGA: Yes. That clearly would create a bit more stability between the two nations, not so dependent on leadership and personalities, you're right

there. Professor Haykel, thank you so much for your time and expertise. We appreciate it.

HAYKEL: Thank you. It's a pleasure.

GOLODRYGA: And still to come tonight, as police responded to yet another shooting in America, is Congress any closer to finding common ground?


GOLODRYGA: Well, like deja vu, once again, we are back on familiar and tragic grounds. Telling you about yet another mass shooting in the United

States. The latest incident at the hospital in Tulsa, Oklahoma on Wednesday as America's 233rd mass shooting just this year. It's only June 2nd. Four

people were killed before the shooter reportedly turned the weapon on himself. Police say one of the victims with a doctor who recently performed

back surgery on the gunman.


Now, days after his visit to the Uvalde, Texas scene of last week's school massacre, President Biden will deliver a speech on guns later tonight. So,

what is being done to tackle this issue? Well, some states have already passed laws or working. And so, the officials are working on laws like

Florida, where one gun control measure is actually backed by both sides of the political divide.

CNN's Leyla Santiago explains.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You are to have no firearms or ammunition in your possession.

LEYLA SANTIAGO, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voiceover): This is what it looks like when a red flag law is at work.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Please raise your right hand, please.

SANTIAGO (voiceover): In this Florida courtroom, we watched as a judge ordered individuals to turn over their guns.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I haven't used a gun in two years.

SANTIAGO (voiceover): The judge ordered this man to give up his weapons. The man told us it was because he sent a photo of himself with a gun

pointed at his chin to a loved one on the anniversary of his son's death. He agreed to surrender his gun.

GRADY JUDD, SHERIFF, POLK COUNTER, FLORIDA: Listen, I'm a strong Second Amendment guy. I'm a conservative. I believe rich protection orders work

SANTIAGO (voiceover): Those risk protection order or RPOs that the Polk County sheriff, Grady Judd, is talking about were at the center of

Florida's red flag law. It allows a judge to temporarily take away firearms and ammunition from anyone deemed a threat by law enforcement. Usually, for

a year. They can't buy guns, either.

JUDD: It's simply a cooling-off period until you have some mental health counseling.

SANTIAGO (voiceover): Florida is one of 19 states that have passed a law like this. One of just a few red states with such legislation.

JARED MOSKOWITZ, DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE: We've left nothing on the table to make sure that we preventive what happened here, at Douglas,

from happening in the State of Florida again.

SANTIAGO (voiceover): Former State Representative Jared Moskowitz graduated from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland. In 2018,

after a gunman killed 20 students and faculty there, lawmakers passed legislation that not only established its red flag law, it also raises the

age requirement to buy a gun from 18 to 21, and added a three-day waiting program, a guardian program, which allows trained school staff to carry

guns, and set aside $400 million for, among other things, mental health and school security. Gun reform with bipartisan support passed by a Republican

legislature signed into law by Republican governor in a matter of weeks.

MOSKOWITZ: Not one Republican who voted for that bill in Florida has paid a political price for protecting kids and doing the right thing.

JUDD: We all have to work together to say, this person has got a problem, and if we don't address it, they have a large propensity to be an active

assailant at some point in time.

SANTIAGO (voiceover): Data obtained by CNN show that more than 8,000 orders had been granted across the state.


SANTIAGO (voiceover): But the NRA has sued the State of Florida over the gun reform legislation, and gun advocates are voicing concerns.

REP. DAN CRENSHAW (R-TX): If there's such a threat that they're threatening somebody with a weapon already, well, then, they have already

broken the law. So, why do you need this other law?

JUDD: Let me tell Representative Crenshaw, if that were so, then Florida, which is dominated by conservatives, the Republicans, wouldn't have passed


SANTIAGO (voiceover): And as the country once again grapples with finding solutions to ending horrific school shootings, in Florida, Republicans and

Democrats say that this --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you have any other weapons --

SANTIAGO (voiceover): -- ss working.

MOSKOWITZ: And I know we're more divided now than we were four years ago. I mean, we didn't just give up. And this was predictable and preventable.

JUDD: Nothing is more important than protecting our children. Nothing.

SANTIAGO (on camera): And we talked to a lot of Democrats and Republicans here in Florida, all of them said that they wish that politics could be

taken out of the conversation. Now, let's talk about the research. There is research that shows that red flag laws could make a difference. Take

Connecticut, for example. They've had a red flag law for 23 years, since 1999, and an analysis there showed that for every 10 to 20 guns removed by

risk protection orders, one suicide averted.

Leyla Santiago, CNN, Polk County, Florida.


GOLODRYGA: Our thanks to Leyla for that report.

Well, today, a committee in the House of Representatives were discussing a bill aimed at toughening national gun laws following the Uvalde School

shooting. But any measure passed by the House would likely require a further 60 votes to pass in the Senate, where Democrats are expected to run

up against fierce opposition from Republicans.

Norman Ornstein is a congressional expert at the American Enterprising Institute, and he joins me now.

Norman, good to see you.

I wish it was under better circumstances. We had far too many of these segments. I'm not sure if you were able to hear the entirety of Leyla's

reports, but what the state legislature there in the Red State of Florida passed in terms of their law, their red flag law, do you think that that is

a blueprint for other states, especially since you heard from that Democratic elected official that no Republican paid a political price after

that law was passed?


NORMAN ORNSTEIN, SENIOR FELLOW EMERITUS, AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE: When we are seeing, Bianna, is that some states are going to move in that

direction. The negotiations going on in the United States State right now, nine senators, five Democrats, four Republicans, they are still going to

need another six at least of the Republicans to be able overcome that filibuster hurdle, are looking at a number of things, including finding

ways to encourage the states to do these red flag laws.

It is one element of a way of curbing the kind of gun violence that we have. But we also have to acknowledge that many states are moving in the

opposite direction. We just saw Louisiana move forward, with a bill that would basically have concealed carry handguns for teachers in schools. We

are seeing other states and courts. The court, three judge panel of the Ninth Circuit that it validated a California law that would require minors

to not be able to get these assault weapons, like the AR-15s. So, it is a mixed pattern out there. Red flag laws are one part of it. We need more

than that, obviously.

GOLODRYGA: In terms of the Senate negotiations, this morning, Senator Murphy of Connecticut, said that they had, at least, reached a framework

for gun legislation. Said that he had spoken to six to eight Republicans that had been engaged in these conversations. He compared that after Sandy

Hook in 2013, when there is just one Republican willing to engage in these discussions.

He, at this point, seems to have lowered his expectations as to what will be acceptable to him after all these years fighting for gun reform. His

only criteria is that some lives, any lives, would be saved. But when you look at the measures that they were talking about, red flag laws, improving

background checks, more money for mental health. Not even talking about raising the minimum age from 18 to 21, for assault weapons, do you think

that this is enough to break the logjam of decades now of gun violence in this country, if they can make it to 10 Republicans on board with this?

ORNSTEIN: It is a watered-down bill, obviously. And Chris Murphy, who has been a leader in this ever since Sandy Hook along with his Connecticut

colleague, Ric Blumenthal, understands at this point that they are either going to get something that is pretty diluted, or nothing at all. And maybe

if they can get this done, it would give some opening for something more in the future.

But we are not even there yet with something that is this limited, and what it would do. It will be positive, certainly, if they could get a better in

the background check. Although, if it doesn't deal with the so-called gun show loophole, the one where people can still buy guns without a background

check at these gun shows, it's going to have very limited impact.

If you can't stop young people from buying these guns, you know, just imagine that legally, this killer in Uvalde, Texas, had two high-grade

military style assault weapons and 1,675 bullets to go with it, along with the body armor. If we can't, at least, put some limits there, then we are

still going to see an awful lot of these shootings take place.

And remember, you know, the one Florida example that was used with somebody who had done a video putting a gun to his own throat, we have an enormous

number of suicides by gun, and red flag laws can, perhaps, make some difference there. But, you know, that is just one small step for man, not

the giant leap we need for mankind.

And at this point, we are not close to that and we have been for decades despite the fact that almost 90 percent of Americans, in most surveys,

wants to see universal background checks. And two thirds of Americans, or they're about, want to see a ban on assault weapons. That is not even on

the table right now.

GOLODRYGA: Right. And it is not even coming out of the mouth of Mitch McConnell. I want to play for you a sound on what he said on these

negotiations, which he blessed after the massacre there in Uvalde, but something was notably missing from his words. Take a listen.


SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY): We had a (INAUDIBLE) led by Senator Cornyn and Senator Murphy on the Democrat side, discussing how we might be able to

come together to target the problem, which is mental illness and school safety.


GOLODRYGA: Mental illness and school safety. I don't have to tell you, Norm, the United States doesn't have a monopoly of mentally unstable people

around the world. Just yesterday, a shooting at a hospital, not at a school, at a hospital. These shootings are taking place all over the

country, whether it's supermarkets, whether it's hospitals, whether it's schools. And one thing we did not hear from them is what these mentally

unstable people, yes, are using, and that is guns.

What does that tell you about how open they are, this time, to possibly making further change?


ORNSTEIN: So, what Mitch McConnell has done in the past whenever we've had one of these horrific shootings, whether it's Sandy Hook or Parkland or

this one, is to offer a few soothing words and then, hope that the attention turns elsewhere and that we can just move on without doing much

of anything.

When you think about mental illness as a driver here, just as you said, other countries in the world, Canada Australia and the European nations

have just as much serious mental illness in their populations as we do, and they don't have these shootings. So, this is an excuse. It is kind of

sidetrack to move away from dealing with the issue of guns.

What's interesting about the meeting that the Senate Republicans had yesterday is there were four Republicans with the five Democrats that

Senator Corny, who is very close to McConnell, who will determine basically whether they want to move forward and allow 60 senators, 10 Republicans, to

go ahead or whether they will try to block, it was not a part of those negotiations.

On Twitter, where one of his supporters said, I hope you are not going to do anything to hit the Second Amendment, and Cornyn said, it is not going

to happen. So, even these changes that would take place, where there is some hope, at least, that is not a sure thing at all and that is very, very

limited and doesn't get at the issue of guns, which is the prime thing that we have to deal with here.


ORNSTEIN: And that has been true for decades.

GOLODRYGA: Yes. Jim Jordan today just saying that the even raising the idea of raising the age from 18 to 21 to buy an assault weapon would be

unconstitutional. Mind you, that buying a handgun is only lawful at the age of 21.

Can I ask you what we can expect to hear from President Biden tonight? This is the second delivery in a week to the nation following a mass shooting.

We know how he feels on this issue. But what more can he say without actually having something done?

ORNSTEIN: There is a limit to what the president can do. The question that is going to be foremost in my mind is whether he's going to talk about any

executive actions that he could take assuming that no legislation can pass. And there are real limits there as well, and the courts are likely to put

more limits on.

I think what's he's going to try to do tonight is to move those negotiations in the Senate further along by trying to make clear that there

would be a political price to be paid for not acting. And that's McConnell has even opened up these negotiations, a fear that this could be an issue

that would cause Republicans suburban voters in 2022.

Mitch McConnell primarily wants to ensure that he can win back control of the Senate. If he thinks that the failure to act in any fashion on this

issue following these horrific shootings might cost him a senate seat or two, you will see him move with great speed. If he thinks that politically,

they are not going to be hurt by it, that inflation, gas prices are still going to be the dominant issue, we can forget about any significant change.

GOLODRYGA: I know. I am so haunted. I imagine you are and much of the nation is by the pleas from those families in Uvalde when the president

visited last week to do something. You know, they are at least owed that.


GOLODRYGA: Norman Ornstein, thank you so much for joining. We appreciate it.

ORNSTEIN: Thank you, Bianna.

GOLODRYGA: Well, when we come back, a night to remember. Ukrainian celebrate a rare moment of joy, keeping their World Cup hopes alive.



GOLODRYGA: And finally, two hours of happiness that we have grown unaccustomed. That is what President Zelenskyy said on Instagram when he

thanked the Ukrainian National Soccer team for their show stopping performance against Scotland in the World Cup qualifier game, winning


It was the first game the country has won since Russia invaded and the emotion in the stadium was palpable. A brief moment allowing fans to forget

the horrors back home as the war enters its 100th day tomorrow. Ukraine hopes to keep's World Cup dream alive when they play Wales on Sunday. I

wish them well.

And that is it for now. Thank you so much for watching and good-bye from New York.