Return to Transcripts main page
Amanpour
Interview with Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski; Interview with Los Angeles Times Middle East Bureau Chief and Beirut-Based Journalist Nabih Bulos; Interview with Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis; Interview with "Who Could Ever Love You" Author and Niece of Former President Donald Trump Mary L. Trump. Aired 1-2p ET
Aired September 24, 2024 - 13:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[13:00:00]
CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Hello, everyone, and welcome to "Amanpour." Here's what's coming up.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT: Putin has stolen much already, but he will never steal the world's future.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: Ukraine makes its case for victory at the United Nations. I'm joined by one of its most ardent allies, the Polish foreign minister, Radek
Sikorski.
Then thousands flee their homes in Lebanon as fears grow of an all-out war. We get the latest from Beirut with L.A. Times Middle East Bureau Chief
Nabih Bulos.
And, as the world reels from these conflicts, I asked the Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis how his country can play a role in peace and
in the fight against climate change.
Also, ahead --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARY L. TRUMP, AUTHOR, "WHO COULD EVER LOVE YOU" AND NIECE OF FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: There was so much that was traumatizing about the
four years Donald was in office.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: -- bestselling author Mary Trump tells Michel Martin about her personal struggles as her uncle runs for the presidency again, all in her
new memoir, "Who Could Ever Love You."
Welcome to the program, everyone. I'm Christiane Amanpour outside the United Nations in New York, where President Biden today made his final
address in that role to the General Assembly. An audience of more than 100 world leaders all grappling with an increasingly unstable and volatile
reality. And high on the agenda for President Biden was Ukraine. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOE BIDEN, U.S. PRESIDENT: The Ukrainian people stood up. I asked the people of this chamber to stand up for them. The good news is Putin's war
has failed at his core aim. He set out to destroy Ukraine, but Ukraine is still free. He set out to weaken NATO, but NATO is bigger, stronger, more
united than ever before with two new members, Finland and Sweden.
But we cannot let up. The world now has another choice to make. Will we sustain our support to help Ukraine win this war and preserve its freedom,
or walk away from that aggression, be renewed and a nation be destroyed? I know my answer. We cannot grow weary. We cannot look away and we will not
let up on our support for Ukraine.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: Now, the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, as you saw, was there in the audience. He is here in the United States to present what
he calls his victory plan to President Biden, to Congress, and he hopes to both presidential candidates.
On Sunday, he kicked off this trip with a visit to a munitions factory in Pennsylvania, signing an artillery shell and thanking workers for their
help. But there's still one key request that Ukraine's leader is desperate to have heard, and that is permission to use U.S.-made and other allied
long-range missiles on targets inside Russia.
Now, one country that's been outspoken on this issue is Ukraine's next door neighbor, Poland. And the foreign minister, Radek Sikorski, is joining me
now. Welcome to the program.
RADOSLAW SIKORSKI, POLISH FOREIGN MINISTER: Hello.
AMANPOUR: Hi. So, you were in the room for President Biden's speech. So, I want to ask you to comment. He said, as of now, Putin has been defeated. He
has lost in terms of his main aim, to overturn and to destroy Ukraine. Do you agree with that?
SIKORSKI: His aim was to recolonize Ukraine, and he thought it would take three days, and he's clearly failed in that. Ukraine is democratic, it's
fighting, it's receiving a lot of assistance. Russia is underperforming. Ukraine, the west, the United States, we are overperforming and we just
need to stay the course until Putin runs out of recruits and resources.
Poland is doing its bit. We are on our 45th assistance package, $4.3 billion dollars of military equipment alone, 1.6 million refugees in
Poland, and 80 percent of western assistance to Ukraine comes through Poland, and we will stay the course.
AMANPOUR: You will stay the course. You're a front-line state. When President Biden says we will not waver, we will not walk away. Do you think
all the alliance feels that way? Frankly, do you think America will be able to fulfill that promise?
[13:05:00]
SIKORSKI: I hope so, because important principles are at stake, namely that you may not change borders by force on the pretext of coming to the
assistance of your compatriots on the other side. All borders, certainly in Europe, on most continents, are artificial.
Once we -- if we started changing them by force again it's a recipe for a war of everyone against everybody else. This time of European colonialism,
Russia's colonialism is over.
AMANPOUR: One of the things President Zelenskyy has heavily telegraphed is the victory plan. It apparently has about four or so components. Have you
been brought into sort of the circle? Do you know what the victory plan precisely looks like?
SIKORSKI: I was in Kyiv two weeks ago and President Zelenskyy said that the first person to read it will be President Biden. And I haven't seen it
yet. But it's possible that it's been handed over.
AMANPOUR: Apparently, one of the issues is to be formally invited into NATO. Another is that they absolutely want advantage on the battlefield,
what they call fair and justifiable use of the weapons that are being given to them without any restrictions. Now, I know you and some other European
countries say long-range missiles can be used to target Russian military targets inside Russia. But the U.S. has not yet signed off on that, nor
have the others.
SIKORSKI: There are restrictions on all of us, of humanitarian law and of -- and these are restrictions that Russia is breaching by attacking
civilian targets. I was in the Ukrainian city of Lviv, and they killed a family, you know, the father watched the bringing out of the bodies of his
wife and three daughters. And they're doing it all over the place. They've destroyed, it is estimated, 70 percent of Ukraine's electricity and heat
generating capacity. So, yes, those restrictions should apply.
But the missile that killed that family was launched from a Russian bomber flying over Russian territory from a Russian airfield. Give me one reason
why Ukraine should not be able to take out that bomber and take out that airfield? The victim of aggression has the right to defend itself also on
the territory of the aggressor.
AMANPOUR: So, why? Give me the reason. You're NATO. What's going on? Why?
SIKORSKI: We are making those arguments to the U.S. Ukraine is now on Russia's territory. If you believe in peace, you should be appealing to
both countries to remove their forces to the international line.
AMANPOUR: Poland has stepped, you know, quite far across -- you know, lent across the skis, so to speak. You said that it's a matter of your own
national security and constitutional rights to be able to strike down Russian launching mechanisms, whether it's a missile or an aircraft, as you
describe, even over the territory of Ukraine, if it's close enough to your border and may come, because you're next door. Yes, you still stick by
that?
SIKORSKI: Well, Ukraine has us as well to do it.
AMANPOUR: Yes.
SIKORSKI: And when Russia launches these missiles and drones into Ukraine, the least that they should expect is that they will launch the -- that
they'll lose the missile or the drone. And the trouble is that they are losing control over these things. So, drones are landing in Romania, in
Latvia, in Poland.
One Russian cruise missile crossed two-thirds of Poland landed 10 kilometers from my house in Western Poland. And you see when you do it over
our territory, the debris can injure someone or damage property. With hundreds of these projectiles being launched and some of them the Russians
are losing control of it, you also have to think about what will happen if one of them hits one of the Ukrainian nuclear power plants.
We should be providing Ukraine with anti-aircraft defenses in our own best interest because we know what happens when a Ukrainian nuclear power plant
blows. All of Europe has a problem.
AMANPOUR: You're talking about Chernobyl, of course, in the '80s.
SIKORSKI: Of course.
AMANPOUR: OK. So, if it makes absolute sense, then why does, for instance, the United States, even, obviously, NATO, the secretary general has said,
that's a step too far, that means we are directly involved in a war against Russia? How do you convince --
SIKORSKI: Well, we've had these discussions with Javelins, we've had these discussions with stingers, we've had these discussions with tanks, and
we've had these discussions with F-16s. And this is another one of those discussions. I hope the arguments finally persuade those who have the
decision-making power.
AMANPOUR: Ukraine also has a -- basically a manpower disadvantage. The Russians have a much, much bigger pool to draw upon. And you have said,
Poland has said, that there is an attempt, maybe it's underway already, to sort of raise a Ukrainian foreign legion on your territory and to train
them and to be able to send them back into Ukraine to fight. Where is that going? What's that all about?
[13:10:00]
SIKORSKI: We are ready to train a Ukrainian unit and equip it. Ukrainian side needs to provide the recruits. But if this works, I think other
countries may follow. I also believe that there should be no financial incentives for Ukrainian refugees in Western Europe to stay in Western
Europe. People should go back and defend their own country. And it's not a human right to be paid Social Security to be a draft dodger. And so, this
is something that we should address too.
AMANPOUR: In terms of what I've read from various, again, frontline states, such as yourself, such as the Baltics, they're very concerned that
despite all the promises of weapons and ammunition, it just doesn't get there in time and fast enough, and President Zelenskyy himself has
outlined, still, two and a half years into this war many of the promises are either not able to be fulfilled instantly or their promises for down
the line, they're just not getting there in time.
SIKORSKI: We feel we are doing what we can, and we are a frontline state. Yes, it takes the effort of the entire west. But remember, Ukraine has
received roughly 260 billion euros or dollars, depending how you count. We are front loading a loan based on frozen Russian assets. Ukraine's
indigenous arms industry has some spare capacity. We need to make investment into that. And Ukraine also needs to ramp up its recruitment
efforts of its own citizens.
So, everybody has to do their bit. We need to stay the course. These colonial wars, unfortunately, take a little longer than hitherto. But I
believe in a year or so, Putin will run out of human and material resources to continue this aggression.
AMANPOUR: And do you think Ukraine has a year or so to wait?
SIKORSKI: Those are Ukrainian decisions, but we have no right to be tired by this war because it's not we who are making the sacrifices. We should
continue to uphold principles and sustain our support for Ukraine.
AMANPOUR: I want to play a soundbite from the U.S. presidential debate between Kamala Harris for the Democrats and Donald Trump for the
Republicans. Essentially, she was pointing out that, in her view, Donald Trump would potentially, you know, reward or help Putin. Let's listen to
what she said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAMALA HARRIS, U.S. VICE PRESIDENT AND U.S. PRESIDENTIAL DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE: Putin would be sitting in Kyiv with his eyes on the rest of
Europe, starting with Poland. And why don't you tell the 800,000 Polish Americans right here in Pennsylvania how quickly you would give up for the
sake of favor and what you think is a friendship with what is known to be a dictator who would eat you for lunch.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: What is your reaction to that?
SIKORSKI: Well, we like it when U.S. presidential candidates vie for the support of the Polish community. Kamala Harris said that about Poles in
Pennsylvania. I'm going to Michigan to tell our people that NATO is important, to thank them for their support for the enlargement of NATO 20
years ago. And yes, that Poland's security and the security of Europe, we believe, important subjects.
AMANPOUR: And just another question about weapons and arms. You know, we've seen a lot of analysis about how, after the Cold War ended, there was
meant to be a peace dividend. So, a lot of arms factories --
SIKORSKI: And the wars.
AMANPOUR: Right -- you know, were sort of mothballed. And now, when you need them, because things have changed, they just haven't been able to get
up to speed quick enough. How do you see the big picture of European arms industries, you know, trying to meet this moment?
SIKORSKI: Actually, President Trump and all his predecessors were right on this, that Europe should be spending more. Poland has been spending a solid
2 percent of GDP on defense for the last 15 years. This year we had 4.3, next year 4.7 percent. Because you're right, Europe didn't just disarm, it
also de-industrialized in the defense field and we need to ramp up our capacity and our production, and we need to fairly share the burden of
that, which is why I'm a supporter of the European defense budget, which -- where we make contributions in proportion to GDP.
Yes, we need to stand firmer or on our own feet so as to support American leadership around the world.
AMANPOUR: And finally, President Biden referred to this being his last speech, last address as president. He gave the whole sweeping view of
history for the last, you know, 50 years, saying that it's often been really grim periods in history, but leaders have gotten over it and things
have got better.
[13:15:00]
When you see this backdrop, do you think one can be so sanguine? I mean, you've got a raging war in the Middle East, potentially widening. You've
still got Russia trying to change the face of Europe.
SIKORSKI: A lot of bad news, but there is good news too. In Poland, we had populists in power. We --our people came out 75 percent and we defeated the
populace. And President Biden, I thought, passed a very important message to the people in the chamber, namely, look, I'm not running again because
there are things that are more important than holding on to power. Think not only about yourself. Think about the welfare of your people. And that
was a very important, dignified message to pass to that room.
AMANPOUR: Radek Sikorski, Foreign Minister, thank you very much for joining us.
SIKORSKI: My pleasure.
AMANPOUR: Thank you. Let us turn now to Lebanon and its capital, Beirut, which was hit by another Israeli airstrike. At least 560 people have been
killed and more than 1,800 wounded since Monday, which was the deadliest day in nearly two decades for that country. Thousands of people are fleeing
their homes in search of safety. These images showing vehicles lined up at the Lebanon-Syria border. And overnight, thousands Hezbollah also launched
hundreds of projectiles towards Israel.
So, where is this all going? Where will it end up? Nabih Bulos is Middle East Bureau Chief for the L.A. Times, and he's in Beirut, and he's joining
me now. Thanks for being with us. You know, you probably heard the speeches here. These two huge wars dominate all the leaders' speeches. Can you tell
us what you think is going to be the next step, the next move, for instance, by Hezbollah?
NABIH BULOS, MIDDLE EAST BUREAU CHIEF, LOS ANGELES TIMES AND BEIRUT-BASED JOURNALIST: Well, at this point, it's hard to say only because Hezbollah
has sustained quite a few painful blows in these last few days. I mean, as you've reported on CNN, you've had the issue with the exploding pagers and
walkie-talkies. And then, of course, you had that massive strike in the heart of Beirut that struck, I mean, one of the senior commanders and 16 of
its elite commandos.
And, of course, then we've seen this tsunami of airstrikes that has been hitting really across Lebanon these last two days. So, it's fair to say the
group has sustained damage. At the same time, its leaders insist they will continue, right, with this so-called support for Hezbollah.
And that now, more importantly, there's an open account with Israel. And none of this, of course, sounds like a situation which is reassuring,
obviously. And at the same time, yes, Hezbollah has been perhaps weakened to an extent, but it supposedly still has a big arsenal and, indeed, still
has enough cadres to mount a serious challenge, and that's where we are now.
The expectation is that the group will continue as it is right now, firing rockets, indeed, as it has done today and yesterday.
AMANPOUR: I couldn't -- I can't see. Nabih, what is the -- you know, the proverbial question about the mood of the people? I mean, this has not
happened to Lebanon for, as we said, nearly two decades. We're seeing pictures of cars, we're seeing pictures of, you know, people trying to
flee. And Beirut itself, the capital, is obviously being targeted. What can you tell us about the people and what they think, if they can, and if they
have any view, of Hezbollah's role in this?
BULOS: Well, of course. I mean, not everyone in Lebanon supports Hezbollah, but even among its support base, people are tired. It's worth
noting that the country is going through a multiyear, you know, currency crisis that's seen about -- really about 90 percent of the value fall at
this point. And people, obviously, their savings were wiped out. So, really, they're ill-equipped to deal with the situation.
At the same time, yes, there are people who are, of course, you know, against Hezbollah, but even its supporters are feeling the pain the sense
that now they've had to leave the Dahiya, which is, you know, the heartland of its support in the capital. They've had to leave the south and also some
parts of the east. And you saw the images as well, there's just a mass exodus. People are now in shelters across Beirut and really -- I mean, also
into Syria and also in the north of the country. And families are scattered. Homes are destroyed. Obviously, people are very, very depressed.
AMANPOUR: And, Nabih Bulos, the Iranian factor. Obviously, Iran supports Hezbollah. It does support Hamas. And the Israelis, in fact, the prime
minister said this assault on Hezbollah targets is designed to try to, you know, sort of separate Hezbollah from its support for Hamas. But
everybody's always looking to see whether the Iranians are going to come in. They haven't yet wanted to do that and widen the war.
You know, the leaders, whether it's the supreme leader in Iran, whether it's the new president, have said that they will come to the support and
they vowed, you know, revenge, for instance, the killing of Ismail Haniyeh on their territory. Again, that hasn't happened.
[13:20:00]
What do you think is going to -- what's going to affect Iran's calculations about this?
BULOS: Well, look, it's fair to say that Hezbollah is perhaps Iran's most successful -- yes, most successful paramilitary group in the region. It's
worth noting that Iran has managed to create a, you know, sort of constellation of paramilitary groups across the region, in Yemen, in Syria,
in Iraq, and also in Lebanon, obviously in Hezbollah. And I mean, that ring of fire around Israel has been effective in terms of a threat.
At the same time, right, does this mean that Iran is going to push those various groups to help out if it comes to a big war? Will Iran itself send,
for example, troops or the besiege or anything else in that sense? I mean, truth, I don't expect that to happen, but I do think that it will continue
to support with weapons and perhaps logistical help with advisers and things of that nature.
I mean, the fact of the matter is that right now, even Hezbollah is not really interested in taking this into a wider war, even after all this,
right. Despite all the rhetoric, they are still interested in keeping it as it is, because that, in and of itself, is enough to maintain the goal of
keeping residents of Northern Israel outside of that area.
The fact is -- I mean, that if we see a ground invasion, of course, that would change the calculus. But until then, I think we'll remain as we are,
in many ways.
AMANPOUR: And, Nabih, what about listening to President Biden's speech today at the U.N.? I mean, he was very clear about, for instance,
addressing both Hamas and Israel that this war has to end, that they presented endless bridging proposals, ceasefire proposals, and it has to
end. And he got a big applause from the crowd when he said that as well as Israel living in peace and security, Palestinians had to live in dignity,
peace, security in their own state, there must be a Palestinian State. On the big picture, how do you think that will go down?
BULOS: Unfortunately, that rhetoric has been repeated many, many times over the years, and it has had little effect, I mean, whether on groups
like Hamas or -- you know, or on Israel for that matter. The fact of the matter remains that right now we do not see, I think, a very active role
from the U.S. and its foreign policy vis-a-vis the region has not been very effective when it comes to Hezbollah, you know, or Hamas, or indeed any
other actor, especially Israel.
And so, it would be hard to imagine that this would change, especially at such a late point in Biden's presidency. I mean, I think it's fair to say
that no one here is really expecting the U.S. to play a major role in actually stopping the hostilities.
AMANPOUR: Nabih Bulos, L.A. Times, thank you so much indeed for joining us from Beirut.
Now, in his speech earlier, President Biden acknowledged the huge range of challenges that face world leaders. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BIDEN: I recognize the challenges from Ukraine to Gaza to Sudan and beyond. War, hunger, terrorism, brutality, record displacement of people,
the climate crisis, democracy at risk, strangers in our societies, the promise of artificial intelligence and its significant risk. The list goes
on.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: Now, a new group of countries are preparing to play a prominent role in tackling those as they take up now non-permanent membership of the
U.N. Security Council. One of them is Greece. The country is also on the frontlines of issues like migration and climate change. The Greek Prime
Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis is here with me now. Welcome to the program.
KYRIAKOS MITSOTAKIS, GREEK PRIME MINISTER: Thank you, Christiane.
AMANPOUR: So, I just want you to react. You were in the room, obviously for President Biden's speech, his last speech as president. He did put
today's issues in the -- in terms of historical context. Do you feel as optimistic as he seemed to be about the ability to solve these current
crises?
MITSOTAKIS: First of all, I understand that it was a very emotional speech for President Biden coming to the end of a very, very long career. I think
it was a powerful speech in the sense that he touched upon various very, very important issues, including the opportunities and challenges of
artificial intelligence, and I think it is important because we need U.S. leadership on all those issues.
So, I was happy with the with the overall context of the speech. But now, of course, we need to get down to the nitty-gritty details of addressing
all these issues.
AMANPOUR: OK. So, one of the nitty gritty details for you, particularly, is the new war in the Middle East, and that's causing another huge stream
of refugees. I think they're moving towards, you know, the Mediterranean, moving towards Turkey.
You've just had conversations with President Erdogan about the challenge you face right now because of all this. Can you tell us what you guys
discussed and how you're going to fix it?
[13:25:00]
MITSOTAKIS: First of all, it was our sixth meeting over the past year. In itself, I think this constitutes significant progress in the quality of the
Greek-Turkish relationship because as you remember, we've had our frictions over the past years.
And I think it is very important to have open channels of communication to wherever we disagree, and we do disagree on issues such as the delimitation
of maritime zones, to do so by, first of all, agreeing that the issue can only be resolved with reference to international law, but also to work
together on issues such as migration, and we have made progress in terms of addressing this problem.
What we want, Christiane, is we want the boats to be stopped before they enter the water. And in order to do that, we need, of course, the
cooperation of the Turkish authorities. And I'd say we've made progress over the past year in establishing better channels of communication because
migration is a huge issue and we don't want to leave it up to the smugglers to decide who enters the European Union or to put innocent lives at risk.
So, working with Turkey on this topic is very important.
AMANPOUR: So, some have pointed out there's potentially, in one of the things you've called for, is for the E.U. to allow more of the children,
the wounded civilians from Gaza to be able to come to the E.U. At the same time, let me just get this right, you and Turkey have been building a
barrier, like a cement and barbed wire fence, along your northern border. Is there a contradiction with how you see the issue of migration and
refugees?
MITSOTAKIS: I think that, Christiane, we need both a big fence and a big door. And let me explain what I mean. It is important for the European
Union to defend its external borders. At the same time, it is important for to establish legal pathways to migration and to do so in an organized and
disciplined manner, both for humanitarian reasons, but also for economic reasons.
Greece, for example, was the one country that accepted hundreds of women from Afghanistan when the country essentially was on the verge of collapse
after the U.S. abandoned the country abruptly.
So, we have both humanitarian sensitivities, but at the same time, we want to send a message to countries such as Egypt, for example, that we can
welcome workers to Greece so they can come and stay, they can come legally, safely, and they don't need to embark on a dangerous trip, you know, across
the GNC in order to get to Greece.
And I think this has to be the foundation of a modern migration policy by the European Union. The solution is not to bypass the Schengen rules
unilaterally. We have a pact for asylum and migration. It makes no one completely happy, but that is the nature of European compromise, and we
need to implement it.
AMANPOUR: So, let me just ask you, because this is an endless -- an issue for you that you're constantly being asked about, because it's tragic.
Yesterday, another four migrants died in a shipwreck off your coast, off the island of Samos. Five were rescued, another 25 have been located on
shore. Your coast guards periodically have been accused of allegedly forcing people out of your waters and making people, you know, go back out
to sea and turn them away from -- you know, from Greece.
And as you know, last year The New York Times posted a big, important investigation with footage of boats being set adrift by the coast guard.
This seems to be alarmingly too often, and I wonder how you can deal with this, as you try to both control and be, you know, humanitarian and
welcoming?
MITSOTAKIS: I take your point, and I acknowledge that it is a, you know, a difficult balance to strike. First of all, let me point out that there was
no involvement of the Greek Coast Guard in yesterday's incident. It is a clear example of what happens when you have a dinghy trying to come across
in poor weather conditions. The Coast Guard only showed up to save people, which is the rule, Christiane. And whenever we have incidents where we feel
we need to investigate, we will do so.
At the same time, we do retain for ourselves the right to intercept boats on the sea border. I need to stress, these are not the open waters. The
borders, as you know, are relatively close, and then work with the Turkish Cork out in order to return these people to Turkey with safety. But the
most important thing is no boats at sea, and only the Turkish authorities can help us for this to happen, because it is tragic for human lives to be
lost on a journey which is dangerous, and where we are essentially outsourced to the smugglers the right to determine who will make this
journey.
AMANPOUR: And this is obviously an issue that many European and, of course, the U.S. are dealing with. What is the outcome of some of these
investigations? Have they been concluded?
MITSOTAKIS: Not yet. I have no indication that the Greek, especially when it comes to the Pylos tragedy, which I need to remind you happened in
international waters, that there was any involvement by the Greek Coast Guard that actually caused this accident.
[13:30:00]
But we're always open and we need to investigate properly. And we have also independent authorities in Greece that are actually doing this
investigation.
AMANPOUR: Let me just get back to the Israel-Palestinian war, Israel-Hamas war. And your foreign minister said yesterday, it seems that there's no
effective pressure on Israel. We're friends of Israel and we're strategic partners of Israel and we're trying to be as open and as sincere with them.
OK. What -- how does that play out? I mean, there's no influence, right? Who do you think can actually pressure Israel?
MITSOTAKIS: First of all, let me --
AMANPOUR: If you think they should be.
MARTIN: I think there should. And we've made it very, very clear to our Israeli friends that there were opportunities to get to a ceasefire. That
is at least how we feel, and those opportunities were not taken. And as long as you don't have a ceasefire in Gaza, the hostages will not be
released. You will have a necessary loss of life, compounding already on the humanitarian catastrophe that has taken place. And you will always give
Hezbollah a reason to continue firing rockets into Israel. So, it seems to me that it is also in Israel's interest to get to a ceasefire as quickly as
possible.
Look, we don't want to over exaggerate our power. I mean, many other countries, including the U.S., have said the same thing to Israel. But I do
point out that we are a good friend of Israel, and I think friends need to tell hard truths to friends. And this is essentially what we have done. And
we've also aligned our votes at the Security Council accordingly.
AMANPOUR: You've just said, including Israel, I mean, obviously -- sorry, including the USA, which has a huge influence on -- or should, because it's
such a strong ally of Israel. Does it alarm you that even the United States has not been able to have effective influence of actually achieving the
ceasefire? And you saw President Biden get pretty, you know, emphatic about now it's time for the parties to end this.
MITSOTAKIS: Well, maybe it is, you know, as President Biden, you know, is coming to the end of his term, maybe this is the opportunity to really do
what he can to stop this, because the consequences are dramatic and they're also economic consequences. Look what's happening in the Red Sea. Greece is
the largest maritime nation in the world. We're concerned about security and freedom of navigation. We had a Greek tanker that was attacked by the
Houthis.
So, there are many consequences of this crisis, including the impact on the cost of living, which is our number one priority for all Western countries.
So, this is not just a question for -- you know, for the Israelis or the Palestinians or the Lebanese to resolve, this is a regional conflict with
global implications.
AMANPOUR: What about a global crisis, and that is climate change? Not getting a huge amount of public attention here. They're obviously sidelined
conferences. And the president, again, President Biden said, you know, one of the things he's so proud about is that his country did the biggest
investment in climate infrastructure and green infrastructure. What are the challenges you're facing right now because there's the fires and there's
the floods and there's so much going on?
MITSOTAKIS: The Mediterranean, as you know, Christiane, is a hotbed for the climate crisis. It is happening. And by the way, it's not just the
Mediterranean and you saw huge floods in Central Europe. So, the climate crisis is already here.
What does this mean? First of all, we need to invest much more not just in mitigation, which is what we are doing, but also in short-term adaptation.
In Greece, for example, we're using sophisticated technologies, drones, artificial intelligence to identify wildfires as quickly as possible. And
it paid -- and we actually did well this year with the exception of one big fire, the forest that we lost were significantly less than in other years
in the hottest summer that we have ever experienced.
So, we need to be ahead of the curve. But this needs to be a European initiative, not just a Greek initiative. And I'm afraid that when you look
at the resources that we have available in Europe, we focus a lot on the Green Deal, but we focus very little on short-term adaptation, because once
these climate events hit, it is devastating, whether we're talking about wildfires or the big floods, and we need to do more as Europe to convince
our citizens that on the path towards climate neutrality, we will stand by them in case we have a catastrophic climate event.
AMANPOUR: And what do you think about the sort of central European project, if you like, on this? Because, obviously, after COVID there was
the big Green Deal, but there seems to be ort of chipping away at the edges of that.
MITSOTAKIS: I think there's a general understanding, which was also reflected in the Draghi report, that the Greed Deal is a very lofty goal,
but it cannot take place at the expense of the competitiveness of the European industry or by significantly decreasing living standards for
Europeans.
And if this means making certain readjustments, I wouldn't call them chipping away, I would call them realistic readjustments to what we have
agreed, so be it. I think we would be in the right direction.
[13:35:00]
AMANPOUR: And finally, and totally unrelated, but important to you and your people and the British people, the marbles, the Parthenon marbles.
MITSOTAKIS: The sculptures.
AMANPOUR: The sculptures.
MITSOTAKIS: Yes, the Parthenon sculptures.
AMANPOUR: There you go. Obviously, there was a lot of conversation between you and, at the time, George Osborne was the designated negotiator. What's
going on? Where are we with that?
MITSOTAKIS: Well, first of all, let us agree that it is I think important for global, sort of -- for the global cultural heritage for these cultures
to be viewed in Athens in unity with what is already there, because we're talking about the reunification, not the return.
It's one monument, Christiane. And it's -- I've used the analogy, it's as if you cut the Mona Lisa in half, and you have half of it in the Louvre and
half of it in the British Museum. So, this is going to happen at some point, I'm sure about that. We're having discussions in good faith with the
museum. I think also the new British government may be more open. Although, it is not their decision to a mutually, you know, agreed arrangement that
will allow for the reunification of the sculptures and the ability of all of us to actually view them in the shadow of the Parthenon where they
always belong.
So, I think we have a very credible case. And we are -- we'll continue to push.
AMANPOUR: Are you optimistic?
MITSOTAKIS: I am optimistic.
AMANPOUR: And what kind of a timeframe?
MITSOTAKIS: Well, look, I've said that it's taken us to -- we've -- we waited for 200 years. But this is certainly something I censored an urgency
in trying to address this issue. And it's certainly very high up my personal agenda.
AMANPOUR: It is indeed. Prime Minister Mitsotakis, thank you so much.
MITSOTAKIS: Thank you. Thank you, Christiane.
AMANPOUR: Thanks for being with us.
MITSOTAKIS: Thank you so much.
AMANPOUR: Now, in this busy week of diplomacy, world leaders are weighing up what a second Trump term could mean for the U.S. and beyond. To the
former president's niece, Mary Trump, it could spell nothing but bad news for American democracy.
She sat down with Michelle Martin to discuss her views on the upcoming election and her latest book, "Who Could Ever Love You."
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MICHEL MARTIN, CONTRIBUTOR: Thanks, Christiane. Mary Trump, thank you so much for speaking with us once again.
MARY L. TRUMP, AUTHOR, "WHO COULD EVER LOVE YOU" AND NIECE OF FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: It's really very generous of you to have me back.
MARTIN: Well, let's talk about the first book in front. I mean, many people will remember that you wrote a book during the Trump presidency. It
was called "Too Much and Never Enough." It was a bestseller for lots of reasons. I think in part because it satisfied a lot of people's curiosity,
about like, who is Donald Trump? What did writing that book do for you? Because it had to have been hard. I mean, the fact is you dug into a lot of
really painful episodes in your life, in your family's life.
TRUMP: You're absolutely right. I had to think about things, episodes in my family that I had not forgotten about exactly, but had put aside for
decades. And the other interesting thing about having to do that at that time, because, you know, we were at a very crucial point in the Trump
administration, we were about halfway through it when I started writing the book, we saw how much damage he was doing. We had no idea how much more
damage there was to come.
But I -- in the interval between living the experiences and writing about them, I became a trained clinical psychologist. So, I was able to bring
that training to bear on the way I analyze the family, both as a member of it and as an outsider. So, that actually helped in a way. It was
extraordinarily important that I got the psychology right in that book.
MARTIN: One of the things that I learned from your memoir, your second book, is that you really had not thought about a lot of these things for
years. And I was just intrigued by that. Like, why do you think that is?
TRUMP: Unfortunately, it's because of how my family spoke about my dad, how they treated my dad. Before I was born, my father was perfectly ready
to take over his dad's empire, Trump management. He went to school and got a business degree. He knew that was the role he was supposed to fulfill. It
didn't go well.
My grandfather had determined for various reasons, some of them that are not logical, that my father was not the right person. And when things went
south with his dad, he became a professional pilot for TWA at the dawn of the jet age. He went to ROTC. He was a second lieutenant in the National
Guard. All of that was over before I was born.
[13:40:00]
So, I never knew that version of Freddie Trump, the man I knew was the man who had been completely dismantled by his father who was in family
parlance, the alcoholic loser who did not deserve respect or attention.
And as you can imagine, between my dad's illness and the way my family treated him, it had a huge impact on my ability to have a relationship with
my father. And then, he died when I was 16. So, we were never really able to establish a relationship that could survive that at all.
MARTIN: So, why did you write this book?
TRUMP: It's very complicated. Part of it has to do with the struggles I've been having since 2016. I went into lockdown on November 9, 2016, well
before COVID. I became very isolated. I took it extremely personally. I watched with horror and helplessly as Donald, you know, dismantled my
country and caused great harm to many, many people.
The first book actually did help me get out of that. I had agency again. I felt like I had a role, which was a completely unexpected one. I mean, my
life took a bizarre turn in 2020. But then, a couple of years later, I found that I wasn't -- I -- you know, COVID -- people are emerging from
COVID, I wasn't. I was still isolating. I just felt like I had been completely altered by the experiences of the previous four years and I just
-- I could not take advantage of all of the opportunities that were presenting themselves to me and I couldn't figure out why.
And I realized that it's because I hadn't finished doing the work. I have complex post-traumatic stress disorder from trauma that occurred when I was
a child that I write about. And now, you can't cure PTSD, but you can manage it and mitigate it. I'd never done enough work in order to be able
to do that.
So, trauma, the trauma started piling up. And there was so much that was traumatizing about the four years Donald was in office. And I just -- I
could just couldn't get back on my feet. And I realized, in the fall of 2023, that I was essentially killing myself by continuing to isolate.
There's a lot of self-loathing wrapped up in my trauma, and I just couldn't see my way through.
So, I thought it was really important that I tell that story so I could pick up the thread and follow it to a place that's hopefully better than
the place I was in.
MARTIN: I got to tell you that you are a wonderful writer and a very vivid writer, but the book is brutal from the word go. It's brutal from the
title. I mean, who could ever love you? And it, the book opens with you entering a trauma treatment facility. I'm just wondering, you know, why you
opened there and what the process of writing this book was for you?
TRUMP: It was important for me to locate myself in the present or, you know, in the last six years, I guess, when the book opened. So, I think
part of it was also to acknowledge that we're all traumatized. Whether we acknowledge it or not, whether we recognize it or not, whether we've done
anything about it or not, we're all traumatized.
Some of us from the politics starting in 2016, some of us from COVID, some of us from both, some of us from the cruelties and the division that has
become just part of our everyday life now. And I think it's really important to acknowledge. Not just that I recognize that, but that I feel
it too, because that's why we tell these stories, not just to make sense of our traumas and our histories for ourselves, but to help other people gain
insight as well, to the extent that that's possible.
MARTIN: But one of the things I found interesting is that you do clearly feel that the family, the Trump family, it's almost like a metaphor for the
country. How is it that you see the way the Trump family operates really does stand as a larger metaphor for where the country is now and the role
that he's played in making it that way?
[13:45:00]
TRUMP: We have changed as a country. The way I think about it is that weak systems bend towards their most dysfunctional member. We have done that. We
discussed the debate in terms that are favorable to Donald as if it's some Wrestlemania episode. We discussed the debate in terms of what Vice
President Harris has to do, not what the criminal needs to do to make his case. And in my family, only one person mattered. My grandfather was the
one who mattered, and he chose Donald to be the only other one who could matter.
Everything was a zero-sum game. Only one person could win. Everybody else had to lose, which is why the rest of us struggled to find meaning, the
rest of us struggled to find evidence that we mattered, right. And we see that. Cruelty was a currency in my family. Kindness was considered
weakness. That's where we are now. If you want to be successful, we're told, you need to be tough and cruel and unyielding. And if you're kind,
then you don't measure up, but that is where we are as a country. And we need to fight against that, I think. And so, far, we haven't succeeded.
MARTIN: But sort of looping back to the larger mission of this book. So, what do you want us to draw from this? How do you want us to receive this?
TRUMP: Donald Trump, by virtue of the family he came from, by virtue of the fact that he was raised in a particular way by one person, again, who
was a sociopath and my grandfather and my grandmother, who was also deeply, deeply troubled person, Donald is an irreparably broken person. He has
never done the work. This is not somebody who will get better. He will only get worse. We've seen it happening before our eyes.
So, it's not like he did some questionable things in his younger days and has made reparations. No, he has no insight into himself. And again, we've
seen this in how he's governed. We see this and how he's campaigning. We -- it's very clear that the rhetoric is getting more charged. It's getting
more violent. The people -- the number of people and the kinds of people he's attacking continue to increase. And we just cannot withstand this kind
of dysfunction. We barely withstood it the first time around.
And, you know, for anybody thinking, well, you know, we voted him out and everything was fine. No, it wasn't. Things are worse now than they -- in
terms of our politics, than they were at the end of Donald's term.
President Biden, Vice President Harris have done extraordinary work to try to get us back on our feet, but this race is essentially tied right now.
That, to me, is a sign that we have a lot of more -- we have a lot more work to do. And a lot of people, either like what Donald is offering, which
is a terrifying thought, or just don't know enough about what's really going on.
MARTIN: You've been writing with some exasperation about your view that the legacy media, for example, is not taking seriously the incoherence of
many of the former president's statements and that you feel that a double standard is being employed where the Democrats are being asked to sort of
be coherent and have coherent policies and to, you know, adhere to kind of norms, but that he is not. And could you say more about that?
TRUMP: The push to normalize Donald is breathtaking. And more recently, especially in light of, as you mentioned, the focus, the laser focus on
President Biden's age and mental acuity. The lack of that on -- now that Donald is the oldest person ever to run for the presidency is pretty
shocking, especially given the fact that much of the time Donald makes no sense at all.
[13:50:00]
So, it's as if the legacy media has decided that its job is not to report what he's saying, but to translate it for us. The problem is twofold. One,
they're not telling us that's what they're doing. They're reporting it as if these are the things Donald is saying coherently.
And secondly, they're not really translating him at all because his gibberish, really, is untranslatable. What they're doing is they're imbuing
meaning upon his words that actually doesn't exist within those words, which is much more dangerous.
And, you know, we saw this in my family, too. Like, Donald was the chosen child. He was the best, the greatest the smartest, and none of that was in
evidence. But that's what we had to buy into. We have existed, since he came onto the scene and gained power, in this very dark place. It feels,
especially with COVID, but also with his treatment of the immigrant population, his treatment of the LGBTQ plus community, his treatment of
women, that we've all been existing on this very narrow band of human experience. It's all been rage and fear and dissatisfaction.
And to see the contradistinction between that and what Vice President Harris offers us, it's as if we've been in a dungeon and she's opened the
door and we can be out in the sunshine again. And that's not spoken to at all.
MARTIN: I don't want to make the book sound completely dire because it's not. There are sort of moments of brightness, of moments of kind of
revelation, which feels refreshing. Sort of at the end of it, you do -- I guess the question would be, where do you end up? Where are you now?
TRUMP: It's still a work in progress, but I do hope it ends at a place of hope with the understanding that there is still a lot of work to do. I feel
that part of the, again, impetus for writing this book was that I was so stuck. And I would -- I had opportunities handed to me because of the first
book that I wasn't able to take advantage of because I was so broken, and I wanted to change that.
And part of that was recognizing that by virtue of some of the work I've done, by virtue of just where Donald and I ended up, diametrically opposed
to each other and as far apart as you could possibly be, both literally and metaphorically, I have some power here, too, and I want to use it to help.
I want to make -- I want to help change. I want to contribute. And that can be scary, but it's also a privilege.
MARTIN: Well, it is interesting because I will say, like I said at the beginning, that it -- that your expertise, your both professional expertise
and your familial relationship came at a time -- became public at a time when people really kind of wanted to understand, like, what's going on
here? What do you hope your contribution will be going forward?
TRUMP: Assuming we get through this election in a way that keeps us intact and keeps our democracy intact, I want to be part of a project that
strengthens democracy so that we don't ever have to fight this fight again. It feels like we've been fighting this rearguard action against encroaching
fascism for years now, and it weakens us. You know, there's attrition. It leaves us vulnerable. So, we need to strengthen democracy.
Actually, I mean, I don't think America has ever been a true democracy. We need to make it one. We need to make this country representative to all of
its people who all have the same rights and make this as a level of playing field as we possibly can.
But ort of more immediately, I really hope to be part of the conversation that makes people feel that being a fully realized human being, being the
kind of country that I think most of us want this country to be, we need to believe that kindness is a strength. We need to believe that empathy is the
thing that unites us, is the thing that makes us better. And I would like to see this fallacious notion that cruelty is what makes us strong in the
rearview mirror. It's unsustainable.
MARTIN: Mary Trump, thank you so much for speaking with us again.
TRUMP: Thank you for having me. This was wonderful.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
AMANPOUR: A warning from one who knows. And finally, a stark reminder of all the innocent young lives lost in the Israel-Hamas war.
[13:55:00]
In Doha, thousands of teddy bears have been lined up, each representing the more than 16,000 children who've been killed in Gaza since October 7th. The
installation titled Echo of Lost Innocence is a powerful statement that each life taken is not just a statistic, but a childhood unfairly cut
short.
We also remember the children still being held captive by Hamas in Gaza and those killed on October 7th. A sobering reminder of why here at the United
Nations, world leaders are desperately seeking a ceasefire.
And that is it for now. If you ever miss our show, you can find the latest episode shortly after it airs on our podcast. And remember, you can always
catch us online, on our website, and all-over social media.
Thank you for watching, and goodbye from the United Nations.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:00:00]
END
