Return to Transcripts main page
Amanpour
Interview With U.S. Ambassador To Japan Rahm Emanuel; Interview With Former U.S. Defense Secretary William Cohen; Interview With "Our Town" Actress Katie Holmes; Interview With "Our Town" Actor Jim Parsons; Interview With "Our Town" Director Kenny Leon. Aired 1-2p ET
Aired December 02, 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. Asia prepares for a whole
new America. My conversation with the U.S. ambassador to Japan, Rahm Emanuel. We talk Trump, tariffs, and where Democrats go from here.
Then --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PETE HEGSETH, TRUMP'S PICK FOR DEFENSE SECRETARY: I'm straight up just saying we should not have women in combat roles.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: -- no women in combat and ditching diversity efforts. Is this the future under Trump's unconventional defense big? We dig into the real-world
impact with former U.S. Defense Secretary William Cohen.
And --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You've got to love life to have life. And you've got to have life to love life. It's what they call a vicious circle.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: -- "Our Town." As the great American play returns to Broadway, Michel Martin speaks to stars Katie Holmes, Jim Parsons, and director Kenny
Leon about giving a fresh take on this classic.
Welcome to the program, everyone. I'm Christiane Amanpour in Washington, which is already being rocked by President-Elect Trump's cabinet picks even
before he assumes office. Now, while the current president, Joe Biden, actually lands in Africa, there was another controversial choice over the
weekend, Kash Patel for FBI director. And one more swing of the tariff acts, now, Trump threatening 100 percent duties on goods from the BRICS
alliance if they don't remain pegged to the U.S. dollar.
This could all stoke further tensions with Beijing and concern regional allies like Japan and South Korea, which have shored up their partnership
with the U.S. under President Biden. Joining me to discuss all of this is the U.S. Ambassador to Japan, Rahm Emanuel. A veteran Democrat, he was also
the mayor of Chicago and chief of staff to President Barack Obama.
Rahm Emanuel, Ambassador, welcome back to our program.
RAHM EMANUEL, U.S AMBASSADOR TO JAPAN: Thanks for having me.
AMANPOUR: So, look, I'm in Washington. So, it's all very much in the prism of U.S. domestic politics and how it --
EMANUEL: Get out of there as quickly as you can to keep your sanity.
AMANPOUR: It's a field trip. You know, we're seeing all this going on, so you said get out of there and keep your sanity. What, right now, from
either your perspective as an ambassador in Asia or as a Democrat, is driving you insane?
EMANUEL: Well, I don't know how much time we have in this show. But look, I, first of all, it's not driving me insane. I think there's certain things
that I obviously don't agree with that happen. I'm going to stay in the lane of being an ambassador. So, I'm not going to be partisan about
politics.
I think we -- but closer to home what we're building, our allies feel right now very reassured about America's posture in Indo-Pacific. They're
committed, whether it's on the trilat between the United States, Japan, and Korea, the United States, Japan, the Philippines, the Quad, about our
commitment to the region and commitment to their security being politically, economically, strategically engaged. And I think there's --
you know, from where it was in 2020 to where it is today and many voices on the hill, Democrat, Republicans, all agree that we're in a better position.
China is isolated in their own neighborhood by their own actions, and we have made the most of that. I think there's a lot to be built on if you
have a theory of the case that allies are actually important to your strategic vision.
AMANPOUR: Well, look, that's the point, isn't it? President Trump has demonstrated in his first term and in his words ever since that he's not
really a multilateralist. He's not one who actually believes in, you know, people being stronger together. It's a very America first, to coin his own
phrase, and very transactional. What do you think -- well, what do you know, for instance, the Japanese government is thinking, and perhaps even,
what do you think the Chinese are thinking with the latest tariff threats?
EMANUEL: So, look, first of all, let me -- the way I kind of break it down, and I don't like sports metaphors in this, but I think it works. The Indo-
Pacific is a home game for China. It's an away game for the United States. You want to make it closer to a home game for the United States? You got to
work with your allies. That's the only way to do it. It's the idea that you're going to deal with China on any strategic level from the economics
fair or the strategic fear of the military security side, the diplomatic, you have to have allies. That's our force multiplier and so many different
fronts. If you don't do that, you're not going to be able to be a force.
[13:05:00]
We are a permanent Pacific power in presence. You can bet long on the United States. That's true for Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Korea,
Philippines, Singapore, et cetera. And I think you have to have that concept, otherwise, you're going to do it from Long Beach, California or
from Hawaii, and that just doesn't have the reach and the capacity. So, that's just kind of a fundamental question.
Now, China wants everybody to believe the United States is out of here. We're the permanent. They are going to be the big boy in the field there.
And the United States is declining power. Either get in line, or we're going to use all our economic strategic power to crush your sovereignty.
That is why the people, whether they're allies, treaty allies, or friends, want America invested in that region.
And it's not -- and you can't be America first when -- and believe in America first in the Indo-Pacific if you're not doing it with allies,
because that's the only way it becomes an America first agenda. And second is one of the things that draws people from the United States is that we --
you know, we haven't been perfect at this. We've had our mistakes in execution of this, but we have extended ourselves on behalf of another
country's interest, which is why they're willing to align their interest with ours.
Now, I think -- I can't speak for China, but you can see right now, they're making moves to try to amend with other countries in the region. They did
something recently with India on the border. They recently have done something with Japan on the fish from the Japanese waters in Fukushima.
Because I think they're trying to make amends in the region to allies who may be unnerved. And so, I think we have to kind of double down on what we
built.
This is always -- it's nothing -- you don't hit an equilibrium. It's a work in progress. I do think the -- going from a hub spoke to a trilateral,
multilateral structure is better serves America's interests. And we flip the script on China. They go from trying to isolate a country to being
isolated in their own region.
AMANPOUR: So, you know, the tariffs are a big issue, and I know you've sort of touched on it, but what do you think that will do -- you know, Xi
Jinping congratulated Trump in a way that said, we also have to find a way to get along, obviously politically and in any other way.
But what do you think the tariffs will do for America's security and alliances, but also for the American people, including the big ones he's
already threatened on Canada and Mexico?
EMANUEL: Well, let me say this, you know, when the head of the Chinese Communist Party says we have to figure out a way to get along, well, we
weren't the ones that decided we were going to go from strategic competitor to strategic adversary. You decided that. We're responding to what you've
done. You want to figure out how to get along? Let's not steal intellectual property from Google. Let's not steal intellectual property from ASML.
Let's not -- when the International Court makes a ruling on behalf of the Philippines, you decide to totally disregard it.
So, if you want to have a way in which you say the world is big enough for two big powers, OK, got it. But you're the one that made the change in the
concept. I think one of the faults for the United States, we're all responsible for this, those of have been in government, is we held on too
long to the belief that China would be a committed country to the rules- based system because they so benefited from the rules, when in fact they have violated those rules in intellectual property theft, economic
espionage, coercion on allies, wolf warrior strategy, violating their EEZs, economic zones, is a core piece of their strategic and economic business
model, and you can't do that.
So, I do think -- you know, look, I don't think the tariffs is the end all and be all. Is it a negotiating strategy? I don't know. They haven't been
clear. There's multiple decisions on that. And I want to be careful. I'm still an ambassador. I don't want to take a partisan political position. It
depends in service of what end and to what strategic vision. Is it the only -- is it a tool in a toolbox or the toolbox? And so, to me, if it's a tool
in the toolbox, to what end does it serve? What are the other tools you're going to use? How are you going to treat allies to be part of a strategy
where I still believe conceptually you want to isolate the isolator?
AMANPOUR: Now, in terms of America's allies, so Japan, where you've been, or where you are, and South Korea, and we've got Taiwan as well, I think
they're all expecting to be pressured to put more money into their defense, to pay for the American soldiers, or, you know, military who are there. Is
that the impression you're getting, and do they seem ready and willing to do it?
[13:10:00]
EMANUEL: Well, as you know, in the last three years, probably been most significant change in both the military structures of the United States and
Japan. We're taking a piece of the Indo-Pacific that's been based in Hawaii, the command control center, moving it to Japan. Japan, even before
there was a tank on the Ukrainian border, a Russian tank on the Ukrainian border, agreed to go to 2 percent of GDP of defense budget, acquire
counterstrike capabilities, align their national security with our national security and our visions in that area, normalized relations with Korea.
So, when you look at all that component from a security standpoint, Japan's on the third year of hitting that 2 percent mark way ahead, and it's not a
criticism, but an observation of countries in Europe where you have a hot conflict, which you don't have in the Indo-Pacific. And they've done very,
very significant things from interoperability and capacity to align closer to the United States.
They're going to go from the nineth to the third largest defense budget in the world. We're their number one defense supplier where they purchase
weapons from. So, we have an interest there and they have an interest with us. You can sit here and argue about cost of a base, it's an issue, it's
not the issue.
And the ability to just take -- you said Taiwan, but I happen to think the Philippines is a real event right now in the South China Sea. You don't
have to wait to 2027. It's happening right now between what China -- how China is treating the Philippines. But if one of the strategies on Taiwan
is a quarantine, the Philippine area in the South Island -- southwest islands of Japan, make a quarantine of Taiwan much more problematic for
China to execute.
So, again, example A, you want to have a strategy to deal with kind of a deterrence to China. You're not going to do it without allies. Just as one
-- just look at the map. Not possible from that scenario. Number two, I do think -- and this is on us, this is where I would think when they say to
us, oh -- if we would say to them, oh, you're going to have to pay more for a base, you know, the United States military industrial base, to me, is our
number one security risk.
They've never met -- none of the big four have ever met a budget timeline or a deadline for producing a major weapon. And so, the idea -- you know, I
can't tell you how many times I've been asked to renegotiate a contract, where -- because our companies have not met the deadline or the cost. So, I
would say to you is, we have an ally, we're the biggest supplier of defense products. They're the biggest -- one of the biggest purchasers, is going to
become the third largest defense budget. They rely on not just our security commitment but also the purchases of weapons from all the major foreign
military industrial companies who can't meet a budget, can't meet a deadline.
And so, I say -- so, I -- you know, and every one of them are major stock buybacks. I will tell you one lesson I came out of here, we should have a
policy in the defense budget, you cannot do stock buybacks if these 10X weapons that you produce aren't on budget and on timeline. Not a lot. I'm
saying this both rhetorically, it is so frustrating from a security commitment where you always have to go back and renegotiate with an ally
who's purchasing weapons from you.
AMANPOUR: So, let me ask you, because all of this is obviously going to come up, you know, in spades as we go along, but you are also a very
prominent Democrat. And as you know, here in Washington, where I am and elsewhere around the country, there's a lot of wailing and gnashing of
teeth over what happened, you know, trying to do postmortems.
EMANUEL: Yes.
AMANPOUR: And I just wonder whether you think there's some prominent Democrats who'd say, stop freaking out. Just stop it. Just take stock and
let's really analyze the real issue, which the bottom line they believe is the economy and others say no, no, no, we've got to just, you know, stop --
and this and that.
I want to know where you stand on this, because your name is also being brought up as potential running for the DNC. But just noteworthy on this,
The Washington Post and YouGov did a blind test of a hundred policies. Harris' agenda was overall more popular than Trump's. So, what do you think
went wrong for your party?
EMANUEL: Yes, I think there's three layers, and I'll try to do it quickly. I want it on the top line when 70 percent of the country think that it's
headed in the wrong direction or the economy is not good, that's a structural architect, structurally anti-incumbent.
And any leader that's lived through COVID, it's been bad for the body and not great for the body politic. And it's an example of the elections
throughout both the developed and developed world. So, they're structural there. But a layer below that, when the top of the ticket runs below Senate
and congressional candidates, that's about the kind of campaign you run. You would have a senator in Pennsylvania if we weren't running below the
ticket.
[13:15:00]
And that is about the campaign that was run, example, look, if you're worried about democracy, which is a big issue, but we had you on the low.
Donald -- and again, I want to be careful here, given I'm an ambassador, but the idea that the race that we run is more about how the Oval Office is
going to become like eBay and we're -- whether you're for -- one day you're for TikTok, the next day against TikTok, the next day you're for TikTok,
and one of his biggest supporter is an investor in TikTok.
Oil and gas interests. We are the Democrats -- and again I want to be careful, are the thin blue line protecting you from major special interests
that are going to run rampant through Washington. That should have been the core argument, there are other things to talk about.
And then third, below that, which is not this election, but this moment in time. And that is, I think, if you go back through three events, the Iraq
war, which American people were deceived, spent trillions of dollars, people -- thousands of soldiers lost their lives, people maimed for life,
people were deceived and lied into a war, and not one person responsible for that deception ever was held accountable.
Six years later, the financial industry lies to the American people. People lose their homes, their livelihood, and the bankers are screaming for their
bonuses. Nobody held accountable. Fast forward we are, for those remaining years, the anti-establishment. In COVID, the Democrats become the
establishment voice in so many different ways.
And the component also is in this period of time, it's the first generation of Americans to believe that their kid's future is going to be worse. than
theirs, which has never happened in 200 years of history. And we become the establishment. We literally talk like the establishment. Who talks like
about the caring economy? It's called nurses. It's called teachers. Nobody talks like that, except for an adjunct professor trying to become a 10-year
professor.
But we are -- there's other things that we talk about. Defund the police. When you say that's crazy, they all say, well, it doesn't mean that. Well,
don't use the English language then. OK? Because that's how we communicate.
So, there's a whole thing that happened in COVID and people's lives get upturned and still haven't gone back to kind of a normal routine and
they're angry, and the establishment, I'm part of it, we're all guilty for having, actually, in many, many different ways, never actually have a rule
book that applies to universally. There's one for those in the elite and the establishment and one for everybody else.
So, to me, the election can be understood in layers, and I think the bigger thing is to understand this moment in time, reestablish a connectivity
where the values and the ideals and that we believe in, we're going to fight for, and they're wider -- and this is one of the things that's
important in politics, they're wider than the loudest voice.
And I want to add one thing that's important. The public believes that the Democratic Party is more controlled by the far left, this is a cultural far
left, than they think the Republican Party is by the right. And when you look at John Kennedy, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama. John Kennedy gives a
speech in Dallas about the Catholic Church. President Clinton, at that time, gives a speech about Sister Souljah at Operation Push.
And President Obama gives a speech about Father Wright. They show that they are bigger than any one component of the coalition. That has not happened,
and we need to reestablish that we are a coalition party, but no one voice is bigger than the totality of our -- and the singularity of our voice. And
that did not -- has not happened in past presidential campaigns.
AMANPOUR: Do you think -- I mean, you've got seven weeks to go I guess, A, how are you feeling about coming back from over there, and B, are you going
to follow David Axelrod's advice and apply for the DNC job?
EMANUEL: Look, I'm looking forward and I've got a couple things left I'm still going to execute. I mean this not just verbiage, I'm going to run
through the tape on a couple things. You'll be seeing that in the next seven weeks. I -- before I turn the page over before I'm done, I also want
to say it's been an incredible honor to serve the country. I've learned a lot, not only about the region, learned a lot about America being away from
America and when I -- the first thing I'm doing today after this visit, I'm going to go back to Chicago back home and I look forward to returning home
to Chicago and I'll take a sense of where I'm going to go.
I'm not done with public service. What road I take in public service will be something I determine in the future. But I am going to spend the
remaining time of the honor I've had to be the U.S. ambassador in Japan at this critical moment in time in our history to run right through the tape.
And there's about three or four things you'll see in -- over the next seven weeks that indicate exactly what I just said.
[13:20:00]
AMANPOUR: All right. Well, we will be watching. Rahm Emanuel, ambassador to Japan, thank you.
EMANUEL: And, Christiane, I will buy you a one way Amtrak ticket out of Washington, D.C. Hurry up, get on it. There's an Acela right now. It would
take you anywhere you want to go.
AMANPOUR: You know, I'm here as a foreign correspondent, Rahm. That's all I can tell you.
EMANUEL: Well, the emphasis word was foreign, not correspondent.
AMANPOUR: Rahm Emanuel, thank you so much.
EMANUEL: You got it.
AMANPOUR: Now, here in Washington, civil servants and longtime defense and national security staffers are bracing for radical reinvention as Trump's
unconventional cabinet comes to town. Take a listen to this and decide for yourself.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PETE HEGSETH, TRUMP'S PICK FOR DEFENSE SECRETARY: I'm straight up just saying we should not have women in combat roles. It hasn't made us more
effective, it hasn't made us more lethal, has made fighting more complicated.
TULSI GABBARD, TRUMP'S PICK FOR DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE: Here's something you are not going to hear on the mainstream media. What you do
hear is warmongers arguing that we must protect Ukraine because it is a, quote/unquote, "democracy." But they're lying. Ukraine isn't actually a
democracy.
KASH PATEL, TRUMP'S PICK FOR FBI DIRECTOR: I'd shut down the FBI Hoover building on day one and reopening the next day as a museum of the deep
state.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: Well, those were the pick for defense secretary, former Fox News host Pete Hegseth, Trump's would-be director of national intelligence,
Tulsi Gabbard, and his choice to lead the FBI, Kash Patel.
Joining me now is William Cohen. He's a Republican who became President Bill Clinton's defense secretary, having been in the Senate and also in the
House for his State of Maine. Welcome to the program, Bill Cohen.
WILLIAM COHEN, FORMER U.S. DEFENSE SECRETARY: Christiane, I'm really pleased to be with you, and thanks for inviting me.
AMANPOUR: Can I just ask you, I mean, honestly, those soundbites from those very important jobs that are being filled, kind of -- are kind of worrying
to a lot of people. So, let me ask you, as a former defense secretary, given all that's going on in the world right now, and we'll get to the
substance in a moment, are you comfortable with what appear to be loyalists picks who really have no experience in where they're being assigned, being
assigned? For instance, Pete Hegseth as defense secretary?
COHEN: Well, I'm concerned about the appointment or the nomination of people who don't have a sufficient background in the areas they're going to
be required to oversee and to manage. With respect to the -- to any of the appointments, I think we have to focus on the substance of the individual,
character obviously becomes critically important and merit. And so, those were the tests I would say, what is your substance? What is your character?
What is the merit of your appointment? Can you handle the job?
And so, each of the individuals will have to go through that vetting process or confirmation process by the United States Senate and the notion
that we would skip that, I think would be certainly a threat to what remains of a check and balance type of government. And would allow people
to go through the process without having all of those issues vetted before the American people.
And so, I would be concerned about that, skipping the confirmation process, having temporary employment appointments or recess appointments that could
last for up to a year or so. All of those issues become important as to whether the Senate is going to assert itself as an independent, co-equal
branch of Congress versus the president of the United States and the Supreme Court.
AMANPOUR: Well, that is the question, and I wonder what your feeling about that is. And of course, you know, reading about this I, you know, found out
that when you were -- you know, way before you were defense secretary, you know, when you were congressperson, you were Republican from Maine's
district there, and as a freshman member of Congress, you laid out the evidence for impeaching President Nixon, the party that you are from.
And I just wonder whether you think the current Republicans in the Senate would take on their today responsibility in that manner? I'm not talking
about impeachment.
COHEN: I don't know --
AMANPOUR: I'm talking about the -- you know, the rigorous look into the appointments and the approval process.
COHEN: Christiane, I was trained as an attorney, a lawyer, and I believe fundamentally in the rule of law, and it's the rule of law which separates
us from autocratic or dictatorial governments, and that was primarily on my mind during the Watergate issue, Iran Contra. I want all of us, presidents,
everyone beneath the president to abide by the rule of law and respect the rule of law.
[13:25:00]
And I think the party, most recently, in my judgment, has been more concerned about power rather than the rule of law. And I would hope that
the Senate would reassert itself. They certainly, as a Republican member, want to be supportive of the next president of the United States, but they
have an obligation to insist upon whoever comes before them, whatever President-Elect Trump may do, they have to insist upon the rule of law. If
they don't, they're surrendering something fundamental to the integrity of this country and the notion that we could remain a democratic republic will
be dismantled.
So, I hope that they will abide by the rule of law and insist upon it. And I look forward to their hearings to see if that's going to be the case.
AMANPOUR: I want to dig down into the department that you once headed as defense secretary, which is obviously the Pentagon. I mean, it's a massive,
huge bureaucracy, millions of people, you know, I don't know how many trillions of dollars of budget. And as you know, Hegseth has said some very
controversial things. You just heard him. No women in combat. Women are not fit to be in combat. The DEI project is just a project and those who are,
you know, beneficiaries of that should be out, including, he's been saying the current, you know, hugely, you know, competent and distinguished
chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Brown.
On top of all, that The New Yorker has just published more that he was forced out of previous leadership jobs for financial mismanagement, sexist
behavior, being repeatedly intoxicated on the job. Is he fit for this service, this particular service?
COHEN: Well, this is -- these are the issues that the Senate has to really explore. For example, women in combat. We can't fight today without women
in combat. And you have to define, what is combat? Are you talking about hand-to-hand combat like the Peloponnesian Wars or you're really man to man
in the trenches, or are you talking about the kind of combat that we have today and likely to have tomorrow?
Women are flying our high-performance aircraft. They're doing a great job at that. They're flying our helicopters. They're sailing our biggest ships.
They are fundamental to our ability to defend this country. And I think that anyone thinks you're going to pull them out, pull them out of what?
Pull them out of training as grunts in the marine, so to speak, hand-to- hand combat, or are you talking about, can they manipulate drones as well as men? Can they fly planes as well as men? What are we talking about in
terms of defining what combat is today and what's it going to be tomorrow?
If we're looking what the Ukrainians are doing with drone technology, far exceeding what many countries far more advanced than they are in terms of
their military capability are doing. So, when you say pull women out of combat, you're talking about pulling a major component of our fighting
force, and I think it would be a mistake if it can be done.
And I think it would be very hard for anyone coming in to say, no more women in combat. We want them in subservient roles. Yes, they can be clear
typists and some sort of a -- in the nursing profession as such, but they can't be with us in the fighting of war. I don't think that can take place
today. I don't think it would be wise to do it, but that's up to the Senate at this point to say, do you have the capability? So, can you manage a
department that has at least 20 percent of our positions filled by women?
Secondly, I think an also controversial statement would be that black people are being promoted based on race. I wonder if that applied to the
Tuskegee Airmen and what they were able to do against heroic odds during World War II? I wonder if that would apply to Colin Powell? I wonder if
that would apply to Benjamin O. Davis Sr. and Benjamin O. Davis Jr., and so many others who have performed at the highest levels? And as far as
Chairman Brown, you think he's been promoted based upon the color of his skin, or was it really because of his character and his service to the
country?
So, I think these are the kinds of issues that have to be explored, whether something is said for political purposes, the one thing we cannot do is
allow the military to be politicized and to allow people to come in who are -- and serve in our military, who are not capable, who are not based on
merit. So, we'll have to wait and see.
AMANPOUR: I mean, you know, apart from the, you know, pretty extraordinary facts that you just point out, it's also a story about America. I mean,
it's just, you know, this is not what America stands for, dismissing women, dismissing, you know, minorities of any kind. So, I think that's what some
people are very, very you know, concerned about, as well.
[13:30:00]
I wanted to ask you also about Syria. Tulsi Gabbard. She has been quoted, and we quoted her there. I mean, she basically said Ukraine is not a
democracy. She's been viewed as unnecessarily sympathetic to people like Putin and Syrian President Bashar Assad. How dangerous or compromising is
that for an American director of national intelligence?
COHEN: Well, let's go back to Ukraine. Ukraine certainly is trying to fulfill its desire to be a democratic country that can become a member of
the E.U., certainly, and also NATO. They've been waging a heroic effort against an international war criminal of such, according to the ICC. But he
has invaded a sovereign country, violating every rule of law that has existed since the World War II.
So, he has invaded. I haven't heard the president-elect condemn that invasion. I haven't heard Tulsi Gabbard or others condemn that invasion
other than saying, well, the Ukrainians caused it because they wanted to be free. They wanted to be a NATO member. They wanted to be a member of the
E.U. What about condemning Mr. Putin for having violated international law, for targeting hospitals, for targeting where children go to school, for
kidnapping children, for raping the women as they were invading the country? None of that has been condemned.
And so, I think those are issues that the members of the Senate have to raise and saying, is this an individual? And I pass -- I'm not passing
judgment, I'm saying that's the Senate's job. But I'm saying these are the issues you have to focus on. Can you have someone that is to oversee a --
the intelligence of the United States? What we gather in the way of intelligence is critical to our security. The intelligence agents are on
the frontline. We have technical capabilities second to none. You have to take that into account. Can someone manage that?
With respect to President Putin, President-Elect Trump has said he admires him. He thinks he's done -- he's brilliant. Well, a brilliant man has done
an unbrilliant thing by invading a country and finding out that his own military was far weaker than he knew and the Ukrainians were far stronger
than we knew. And so, we have a country struggling to establish itself as a European Union member and a NATO member. That's the kind of thing that I
would hope that they would take into account during the confirmation process.
AMANPOUR: And interestingly, I've been speaking to the former German chancellor, Angela Merkel, about this. And we'll hear from her tomorrow.
But on -- one last question, the actual real surprise that's happening in Syria right now where ISIS, Al Qaeda sort of collaboration is moving
against the Russian-Iran based -- or rather backed Syrian president. How do you read that? Why do you think that's happening right now?
COHEN: Well, a number of factors. The -- there has been something of a stabilization, so to speak, for the past eight years or so and you have
more countries in the region have come to not overtly support the Syrian dictatorship, but at least trying to promote stability for the benefit of
all in the region.
It's very volatile. It's almost like looking at a Rubik's cube trying to match the pieces so you can say, I solved the problem, but you have not
only Russia involved, Syria involved, Iraq involved, Iran involved, you have Hezbollah that certainly has an interest, you have Israel that has an
interest, you have the Gulf state. All of them have an interest in that region, in Syria itself, because it becomes a ground for the proxy -- well,
for proxy forces moving from Iran through Syria and to support Hezbollah.
So, Iran certainly has a big interest and all of the other countries do, as does the United States. So, there's no simple answer to it. And what we
hope the -- I hope the countries can do is come back to the U.N. Security Council resolution, I think it's 2255, that tries to protect the civilians
who now are caught up in more terrorist activity and conflict. And so, you've had about half a million Syrians who have died because of this. Five
to 8 million people who have been moved out of Syria, many of them going to Europe to help destabilize some of the democracies in Europe.
It's complicated. There's no one single solution, but it's not going to be on the battlefield. There's no one party that's going to control the entire
area of Syria. So, it's going to have to be settled at diplomacy.
AMANPOUR: Indeed. I was just going to say, it just shows how much is in the inbox of the upcoming American president. William Cohen, thank you so much
indeed. And tune in tomorrow for that revealing conversation with the former German chancellor, Angela Merkel. She sat down with me to discuss
her unvarnished opinion of Trump, Putin, and the world's strongmen. Insights she doesn't hold back from in her new memoir, "Freedom."
[13:35:00]
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
AMANPOUR: I remember very distinctly when Donald Trump was first elected, you did one of -- you were the only one to actually welcome his election
conditionally. In other words, based on the respect and the adherence to mutual values, democracy, freedom, diversity, rule of law, human rights, et
cetera. And I just, you know, wonder whether you thought he did act in that way. And especially because you said he was clearly fascinated by the
Russian president. In the years that followed, I received the distinct impression that he was captivated by politicians with autocratic and
dictatorial traits. How did that manifest itself to you?
ANGELA MERKEL, FORMER GERMAN CHANCELLOR (through translator): Well, in the way that he spoke about Putin, the way that he spoke about the North Korean
president, obviously apart from critical remarks he made, there was always a kind of fascination at the sheer power of what these people could do. So,
my impression always was that he dreamt of actually overriding maybe all those parliamentary bodies that he felt were, in a way, an encumbrance upon
him and that he wanted to decide matters on his own and in a democracy. Well, you cannot reconcile that with democratic values.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: A lot more of that conversation tomorrow, including what she got right and wrong as chancellor.
Next, the culture block. A Broadway revival of an American classic aims to remind us of the importance of connection. For the first time in over 20
years, "Our Town" has returned with a star-studded cast. The Thornton Wilder play follows the lives of two families in a small town in New
Hampshire at the turn of the 20th century. And now, Tony Award winning director Kenny Leon is reimagining it for a modern audience. And he's
joining Michel Martin, along with actors Jim Parsons and Katie Holmes, to discuss their spin on a timeless tale.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MICHEL MARTIN, CONTRIBUTOR: Thanks, Christiane. Kenny Leon, Katie Holmes, Jim Parsons, thank you all so much for joining us.
KATIE HOLMES, ACTRESS, "OUR TOWN": Thanks.
JIM PARSONS, ACTOR, "OUR TOWN": Thanks for having us.
KENNY LEON, DIRECTOR, "OUR TOWN": It's so good to be here. Yes.
MARTIN: You know, "Our Town" is a staple of, you know, high school theater companies and community theaters. Katie and Jim, I'm going to start with
you two because I know you were theater kids. Did you ever see the play when you were growing up? Do you remember it?
PARSONS: I did not see a production of it. No.
MARTIN: You never saw it? Katie, you never saw it?
PARSONS: No.
HOLMES: I never saw it. I had never read it. I knew that Paul Newman had done it. But that was the extent of my knowledge.
MARTIN: Wow. But -- OK. Kenny Leon, what about you? You saw it, right?
LEON: I used to hate to play. I used to hate to play. I said, oh, my God, there's no diversity. It's like, is that the way the world looks and that's
the way they sound?
MARTIN: As a kid, as a theater kid, you saw it in high school, I guess, and you thought, what's up with that?
LEON: Yes. Well, my class integrated my school in St. Petersburg, Florida. So, it was the first year that black students were in school with white
students. And there was no vision for the black students to be in a play that was not meant for black students. And I only started seeing myself in
it in the year that the hurricane was in Puerto Rico and Scarlett Johansson and I got together and did a fundraiser, and we used to play "Our Town, but
I cast it the way a black man would see the play along with the people from the Marvel cast.
And I was like, oh, my God, it's a huge, beautiful, wonderful play there. If I ever do this play, I'm going to cast it the way I see it and I'm going
to make it look like America. And flash forward all these years later and you get Jim Parsons and Katie Holmes and this wonderful cast we have, it's
one of the best plays ever written. And so, it's us meeting Thornton Wilder where he meant for it to be.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PARSONS: The name of the town is Grover's Corners, New Hampshire, just across the Massachusetts line. Latitude 42 degrees, 40 minutes. Longitude
70 degrees, 37 minutes. The first act shows a day in our town. The day is May 7, 1901.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MARTIN: So, Jim Parsons, you're the audience's guide through Grover's Corners. What does being the stage manager mean to you?
PARSONS: My understanding is that -- or my opinion is that it's partially Thornton Wilder. I believe that it's more than any other character in the
play. It's as much his voice as it is -- as anybody else's. And I really firmly came to believe that it really is a role that is whoever is playing
it.
[13:40:00]
I mean, the level of honesty that this play starts with in its words. I mean, the first line in the play is, this play is called Our Town, and it
was written by Thornton Wilder. It's like, you kind of give up the lie, as it were, from the moment the lights come up. His job the entire time is to
keep being the conduit between you, the audience, and these actors who are portraying these characters. It was higher a degree of honesty than I was
perhaps used to.
It was -- I'm not really hiding behind very much as a human up there, I have to be honest. You know, it's not my words, but it's as much me as I
can muster as with somebody else's words. And that's been a wonderful challenge, and I think that it's been a wonderful growing experience for
me, and I hope that it's been a rewarding one for the audience.
MARTIN: Katie, what about you? You play Mrs. Webb. She is a wife, a mother of two. She's very much absorbed, you know, in the details of daily life,
and she's the -- one of sort of the two principal families that ground the play her -- the primary storyline centers on your daughter, Emily Webb, and
George Gibbs, the neighbor's son, they fall in love and so forth. For people who don't know the play, why does this relationship matter?
HOLMES: I think what I have found in playing this character, because it -- at first she, she felt a little far away because it's, you know, the place
for the early 1900s and there's this scene between Mrs. Webb and Mrs. Gibbs where it's very obvious that these two women, their lives are dictated by
what their husbands allow them to do, and this is before women could vote. And, you know, one could look at these women as, you know, they just don't
have the freedoms of the lives that we women have today and, oh, poor them.
Well -- but in the process of really understanding the play and taking on this character and also really enjoying the friendship between Mrs. Webb
and Mrs. Gibbs and the joy of these women. And the honor that Mrs. Webb seems to have of nourishing her family and taking care of them and the love
language of cooking for them every day and the beauty that -- she's using her hands. She's using her hands to pull those beans to make dinner, to be
there, to love. And the journey of her relationship with her children to me is just a part of the overall theme of life. We're all a part of this
process of time and, you know, we're planting, things blossom, there's a passing, and the same is happening for us.
MARTIN: I don't know if you read reviews, if you don't, I apologize, but I just want to read a little bit from The New York Times review. The reviewer
wrote, if you think of the play as small, sweet, or old fashioned, I respectfully offer that you have the soul of a rock. In any good enough
production, "Our town" is titanic beyond, time and brutal.
Brutal. So, can I just hear from each of you about that? Kenny, do you want to start?
LEON: Right before the pandemic I was doing a play on Broadway, "A Soldier's Play." And Broadway shut down. And I felt like our industry will
be the last thing that will come back. The only thing I knew was that if it ever came back, the play that I had already signed a contract to do was to
do our talent.
And I said, what does that look like? What do you really know about that? And so, you go from the pandemic, you go from where we were divided and
separated from each other, away from the good in us, the joy in us, the love in us, and I conceptualized this production on my porch, back porch,
thinking about "Our Town" being a metaphor for our world, our country, our time, our people, our community.
And I felt that Thornton Wilder wrote a love letter. He didn't know it, but he was writing a love letter to the future. So, every generation of this
play is different. I really like sort of reached down and handpicked the people that I thought could help me translate this version of "Our Town" to
our world and hopes that our politicians would hear it, our communities would hear it, but more importantly, our people sitting next to each other,
black and white, brown and yellow would get it and say, you know what? When we're doing our good, we could be beautiful. We could be joyous. And we
haven't gotten there yet.
[13:45:00]
And so, every night, I'm hoping more and more people come to see this play in hopes that we're -- all could be in the pursuit of a much more beautiful
place and focus on the good in us.
MARTIN: Jim, what do you think -- I mean, you're -- as the stage manager, you're on stage for, gosh, most, if not all of the play and you see the
audience, and I'm just wondering if you have a sense of what moments move them or how they respond to it?
PARSONS: There's two things in our production that have surprised me. One is that it's frequently a much funnier play than I think some people,
including myself, were prepared for. And it's also some of the most intense silences I've ever heard from a thousand people in an audience before.
I think you could pick many things that you think are brutal in this play. The one that comes to me the most is that for two acts, you watch all this
daily living and moving and shuffling around that we do. And by the end of the play, part of the message seems to be, all of that was going on was
kind of what blinded us to really seeing each other while we are here at the same time. And that's brutal, in my opinion.
But I also think that when Emily, the character, asks if anyone ever sees it all, every moment, and the stage manager says, no. The saints and poets,
maybe they do some, but no. I don't think that's as brutal as it is forgiving. I think, to me, the message is this is the fact of what it is to
be alive, but there's also nothing to be done about it too much. You know, you try and connect, try and love, but forgive yourself for all the ways in
which you're going to fail to miss all these human moments because that's what it is to be on this Earth.
MARTIN: Katie, one of Jim's first lines in the play is no one remarkable ever came from this town. And I just wondered, what did that bring out for
you and how did you think about that?
HOLMES: Our society for years has valued remarkable people and the people who stand out as though it's a free pass for more time or something else.
And what I think this play is trying to remind the audience is that we are all involved in life and nobody can escape all of the parts of life and
they are beautiful, and they are hard, and I love that and I love that sense of community as well, there's no division in this town.
And I think, again, when we start separating people, the successful, the non-successful, there's a gap all of a sudden. But what unites us is we're
-- we are in this together, and we all do feel the same things. And this play, I think, reminds people that, yes we're all doing this too. Also, I
wanted to bring up what I think what happens with this play is, you know, the moments where there's -- everyone freezes and these characters start to
have these feelings. And I think with great plays, this -- there -- you allow for the confusion of the human experience, which is, I don't know
what's happening.
Or like George, like one minute, he's afraid to get -- he doesn't want to get married and the next minute he's fine. And that confusion starts to
seep in. And that is the human experience and human nature. And then by the end, it didn't really matter anyway. You know what I mean? Not really, but
I mean, it just -- we keep leading the audience to that ending, that is the journey of life.
MARTIN: So, near the end of the play, Emily asks that famous question, do any human beings ever realize life while they live it? I did want to ask if
working with this material made any of you feel differently about the small moments in your lives.
PARSONS: Oh, I think without a doubt. I mean, I think that a lot of people in the world and a lot of people in this rehearsal room were the kind of
people who were trying to find ways to do exactly that with or without this play. But I think it's been impossible. And I think that our group dynamic
when we're together, all 28 of us every night, not just on stage, but off stage, the way we feel about each other gives credence to the idea that
we've all been affected by that. I see everything differently.
[13:50:00]
And I want to also, kind of relate, to that took Kenny's insistence that we all bring ourselves to these roles, I've never had a director insist so
much on that for the entire cast. And the more we've played this and the more I've gotten to know everybody through the process, like Katie as an
example, that Mrs. Webb is Katie's Mrs. Webb.
There are a million ways you could say those lines, there are a million presentations and tones you could have it, it is pure Katie. And I hope
that my stage manager is the same way. And I -- the more we're doing this, the more I think that that's as powerful an element about this particular
production as anything else about it is that every part is being spoken as much as possible very genuinely from the individual that's there.
MARTIN: Katie, what about you? Is there anything about working with this material that made you think differently about those small moments?
HOLMES: Yes, absolutely. I noticed in my own life just really being present. And when I start to feel like -- even in general, like if I'm
like, oh, God, I got to rush to the show, am I running late? And I just go, nope, I'm not going to do that. I'm actually going to enjoy my shower. You
know, I'm going to stay where I am. And I feel like it has made me also really see people and also, I think because this play offers you the
opportunity because it's so solid, you can go in one night and be like, oh, I think that line means this and you can just kind of, you know, play a
little -- play with it a little bit.
And I've noticed that now in life, I am not reacting to things so quickly because I go, oh, wait, there's a lot of different ways to comprehend this,
think about something. And there's a lot of ways now that I can communicate with people. I can -- you know, I'm just going to take a beat because it's
all up for interpretation.
You know, what's important is how we treat one another. And how can I look at this situation and make the best choice?
MARTIN: So, before we let you go, Kenny, I want to go back to the speech that you gave on opening night. You talked about the experiment of being an
American. You said, you know, it's an experiment about humanity over millions and millions of years, but it's an experiment. It's an American
experiment, and we ain't got it right yet. But Lord, let's not go back. And this is our opportunity. This is our opportunity to straighten it out.
And the reason that I've raised that is that, you know, you started working on this play before the election that just happened. For many people this
has been a shocking and challenging experience. But I do wonder whether you feel there's something that it says now that is different in light of all
the feelings that have been brought forward because of what we've just gone through?
LEON: As an American artist, I think this is absolutely the time where we feel most empowered, and this is the time where we have to have a voice,
and it also reminds me -- the last few weeks reminds me that we are all -- just like in "Our Town," we're really all tied together. Nothing changed
after election. We're still all really tied together.
I'm the grandson of sharecroppers and slaves. And, you know, and we went through civil rights. We went through reconstruction and went through
Rodney King. We went through so much and we'll survive this. And when I think about how young this country are and how many millions and millions
of years Thornton Wilder talks about compared to this little small bit of time, we still -- we just got further to go. And we're all tied together.
And sooner or later, we'll learn from our scholars and our artists and our passionate hearts. We will.
So, we are Americans and we had many people before us to fight for us, to live for us, to stand for freedom and democracy. The war has not changed.
The war still is freedom and democracy, and every generation has to stand up for it. And by God, I'm standing up for it every night. Every time I
direct something, every time I write something, and I'm trying to engage with artists who are thinking the same. And America belongs to the all, not
to the one, not to the some. So, this forever forward. It's our town. It's our world. It's our country.
MARTIN: Kenny Leon, Jim Parsons, Katie Holmes, thank you all so much for talking with us.
PARSONS: Thank you.
LEON: Thank you.
HOLMES: Thank you.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
[13:55:00]
AMANPOUR: And such important observations that "Our Town" is running on Broadway at the Ethel Barrymore theater through January 2025.
And finally, tonight, brain rot anyone? Not watching this show, I hope, but hours of social media scrolling can cause this affliction. And so, brain
rot is the Oxford University Press 2024 word of the year. It's use has apparently risen by over 200 percent over this past year, suggesting that
more and more digital users are grappling with the symptoms, which include lethargy, mental fogginess, and reduced attention span.
The good news, though, is action already is happening to limit our screen time. Australia has passed a world first law last week banning social media
for children Under 16. It's a start.
That's it for now. Thank you for watching, and goodbye from Washington.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:00:00]
END
