Return to Transcripts main page
Amanpour
Interview with Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT); Interview with INARA President and Founder Arwa Damon; Interview with Pediatric Intensive Care Doctor and American Physician Who Volunteered in Gaza Tanya Haj-Hassan; Interview with Harvard University Professor of History and "All That She Carried" Author Tiya Miles. Aired 1-2p ET
Aired April 02, 2025 - 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.
As Trump's trade war reaches new heights, I'm joined by one of the leaders rallying democratic resistance, Senator Chris Murphy.
Then, Israel says it'll annex large portions of Gaza as the war expands. The human toll with humanitarians who've seen the suffering up close.
Also, ahead, is the White House trying to rewrite history at the Smithsonian. Michel Martin talks to author and historian Tiya Miles about
Trump's efforts to overhaul America's most famous museum.
Welcome to the program everyone. I'm Christiane Amanpour in London.
Today, President Trump is poised to declare global economic warfare with sweeping new tariffs that until his big Rose Garden reveal extraordinarily
still remain shrouded in mystery. Across the world, leaders bracing for impact, making it very clear that they won't take this lying down.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARK CARNEY, CANADIAN PRIME MINISTER: As I made clear to President Trump in our call last week, I will reject, I will reject all attempts to weaken
Canada, all attempts to wear us down, to break us down so that America can own us.
URSULA VON DER LEYEN, EUROPEAN COMMISSION PRESIDENT: We will approach these negotiations from a position of strength. Europe holds a lot of cards
from trade, to technology, to the size of our market, but this strength is also built on our readiness to take firm countermeasures is -- if
necessary. All instruments are on the table.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: In addition, the Chinese foreign minister said Beijing will, quote, "counterattack" if the U.S. continues to engage in, quote,
"blackmail." While it's tariff day for Trump, it may just be resurrection day for Democrats. The flailing opposition roaring back to life with a 25-
hour speech by Senator Cory Booker and a convincing win in Wisconsin's Supreme Court election, proving there is a limit to what Elon Musk and his
billions can buy.
My first guest tonight has stepped into the ring trying to work out his party's most effective response to Trump. Democratic Senator Chris Murphy
was in the chamber for Cory Booker's entire speech, and he asked the final question.
Senator Murphy, welcome to the program.
SEN. CHRIS MURPHY (D-CT): Yes, thanks for having me.
AMANPOUR: So, everybody is bracing. Honestly, that's all you can hear and read about over here in Europe, what is going to happen from the Rose
Garden? How are we all going to be affected by what appears to be the start of a global trade war? How do you see it and how do you react even though
you haven't heard it yet?
MURPHY: Well, I mean, none of us know what the president is going to announce, and I'm not even sure what he announces will mean anything. Maybe
then an immediate tumble in the markets because anything he announces today, he may reverse tomorrow. Nothing is real until it is actually
implemented.
Already, we have seen in the first 72 days, the president announced several tariffs that within 24 or 48 hours had vanished. We also don't know what
policy he's trying to drive at. Sometimes he is talking about tariffs as an economic policy, trying to build up U.S. industry, but he doesn't actually
partner that with any industrial policy. Sometimes he's talking about it as migration policy. It all makes absolutely no sense to Americans, to
economists, to our allies. We're waiting to see what he says today. But I, frankly, am not going to pay too much attention to the announcement he
makes today until anything is actually implemented.
AMANPOUR: OK. So, that's interesting because therefore our viewers, even though we're talking before, he's actually said it, should, you know, react
as you are, because, as you say, implementation is what will matter.
So, how do you assess, and then I'm going to get to the Democrats, but GOP lawmakers are now essentially, whether it's in town halls or whatever,
forced to explain how this trade war and this possible economic disruption, which will presumably hit people in America in their pockets, how is that
better for U.S. consumers who, remember, voted for Trump in order to improve their cost-of-living crisis?
[13:05:00]
MURPHY: I think at this point you have to assume that Trump is intentionally trying to send the economy into a recession. And I understand
that that doesn't make sense if you are treating American politics as normal, but nothing is normal here right now. Trump appears to be very
intentionally trying to transition America away from a democracy to some form of autocracy, and part of the way you do that is to create crises.
Everything Elon Musk is doing inside our government is just intended to create crisis, whether it's threatening to take people's Medicaid away,
threatening to shut down Social Security, firing randomly thousands of federal employees. Everything is designed for chaos. And so, I think you
have to look at his trade policy as designed for chaos.
Listen, tariffs can work. I'm a believer that targeted tariffs combined with domestic industrial policy incentives to create manufacturing capacity
in this country can be good policy, but I think you have to acknowledge that's not what he's doing. He is applying tariffs with absolutely no
corresponding domestic industrial incentives. And thus, all that's going to happen here is prices are going to go way up, you know, on cars, for
instance, maybe $3,000 immediately. And there's going to be very little job creation in the United States. So, I think that's the reality, is that the
underlying motivation is recession and chaos.
AMANPOUR: OK. So, that really, really strikes me as very difficult to comprehend because I understand what you're saying about your view of
transitioning from democracy to autocracy, but even autocrats want a strong economy, right? I'm just going to read some polls. Most Americans now say -
- 58 percent say tariffs hurt the U.S. economy, and they expect Trump's policies to increase inflation, the very thing that they voted against,
presumably, in order to -- you know, to elect him.
A Harvard economics professor said to The Washington Post, Trump doesn't seem to understand basic international economics. I've not seen a more
wrongheaded policy come out of a White House in decades. So, again, how could this be deliberate? How does that help him?
MURPHY: Well, I mean -- again, I mean, what if the intention, ultimately, is to get the United States in such an unstable place, both politically and
economically, that the president is in a position to exercise emergency powers? If that's his intent, then maybe in the short run he is looking for
some kind of economic chaos.
And he also wants to be in a position where everyone domestically, in the United States, has to come to him and pledge their loyalty. Tariffs is a
way to do that, because if he imposes tariffs across the board in the economy, then every interest has to come to him and ask for the tariffs to
be released. And that's an opportunity for him to force them to declare their political loyalty to him.
So, if you exist in a world in which you are just trying to essentially crush descent and reward loyalty, then tariffs, even if it gets you some
short-term economic shock, may serve your political goals in the medium and long run.
AMANPOUR: It is, again, extraordinary to hear you say this and clearly, every foreign government also has to appeal to him to try to get rid of
this and figure out how to -- you know, to make it not hurt as much. And also, the question though is, how are you going to make sure that doesn't
happen? In other words, that such a crisis, such an emergency, you know, as you've laid out, happens, and that he's just going to be able to do what
you just said he might do. What will the opposition do? And I ask you, after the Supreme Court election in Wisconsin, after the -- you know, the
big speech by Cory Booker, which I'll play a little bit of right now and then I'll ask you to answer. Let me just play a little bit of Cory
Booker's, I don't know, filibuster, what was it in the Senate? Here we go.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. CORY BOOKER (D-NJ): I rise with the intention of getting in some good trouble. I rise with the intention of disrupting the normal business of the
United States Senate for as long as I am physically able. We could be that city on a hill, but we are up high and folks are going to look to us for
what is the world order going to be? What is democracy globally going to look like? Are we going to defend democracy and democratic principles, or
will you behave like the authoritarians that we should be against?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: It's a speech, not a filibuster. Obviously, I made that mistake. But this is a record, 25-hour speech. Nobody's ever spoken on substance,
you know, or anyway, that long. And you were there. What do you think that is achieving?
[13:10:00]
MURPHY: Yes, I stayed up with Cory all night. So, I was on the floor with him for all 25 hours because I actually believe what he was doing has the
potential to help save our democracy. I'm not saying by itself. But this is a moment, ultimately, where maybe the only thing that will matter is mass
public mobilization.
If we get to that five-alarm constitutional crisis where our democracy is hanging in the balance, and arguably it might be hanging in the balance as
we speak, we are going to need, you know, not thousands or tens of thousands of people turning out on the streets of this country, we're going
to need hundreds of thousands of people showing up.
And Cory did something, you know, small but courageous last night. And I can tell you already, he has inspired mobilization and action all around
the country. So, everything we're doing internally has to be seen right now as an attempt to provide people with the impetus and the inspiration on the
outside to stand up in big numbers against the thievery that is happening inside of our government right now.
I think that's what he did last night, was just provide a little wind under the wings of folks who do not want to lose our democracy. The Wisconsin
victory, a big victory, a 10-point victory in a state that Donald Trump won will also provide some momentum to people and, you know, that's what we
need.
Unfortunately, we're at a point where we need to look to countries like Korea, where there were constitutional crises, hundreds of thousands of
people came out onto the streets to save their country. That's probably what we're going to need here in America.
AMANPOUR: Even Turkey, as you've noticed, you know, they arrested a political threat to Erdogan and hundreds of thousands of people turn out in
the streets. And actually, people around the world are saying, well, why is everybody silent in the United States? Do you think there will come a time
when Americans feel that much threat because the autocracy-democracy argument that the Democrats, you know, Biden-Harris put forth as their main
campaign, you know, thing failed. It failed. People didn't care.
MURPHY: Well, I think it's a mistake for folks to look at America and see a lack of 100,000 person rallies as silence. In fact, America is awakening
right now. It's happening though in, you know, thousand-person rallies against Tesla here, or tens of thousands of people showing up for Bernie
Sanders or Elizabeth Warren over here. So, there's a lot of people out on the streets today. It's just in more dispersed political action.
And I do agree with you that, you know, the way that Kamala Harris talked about democracy did not resonate because, you know, this version of
democracy is not working for people. And people do want a dramatically different form of democracy. For instance, one in which billionaire money
is gone where we pass a constitutional amendment to say that, you know, no rich person can try to buy an election in this country.
And so, Democrats are only going to win an argument on democracy if we are arguing that, if you give us power, we will radically reform our democracy
to make sure that it answers to regular people, not to the affluent money.
AMANPOUR: OK. So, that's really interesting because you point out about money and for years, decades, money has been the in American politics from
Citizens United before, since, and obviously, Musk accused of buying votes, not just for Trump in Pennsylvania, but for his candidate in Wisconsin. In
Wisconsin, it failed.
How do you make that -- you know, what are you trying to say in terms of a rallying cry? Yes, the money and the corruption. But you've said things
like, we need to focus on one thing, like maybe this, instead of some of the other historic democratic, you know, promises like gun control,
environment, this and that?
MURPHY: Yes. I mean, listen, I do argue that our party should sort of view economic populism as the tent pole. I mean, we should be a party that's
arguing for, you know, a tripling of the minimum wage, much stronger collective bargaining in unions in this country, much stronger authorities
in the federal government to just blast apart the big corporations and monopolies that are dominating our lives and crushing small businesses in
our communities. We should be an economically populist party. And then, we should let people into our coalition that disagree with us on some of these
social and cultural issues.
But if I could argue for one secondary issue beyond economic populism and support for higher wages, it would be government reform. And we should be a
party that promises, if you give us power, we will seek to get billionaire money completely out of politics. And if you run on those two things,
dramatically higher wages, less powerful corporations, and cleaning up government, you can absolutely cross over and get a lot of the voters that
have been voting for Donald Trump, because over the last decade, they have viewed him as the anti-status quo candidate. Those votes are there for the
taking as they see him essentially using power to just enable and enrich his billionaire friends, his Mar-a-Lago friends.
[13:15:00]
AMANPOUR: And then you have to be sure that your own tent is united on this, right? We can't have some people on the far-left, some people on the
far whatever, some people in the middle. Do you think you can get a united Democratic Party?
MURPHY: Well, I mean, we were certainly united last night. I mean, virtually, every Democrat was down on the floor supporting Cory Booker's
speech. I mean, listen, I want a united party, but I don't actually think that that's the goal. The goal is winning elections. And the Republican
Party, I mean, was the definition of disunity over the past decade. They were fighting with each other all the time on the floor of the Senate. They
could barely elect a speaker, and then when the election came around, they won everything.
So, I actually am comfortable with there being actually more, not less disagreement inside the Democratic party. That's why I'm making the
argument that even as somebody who wakes up every single day thinking about tighter gun laws and banning assault weapons in this country, I'm OK with
people in the coalition who may disagree with me on guns, so long as they agree with me on reforming government and giving workers power in this
economy.
AMANPOUR: I want to ask you about due process, because that obviously is all part of what we're talking about, and clearly, the big scandal is in
these mass deportations, whether it's on freedom of speech masquerading as foreign policy, whether it's, you know, crime and the huge hauling off of
people and sending him out of the country.
You know, what happened to this person who was sent to El Salvador is completely wrong. The administration admits it. And in fact, even now, some
very prominent right-wing voices, people who helped Trump win, Joe Rogan, Ann Coulter, all these people are getting a little alarmed. Do you think
that signals a genuine change? Do you think due process in this deportation is going to be, you know, a problem for this administration?
MURPHY: Well, I hope it is, it has to be because, I mean, this is part of why I argue to you that we are on a descent to despotism. Now, it is
absolutely interruptible. This country can make a decision that we do not want to be a nation in which you get locked up or deported for your
political views or for the art on your arm. But we have to come together around that.
I have made the case over the last several weeks that every Trump supporter, every Republican in this country should care about the way in
which Trump is targeting political speech. These students who are being disappeared, these are people in the country legally, they have student
visas and they are being locked away simply because they disagree with the president politically. If that becomes normalized then it will not stop at
green card holders or student visa holders, it will be American citizens who will be locked up simply because they disagree with the president.
So, history shows you have to draw a firm early line on this kind of criminalization of political speech. I'm glad that a couple Republicans are
speaking up, but very few of my colleagues are. So, we need some elected Republicans to say, enough is enough. Political speech in this country is
protected for everybody, whether you are a green card holder or an American citizen.
AMANPOUR: And of course, let's not forget that these particular students, no charges are being filed against them. And as you say, they are still
disappeared in some court system somewhere, and no charges filed against them.
Just very finally, you know, people say, oh, don't take Trump seriously, or literally, or whatever the hell they say, but he did say to a Sunday show
that he's not joking about a third term.
MURPHY: Well, I think it is difficult to understand when you should take him seriously and when you shouldn't. But I think there's a pattern here.
When he's getting in real hot water, real political trouble, he will lob a bomb, right, and hope that you'll stop talking about the central story.
So, this week, Republicans in the Senate are debating a bill to throw millions of people off of Medicaid. That's the health insurance program in
America for 24 percent of families in this country, in order to pass a massive tax cut for the wealthy. Also, the administration is mired in this
Signal scandal where they are apparently texting war plans to journalists.
So, this is a tried-and-true tactic for Trump. He just says, oh, I'm going to run for a third term and hopes that everybody focuses on that outrageous
statement and stops talking about the central storyline, which is the thievery, which is the stealing of resources and wealth from the poor and
the middle class to hand to his Mar-a-Lago friends.
So, I'm not paying attention to what he said on that Sunday show. I'm focused right now on stopping him from cutting Medicaid and dropping people
from insurance in the millions all across this country.
AMANPOUR: Senator Chris Murphy, thank you so much for joining us.
MURPHY: Thanks.
AMANPOUR: And later in the program, Israel expands its military offensive in Gaza, we hear from a humanitarian and a doctor about the urgent
situation there.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:20:00]
AMANPOUR: Now, to the Middle East where Israel has announced a major expansion of its war on Gaza. The defense minister says there are plans to,
quote, "seize" large areas of the enclave while major bombardment and a siege on any aid getting through punishes the whole population.
The number of dead rises above 50,000, according to authorities there. The U.N. says it has discovered the bodies of 15 aid workers in a mass grave.
U.N. says they were killed one by one. The Israeli military has admitted that it did bury the bodies and says it's now investigating what happened.
My next guests have worked hard to minister to all this pain and suffering Arwa Damon, a former CNN journalist and founder of INARA, which offers
medical support to children and families in war zones, and Dr. Tanya Haj- Hassan, an American physician who's recently left Gaza.
So, first and foremost, welcome to you both. I think we have to start particularly with, Arwa, sitting here. No journalists are allowed in,
period, end of story unless it's on -- in beds, and we haven't seen any of that recently. So, we do actually rely a lot on people who actually get to
go in, to tell us the humanitarian situation.
So, Arwa, first I need to ask you, what do you think the defense minister's declaration of an expanded annexation of parts of Gaza will mean for the
people there.
ARWA DAMON, PRESIDENT AND FOUNDER, INARA: Well, you have to think about the population there that's already crushed and now it's just going to be
crushed into an even smaller, more condensed space. And this is happening whilst no aid has gotten in for nearly a month now, nothing.
So, right now, there are no functioning bakeries. The World Central Kitchen says it only has about two weeks of supply left. And when we look at what
they and other community kitchens are actually being -- producing right now, and we deliver hot meals as well, it's rice and basically canned
vegetables. What's on the market pretty much non-existent. There is some local produce that you can buy and distribute. We've done that, but a fresh
vegetable parcel costs about $60. Nobody can afford that. That's going to run out as well. There's --
AMANPOUR: And there's people price gouging, right? Merchants and things, as they do in wars?
DAMON: Exactly, which has been happening all along, but there's also -- there's nothing on the market. So, the prices don't even out. They even out
when aid comes in, but not at a time like this. And then, there's the trauma of all of it that is especially being felt by the children, and we
see this in our work all the time. There's children who have started bedwetting, there's children who have gone nonverbal. There's children who
have had their hope crushed to such a degree that they no longer have hope in themselves anymore or in life in these institutions that are meant to
protect them.
AMANPOUR: So, you -- and we'll ask further, you -- for the moment, your organization or you are blocked from getting in. Tanya Haj-Hassan, you have
just come out after a long period in Gaza, ministering perhaps not to the mental health and emotional health of children, but their physical health
and the destruction there, but tell me what you're seeing most recently in the hospital.
TANYA HAJ-HASSAN, PEDIATRIC INTENSIVE CARE DOCTOR AND AMERICAN PHYSICIAN WHO VOLUNTEERED IN GAZA: Thanks, Christiane. I mean, nothing I tell you
right now can fully encapsulate the abhorrent catalogs of atrocities that Israel has committed.
[13:25:00]
Even in the last 10 days, I was in Gaza, if you just look at those last 10 days, in addition to Israel's vicious break of the ceasefire agreement,
killing and maiming around a hundred children per day in this last period, according to UNICEF, and I bore witness to a lot of that, children taking
their last breaths, children maimed in our intensive care unit, children who have been orphaned, children who will never move parts of their body
again or -- and in addition to that, in these last 10 days, Israeli military shells a U.N. team, killing and maiming members of it, bombed.
The ICRC, the Red Cross offices directly hit Nassar Hospital, the hospital where I was based. I was in the emergency department. They shelled the
floor directly above me killing two patients and injuring others. They completely leveled the only specialty cancer specialty hospital in the Gaza
Strip.
And as you mentioned they, frankly, executed 15 rescue workers, nine paramedics, six civil defense service members and a U.N. worker and then,
buried them in a mass grave. I mean, the U.N. and others spent over a week trying to rescue these people and they had gone Rafah to rescue others who
had been injured.
And I can tell you, we passed through Rafah in the U.N. convoy as we were leaving Gaza. And I remember seeing some people running carrying a wounded
person and thinking we're an entire convoy of people who could help this person, and we couldn't stop because the Israeli forces would shoot at us
too if we had stopped.
And in addition to just those crimes I just mentioned, they killed multiple Palestinian journalists in these last 10 days at a time when international
journalists are not let in and Palestinian journalists, like Palestinian paramedics, like Palestinian rescue workers, like my Palestinian healthcare
worker colleagues have been very courageously and incessantly providing humanitarian services to their people at a time when they're starving, when
their families are intense.
AMANPOUR: Yes. Let me --
DR. HAJ-HASSAN: Israel is --
AMANPOUR: Yes. It's --
DR. HAJ-HASSAN: -- Palestinians at an alarming rate. And honestly, Christiane, I want to ask you what red line has not been crossed?
AMANPOUR: Well, that's the question, frankly.
DR. HAJ-HASSAN: I'd like you guys to -- anybody to answer that question line?
AMANPOUR: That's -- that is the question that we put out all the time when we're having these conversations, because the Israeli government is
constantly saying, and we understand that this ceasefire, which was meant to go into its second phase, which is the start of all of this, the Israeli
government said, no, because they said the -- Hamas hadn't released the hostage. So, it's this constant cycle of repetitive orders and case,
counter case.
And my question to you then, Arwa, is, now, there's 16 or 17 months of this carnage, starting with the carnage in Israel on October 7th and the carnage
that's been wreaked over Gaza for more than a year, nearly a year and a half. What exactly has it achieved? Because they still say they're going
after Hamas militants.
DAMON: And this is what ends up begging the question of what then did you flatten all of Gaza for? And by what count are you unable to accomplish
what it is that you need to accomplish. And also, Christiane, remember the Arab League put forward a proposal, a roadmap for Gaza recently that
actually addresses all of Israel's concerns, including removing Hamas from both military power and political power, but that was rejected.
Arab states have even offered to take on the whole reconstruction effort when it comes to Gaza. All part of this whole package --
AMANPOUR: That's being rejected by the U.S. and everything.
DAMON: Exactly. And the thing is, what we are seeing right now -- and again, like you know, Dr. Tanya is saying, you can't describe Gaza. And
what I'm hearing right now from our team on the ground there is that this is worse than anything that they have ever been through. Because operating
in this space is impossible. What you need is impossible. And it's not just the targeting of locations that were deconflicted or just the sort of
inability to navigate a pattern to the bombing, right?
I was talking to a doctor who was like, I'm afraid to leave my house because before, yes, it wasn't really a pattern, but you could kind of sort
of predict what hours would be safe enough to make a run for it to the hospital. You can't predict that anymore.
Plus, you know, I should have been in Gaza. I was denied entry after having already been in Gaza four times.
AMANPOUR: Why is that? Because this is important.
DAMON: I don't know. I have been messaging COGAT repeatedly.
AMANPOUR: That's the Israeli organization --
DAMON: Coordination body, yes.
AMANPOUR: Coordination body. Yes.
[13:30:00]
DAMON: That coordinates everything. Repeatedly trying to get an answer to say, what concerns do you have? What can I address? What can I do to
alleviate your concerns? And I get zero response whatsoever. And it's not just me, dozens and dozens of other --
AMANPOUR: We know. I mean, there's no aid getting through. And, Tanya, Dr. Haj-Hassan, what does this mean in actual terms of what you need to, let's
just say, operate with? Because what we hear is that there's tons of stuff waiting on the borders to get in, whether it's to eat, whether it's medical
supplies, equipment. I mean, do you have oxygen? Do you have medicine?
DR. HAJ-HASSAN: Christiane, I'll just give you the example of my own specialty. So, I'm a pediatric intensive care doctor. Every single hospital
providing pediatric and neonatal, so newborn and children, intensive care in Gaza City in the north of Gaza has been destroyed or put out of service
by the Israeli military.
So, instead, the organization I work for set up a small pediatric ICU, neonatal ICU in a small non-governmental hospital in Gaza City. There
aren't enough ventilators. There are 20 UNICEF ventilators waiting at the border to enter Gaza and are obstructed by Israel. There are several --
AMANPOUR: And when you ask why, what is the answer?
DR. HAJ-HASSAN: But, Christiane, this is before the full blockade earlier in March. This is even before. Not a single oxygen generator has been
allowed by Israel into the Gaza Strip for the last year and a half, despite them destroying the majority of the oxygen generators in Gaza.
So, same goes for the hospitals. I'm telling you, they've destroyed most of the hospitals in Gaza, but they won't let in the construction equipment
required to rebuild them. So, this is, I guess, from a sort of gross infrastructure and equipment standpoint --
AMANPOUR: Tanya --
DR. HAJ-HASSAN: -- but then you have all the --
AMANPOUR: -- can I ask -- can I -- want to ask you something. You -- were you there while the ceasefire -- the first part of the ceasefire was in
effect? Were you able -- so, what did you see? I'm really fascinated to know there was a flood of aid, right, and people were, you know, trying to
go back to even they're bombed -- what was the atmosphere? What was the ability of people to try to live during those few weeks of ceasefire?
DR. HAJ-HASSAN: Christiane, it was selective aid. All the things I just mentioned were still prohibited during that period. Chocolates were getting
in, soap, which had been prohibited from entering for a while, was getting in. People got shampoo and soap and chocolates, and things that allowed
them to breathe. Yes, it is relative respite when you think about what they were going through earlier, and the evidence of which was our malnutrition
unit in the hospital where we had children with severe acute malnutrition. Both protein deficiency, malnutrition, and general caloric malnutrition as
a consequence of the full blockade up until that point.
So, it was great that we were getting in food. People were able to eat varied sources of protein and varied sources of vitamins, which is very
important for their health after being starved for a year and a half. But at the same time, things that are necessary to rebuild their lives were
being obstructed from entering the Gaza Strip.
But people were breathing, Christiane, and you could see it, there was this sense of hope that they could go back to their homes, that they could
rebuild. You saw healthcare workers setting up clinics and reopening hospitals or even tents on the rubble of where the hospital was to provide
services.
And that night, on March 18th, when Israel viciously broke the ceasefire -- and just to be clear that the -- they had been breaking the ceasefire all
along. We were receiving casualties even during that period. It was just relatively fewer. We received patients with gunshot wounds. We received
patients from missile strikes. We were receiving fewer war related casualties, but we are still really receiving them.
But on March 18th, that early morning, when I say terror shook Gaza, I don't know how else to describe it. Christiane, I want to share this with
your audience, even though it's embarrassing to myself, but I think it helps people understand the level of terror that is being inflicted on the
Palestinian people by the State of Israel.
The entire strip shook, that roaring sounds. And I've been in war zones before. I was in Gaza last year when there wasn't a ceasefire. I awoke from
sleep and I started shivering, and my teeth rattled, the way your teeth rattle when you're cold, it's never happened to me before. It was a
visceral reaction to being awoken from sleep with pure terror.
And it took me about 20 minutes, even after I rationalized what was happening, put my scrubs on, was getting ready to run down to the ER,
expecting the wave of casualties that was going to come in with this. It took me about 20 minutes to calm down. And now, I understand why all of
these children come into the emergency department shivering.
[13:35:00]
It -- last year, part of me thought it was that they were cold. Now, it's terror, Christiane. Its terror being inflicted on a people who have been on
the receiving end of some of the worst atrocities of our lifetimes. And honestly, it's going to be a shame that we're going to have to reckon with
as history is written day after day, and both countries like the United States and media agencies that are manufacturing consent for this using,
you know, misleading language, hiding certain narratives, discrediting the few journalists that are actually covering these atrocities, we're going to
have to reckon with this.
AMANPOUR: It's going to be a huge reckoning throughout this whole, you know, tragedy that's been going on, not just for these last 16 months, but
for decades and decades, both sides suffering so unbelievably much.
I just want to ask you really a very devil's advocate question, Arwa. You know, from what we've just heard from Tanya, from the obvious visuals of
the almost uninhabitable Gaza, I mean, I remember seeing these amazing pictures during the ceasefire where families were breaking Ramadan, you
know, Iftar in the rubble, and they were looking like they were happy to be together, but you could tell it was almost uninhabitable.
What do you -- and clearly, this press and the pressure to squeeze the number of -- the amount of territory, do you think inevitably they're
moving towards trying to move the Palestinians, like President Trump says, move them out?
DAMON: I think, and a lot of Gazans believe that that is the end objective, because, one, Israel has already declared that that is its
objective on numerous different occasions. You know, senior officials have come out and said, you know, we are going to take Gaza.
And for Palestinians who are there living through it, I mean, they can't describe this as anything other than their own annihilation and the sense
of abandonment. They are fully cognizant of the fact that nothing is going to stop this and nothing will stop it.
AMANPOUR: And, Tanya, just lastly to you, you are obviously treating the Palestinians, but there are still Israeli hostages, individuals whose
families are still protesting in Israel against this stepped-up war and who want their family members back. I mean, what do you think is happening to
them right now? I know I'm asking you to guess, but this is just such a kind of a -- I mean, they're in this small enclave.
DR. HAJ-HASSAN: Correct, Christiane. And I mean, if you just look at the last year and a half, when are hostages released alive? They're released
when there are negotiations, when the negotiations are respected, not when there's bombardment. The hostages -- given the intensity, the
indiscriminate nature, and the sort of across the strip violent and vicious bombing that happens when Israel strikes the enclave, I mean, their biggest
risk to death is the Israeli military.
AMANPOUR: OK.
DR. HAJ-HASSAN: And I think a lot of people recognize that. And we know that the only way essentially to get anybody out of this alive is for
Israel to respect the ceasefire.
AMANPOUR: We need to -- yes. And we need to get a government official on to talk about this. It's really hard. But anyway, Dr. Tanya Haj-Hassan,
thank you so much for your testimony. Arwa, as always, thank you very much. And good luck with the humanitarian effort trying to get back in. And we
will be right back after this break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:40:00]
AMANPOUR: Now, as President Trump attempts to rewrite the history books, he's targeting the Smithsonian. It's the world's largest museum complex. An
executive order promises to eradicate what he calls, quote, "a divisive, race centered ideology at the institution." Civil rights groups are hitting
back saying Trump is whitewashing America's complex and troubled past.
The award-winning author and Harvard professor, Tiya Miles is an expert who joins Michel Martin to reflect on what this could all mean for the future
of the United States.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MICHEL MARTIN, CONTRIBUTOR: Thanks, Christiane. Professor Tiya Miles, thank you so much for talking with us.
TAYA MILES, PROFESSOR OF HISTORY, HARVARD UNIVERSITY AND AUTHOR, "ALL THAT SHE CARRIED": Thanks for having me. I'm really happy to be here, Michel.
MARTIN: So, you, very well known in your profession, also I would say outside of it, National Book Award winner, MacArthur Genius Grant winner,
your professor of history at Harvard, and a lot of your work focuses on sort of lives that we haven't seen as much of, the lives of African
American people, the lives of African American girls, and also indigenous people too.
So, you write books, of course, as most historians do. You've written a novel. But you also have written about, you know, artifacts, things that
have been -- that we can see ourselves that are sort of in museums. What role do you think museums play in our understanding of history?
MILES: Museums are critically important, Michel. I mean, to me as a researcher, museums have been foundational to the way I can ask questions
about the past in the ways that I can understand the past. There are many scholars who feel similarly that we need to access materials in museums as
well as the experts who curate those materials and who steward them as a way to reconstruct models of things that took place in previous centuries.
So, for example, in one of my recent books, which is called "All That She Carried," it focuses on an antique cotton sack that was passed down through
a family of enslaved and free black women in the 19th century. And I first saw that sack in the Smithsonian, in a museum. Its existence of that
museum, that institution that allowed me entry points into what turned into a really meaningful story, both for me and for numerous readers.
MARTIN: You know, one of the reasons we also called you is that, as you know, recently President Trump signed an executive order titled "Restoring
Truth and Sanity to American History," and it directs federal institutions like the Smithsonian, which he specifically names to remove what it calls
improper ideology and to emphasize more uplifting portrayals of the American past. And it singles out the National Museum of African American
History and Culture for what it says is this kind of inappropriate kind of race ideology.
So, just the first question I had for you is when you heard that I'm just wondering what went through your mind.
MILES: It was like an arrow to the heart to know that the person who has the bully pulpit, who has this massive platform, has decided to use it to
attack a precious cultural treasure, the zoning institution, including the National Museum of African American History and Culture. I felt very hurt
as a black woman, as a scholar, as an American. So, that's what happened for me emotionally.
What I was thinking was, wait a minute, how could this happen? Because I recall being at a convening just a handful of months ago, soon after the
presidential election with many scholars, including scholars who work at NMAAHC, the African American History and Culture Museum.
And curators who are also scholars from NMAAHC were telling the people at the convening that they were feeling positive, they were feeling confident,
because even though we had the election results that we did, they had just taken a group of congressional representatives through the museum. They had
given them a tour, as is customary. And the representatives were positive about what it is that they saw displayed in the museum.
Because NMAAHC has always had, at the center of its narrative, the notion that black America story is America's story. There's not a separation.
They're deeply intertwined.
[13:45:00]
MARTIN: Let me go back for a minute, you said that you felt hurt. Do you mind just sharing a little bit more about that? Why did you feel hurt?
MILES: It does hurt because it feels like a direct attack. I mean, the language of executive order is vague, right? We want to hear, you know,
African stories, we want to hear stories that are highlighting America's greatness. You know, we want to hear a correct ideology. These terms could
mean anything, but I fear that there is a more insidious aspect to them and that a directive to restore or highlight America's greatness actually means
something more like a directive to diminish sideline, exclude stories of black America, stories of many Americans that are characterized by
beautiful moments, yes, but also quite a lot of struggle and quite a lot of struggle at sometimes against the state.
So, I felt that my stories, my family stories, our people stories, and the stories of many, many different communities of the American people were
going to be sidelined, were going to be attacked, were going to be deemed not great or not good, or no longer a part of the American narrative.
MARTIN: I'm looking at the directive here or the executive order. It says that, over the past decade, Americans have witnessed a concerted and
widespread effort to rewrite our nation's history, replacing objective facts with a distorted narrative driven by ideology rather than truth. This
revisionist movement seeks to undermine the remarkable achievements of the United States by casting its founding principles and historical milestones
in a negative light. Under this historical revision, our nation's unparalleled legacy of advancing liberty, individual rights, and human
happiness is reconstructed as inherently racist, sexist, oppressive, or otherwise irredeemably flawed. And rather than fostering unity in a deeper
understanding of our shared past, the widespread effort to rewrite history deepens societal divides and fosters a sense of national shame,
disregarding the progress American has made and the ideals that continue to inspire millions around the globe.
That's the first, you know, paragraph. But I think their argument is that this -- that a focus on race is inherently divisive and that it makes
people feel bad, specifically, some people feel bad, and that that detracts from the social fabric or our national fabric. So, if that is the argument,
what would you say?
MILES: I want to just put to the side for a second your question about race and people feeling bad, to go to the point in the order that you read,
that has to do with the revision of history or rewriting history. The executive order talks about revisionist history and rewriting history as if
these are bad things, but actually, history is revision. It is a process of looking to find all the evidence that we can to help us to construct a
model of the past, of asking tough questions about that evidence of weighing evidence, you know, against itself and against the other
information that we can bring in, of analyzing the evidence and interpreting it, of putting it forward, of having it be read and assessed,
and yes, criticized by our peers being sent back to us.
We looked to correct our mistakes, if possible. We refine it. We revise it. We go through the process again and again. So, history does not just stand
still. It's not some kind of solidified ossified thing that once you've got it, it's just there and there are no changes.
We want history to change. It is a process of research, of investigation, of dialogue, of engagement that helps us to move closer and closer to a
full and clearer understanding of the past. So, I would say, yes, let's embrace revision to revise things to see again. We need to see the past
again. We need to see ourselves again if we want to see clearly and in a full way.
MARTIN: But now to the question of feelings, because the other argument here seems to be that these new learnings make people feel bad, especially
certain people feel bad, and that that is bad.
MILES: Yes.
MARTIN: And their argument is that it runs at the social fabric. What's your take on that?
MILES: Well, I'd say that the fundamental value here that I would like to uplift, that I believe the Smithsonian institution also highlights is the
value of knowledge, right? The production and the sharing of knowledge.
[13:50:00]
Sometimes knowledge can produce negative feelings. Sometimes we can feel sad when we learn. That's what it means to be a human being with complex
emotions. We can't just simplify the existence of things in the world so that we can feel happy about them. We are thinking adults who have the
responsibility, the duty to try to shape and support a complex society in a diverse and very complicated world. So, we need as much knowledge as we can
get in order to do that.
But with regard to feelings, the executive order I think mentions a concern about people feeling shame. I'll say, first of all, that pointed to shame
in particular is an interesting choice, because there are many different emotional responses that a person could have when learning about the past.
Why would shame be the one that the president is highlighting?
I have presented my work on the history of slavery and abolition like in front of many, many different kinds of community audiences, and oftentimes
they actually feel a sense of pride. They feel proud to know that there are individuals in the history of this country who identified injustices and
who fought against them. So, shame does not have to be a default kind of response to learning about a complex past.
MARTIN: Their argument is that because federal funding is a part of this, that it should serve a patriotic purpose, a sort of a unifying purpose to
give people a sense of pride in the country. What is your -- what's your -- what is your response to that?
MILES: It is possible for museums to tell stories that can encourage patriotism, you know, or a love of country, and at the same time tell
stories that are complex. Love is not a simple thing. There are many people in my family who I feel deep and great and abiding love for. We get around
Thanksgiving table, we might have some disagreements that we need to work out. That is just the reality of what it means to be a human being and what
it means to live in a society.
So, I reject the notion that a patriotic museum or a patriotic exhibition has to only tell stories in a way that emphasizes, you know, hearts and
flowers and, you know, boxes of bonbons. That is not what it means to be a human being to live in community or to be an American.
MARTIN: What would you say to people who agree with him that these -- that too many of the -- let's just put it this way, too many of the offerings of
these institutions in the current moment as they understand it create feelings of division, perhaps feelings of shame and are not supportive of
the social fabric or of our -- sort of our kind of shared experience as a country?
MILES: Well, I would say to anyone who feels like they are being left out of the American narrative that I know this is painful. I am a part of a
community that has felt left out of the American narrative for decades and even centuries. And it's only been in my lifetime that there has been more
of a focus on black history, you know, or women's history or native history or any other kind of particular history of certain groups.
So, I want to acknowledge that it doesn't feel good. We need representation for everyone. They should express to the Smithsonian that they'd like to
see different kinds of exhibitions, different kinds of narratives upheld. But that is a very different thing than one man sitting at the top of the
country looking down and dictating what is to take place instead of museums in which he really does not have authority over.
The Smithsonian is run by a board. It needs to answer to Congress. And people who would like to see their community stories represented
differently, can certainly reach out to the board members, reach out to their representatives, reach out to the curators, give feedback at the
Smithsonian. They're always looking for feedback. And participate together as a collective to make these narratives, to make these stories and more
multiple and more representative of all of the American people.
MARTIN: Professor Tiya Miles, thank you so much for talking with us.
MILES: Thank you, Michel.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
[13:55:00]
AMANPOUR: And finally, tonight, we cannot and must not airbrush history. So, we want to remember one of the last surviving World War II code
breakers. Charlotte Webb, better known as Betty, died this week at the age of 101. She was one of so many women who were part of the British War
effort getting there on merit. And just 18 years old, she helped crack encrypted German messages at the famous Bletchley Park base.
In one tribute, the Women's Royal Army Corps Association called her an inspiration and a champion of female veterans, remembering women's history.
That's it for now. Thank you for watching, and goodbye from London.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:00:00]
END
