Return to Transcripts main page
Amanpour
Interview with Actress and Activist Nazanin Boniadi; Interview with Russian Historian and The New School Professor of International Affairs Nina Krushcheva; Interview with "Firestorm" Author and MS Now Senior National Reporter Jacob Soboroff; Interview with "Polar War" Author Kenneth Rosen. Aired 1-2p ET
Aired January 13, 2026 - 13:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[13:00:00]
BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, everyone, and welcome to "Amanpour." Here's what's coming up.
An inflection point in Iran? Hundreds reported killed as the brutality of the regime's crackdown begins to emerge. Actress and activist Nazanin
Boniadi tells me what she's hearing from inside the country and what this means for the future.
Plus, Russia's descent into tyranny. As Putin launches attack after attack on Ukraine, Nina Krushcheva tells me how this war is remaking Russian
society.
Then, reflections and lessons learned from the L.A. wildfires with journalist Jacob Soboroff, who lost his childhood home.
And --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KENNETH ROSEN, AUTHOR, "POLAR WAR": A lot of people in Denmark and the Scandinavian nations, the Arctic nations more broadly, are worried about
the next two weeks, let alone scientific cooperation. They're worried about their own borders.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: -- "Polar War," the struggle for power in the Arctic, and how climate change could change the calculus.
Welcome to the program, everyone. I'm Bianna Golodryga in New York sitting in for Christiane Amanpour.
Much worse than you can imagine, the words of one Tehran resident as he described the violence at protests to CNN. And a picture is beginning to
emerge of the true brutality of the Iranian regime as it cracks down hard on protests. At least 1,850 protesters and possibly many more have been
killed in more than two weeks of these anti-government demonstrations. That's according to a U.S.-based human rights group.
The human cost of dissent in Iran is laid bare in harrowing images of people searching for loved ones among black body bags. Germany's Chancellor
Friedrich Merz says that he assumes Iran's regime is in its final days and weeks.
Meanwhile, President Trump is urging the Iranian people to, quote, "keep protesting." In the same social media post, he said he's canceled any
meetings with Iranian officials and that help is on the way.
So, what do most Iranians actually want? Nazanin Boniadi is an actress, an activist who has long campaigned for human rights in Iran, having been born
there in the early days of the Islamic Republic. And she joins us now from California.
Nazanin, it is good to see you. First, let me just ask you on a personal note, I still know you have family that is in Iran, loved ones as well.
With the communications blackout, have you been able to connect with them? What are you hearing? What are they telling you?
NAZANIN BONIADI, ACTRESS AND ACTIVIST: It's -- first of all, thank you for having me. It's been a horrific few weeks for any Iranian anywhere in the
world, but particularly, of course, for the people inside the country who are being met with war bullets simply for demanding freedom and their most
fundamental human rights.
I have lost contact with loved ones and the dissidents I've been in touch with for several years now. And the last thing I heard before losing
contact about four days ago, before the nationwide communications crackdown, which includes, of course, internet and phones, was -- we want
any -- we basically are urging the International Community to use any powerful route, approach necessary to allow our voices to prevail for
freedom and for this regime to fall.
A government that thinks of itself as legitimate doesn't take away its citizens rights to communicate with each other in the outside world. And
so, this blackout is very telling. They know they're not a legitimate representation of the people. And yes, they are in their final days. It's
unlike anything I've ever seen in the two decades I've been doing this work. It is millions of Iranians rising up across the country and thousands
being met with war bullets.
GOLODRYGA: And in a new piece for the New Statesman, you write that this revolt right now poses the greatest existential threat to the Iranian
regime since the 1979 revolution.
[13:05:00]
I've spoken to many experts as to the makeup that created this perfect storm for the regime, be it the 12-day war with Israel, everything that
transpired after October 7th, the degradation of Iran's proxies, and, of course, the Trump factor of it all. And here you have President Trump last
week laying a red line, issuing one, that the United States is locked and loaded in terms of any sort of response to the murder of civilians who are
protesting. Now, we see that number in the thousands. The fact that the regime has even acknowledged that suggests that perhaps that number is even
higher than what has been reported at this point.
What is it that you believe that you are hearing the United States should do in terms of a response?
BONIADI: There is no doubt that the president's words emboldened protesters to take to the streets. I mean, when you think that help's on
its way, you are more vocal about your wants and your demands under a brutal dictatorship.
That help hasn't come yet. We're hoping that some form of international assistance happens. What's important to note is an excellent piece for the
Atlantic, Karim Sadjadpour and Jack Goldstone highlighted that the five conditions necessary for revolution are almost all met at this point. And
another piece, a fantastic piece by Suzanne Maloney for the New York Times, she stresses that what needs to happen at the very least is a cyber
operation that targets Iran's critical military infrastructure and diplomatic pressure. Essentially, any country that has diplomatic ties with
Iran needs to expel the Iranian ambassadors to the country.
And so, what we need to do is really tighten all pressure on the regime and empower the people. Any organization that empowers the people, promotes
democracy and essentially uplifts opposition voices and has the ability to support democracy prevailing and succeeding must be funded and supported.
These are all ways that we have to act now, allow Iranians to have access to the internet. Tech companies, governments need to really treat this as
an urgent matter. And so, there are many things we can do right now that we just we just aren't doing.
GOLODRYGA: Yes. President Trump yesterday announcing 25 percent tariff on those countries that continue to do business with Iran. And it is notable
that some of Iran's closest allies, like Russia and China, have been quite muted in their response in coming to any sort of aid to Iran at this
moment.
The little of the reporting that we are getting is horrific. As we said, the numbers of those killed now in the thousands in The New York Times
describes a shoot to kill crackdown. Now, as doctors are talking about the mass casualty situations that they are seeing in hospitals with gunshot
wounds to the heads, a point-blank range for so many of these for these civilians.
And they spoke with a businessman in Tehran. I'd like to read from what he said in his quote to The New York Times. He said, "They take the injured
protesters to the hospital and if they recover, they arrest them. If their families arrive, they then try to somehow help them escape. The families
who come to receive the bodies of those killed are forced into humiliating confessions. They have to say that the terrorists have killed them."
What is your reaction when you hear this? And again, what is your ask of the International Community to do in response?
BONIADI: I mean, I'm horrified. The Islamic Republic state media is trying to convince ambassadors, foreign ambassadors. They reported that they
summoned the Italian, German, British and French ambassadors to show them footage, convincing them that these are terrorists who they're killing.
That's not the case. Every piece of footage that we're receiving, every piece of information that's coming, that's reaching us only because of
Starlink is proving that that's not the case. Forty-seven years of resistance has shown us that that's not the case. The U.N. fact finding
mission has proven that the capabilities of this regime in cracking down on peaceful dissent and the freedom of thought and speech.
[13:10:00]
So, we know at this point the horrors that the Iranian people face. Iran International today reported that it's looking more like 12,000 people have
been murdered in the past few weeks. Something needs to happen internationally on a multilateral, multinational level, multilateral
approach. And honestly, what's happened so far is that we are the International Community have failed.
When we go to the U.N. Security Council, of course, China and Russia will veto any kind of multilateral approach to basically bringing this regime
down. And standing with the Iranian people. At this point, the ask from the people in Iran is very clear. Stand by us and not by the regime. And we
really need the International Community to come together and think about ways that they can do that immediately. And this is not something we need
to think about plans to do in the future. People are being murdered.
GOLODRYGA: You posted on X last night. There is a sharp contrast between some Western punditry in recent years and the slogans on Iran's streets.
Iranians are blaming the Islamic Republic for their suffering, not sanctions, not the West. You have become an expert on covering these
protests and the demands of Iranian people, especially women. And when you think back to the 2022 protests, the Women Life Freedom movement, just talk
about the role that women continue to play in taking to these streets and risking so much in doing so.
BONIADI: You know, this is a culmination of 47 years of resistance. And I truly believe women have been at the heart of that. Of course, you're not
hearing Women Life Freedom on the streets today, but this is an evolution of the same slogan. You know, it is essentially what we've heard in past
protests is a demand for something, whether it's reform or basic human rights or women's rights.
Today, they're just saying death to Khamenei. They want this regime gone. And really, they want to reclaim their country. That doesn't exclude
women's rights. That is at the heart of that stands the struggle of women, half the country who have been second, third class citizens for 47 years.
So, women have had everything to do with this moment.
And Women Life Freedom, I think, has propelled us and allowed us and galvanized people to get to this very moment. So, no, that movement may not
be at the forefront of people's minds in the sense of slogans being chanted on the streets, but it has played an essential role in in the moment that
we're seeing right now in Iran for freedom and bringing down this regime.
GOLODRYGA: When you look at a potential leadership vacuum, I mean, the day after is always such an important question to ask. And there are a number
of names being mentioned as potential successors to this regime. As you know, one of them, Reza Pahlavi, the crown prince who is here in the United
States.
What are you hearing? I know it is very difficult to communicate with those protesters now. But when we're reporting that his name is being echoed more
and more during these protests, how significant is that?
BONIADI: Look, I think Iran is a very diverse country and I think it's impossible for anybody to speak on behalf of every Iranian. But the facts
are the facts, which is the only name I've heard in any video is the name of Reza Pahlavi. And long live the king and calls for basically for
monarchy to return to Iran.
My hope is that any kind of role that he plays is one that brings people together, which is exactly what he claims that he wants to do for a
transition to a free and fair internationally monitored election and allow Iranian self-determination, allow the people of Iran to choose whether they
want a constitutional monarchy or a republic. And that really has to be up to the people of Iran.
But, yes, he is really the only name being called on the streets. And he has what appears to be a groundswell of support.
GOLODRYGA: Well, these are very fragile, frightening times as we continue to report the death toll, but also just marveling at the bravery that so
many are showing despite all of the consequences that they face. We will continue to follow and cover it all. Nazanin Boniadi, thank you so much.
We're thinking of your family and friends as well.
BONIADI: Thank you very much. Thank you.
[13:15:00]
GOLODRYGA: And do stay with CNN. We'll be right back after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
GOLODRYGA: Yet more Ukrainian lives have been lost after a brutal overnight Russian missile attack across the country. The western city of
Lviv was even hit with a nuclear-capable ballistic missile. Putin seems as emboldened as ever. And my next guest is warning of the dark toll the war
is taking on Russia itself.
Historian Nina Krushcheva documents what she calls Russia's descent into tyranny in a recent piece for Foreign Affairs. And she joins me now live.
Nina, it is always good to see you.
You write in this compelling piece that before February 2022, Russia's larger-scale invasion of Ukraine, Russia's society was fairly open, and it
was pretty clear at that point, I mean, that they had access to the Internet, that there was some form of independent news and the capability
to receive that news and even speak out at times in dissent of the government. Now, you have seen and written about what you describe as the
consolidation of a dictatorship in real time.
Are you surprised by that, given your expertise in covering dictatorships and the fact that it happened so quickly?
NINA KRUSHCHEVA, RUSSIAN HISTORIAN AND PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS, THE NEW SCHOOL: Hi, Bianna, thank you so much. At the beginning, I mean,
you know it as well as I do, it was it wasn't a free society, but it was reasonably open, certainly much more open than was reported about Russia
until 2022. It's probably, given Russian history, it's not a surprise that now it's that another cycle of tyranny coming in, although it was a shock.
And I think that it happened so quickly. It has happened over four years, almost four years. That is a shock because it basically undid every
potential for freedom, every potential -- I mean, now it's very difficult to communicate from there. And in my piece, I kind of document how bit by
bit the internet connection was being taken away. So, the connection to the world had been taken away.
But what really doesn't surprise me, but at the same time does surprise me a little, is that Russians basically they don't fight. And you just had
this wonderful conversation, horrible conversation, wonderful conversation about Iran. Russia hasn't been under this regime for long enough to fight
directly face to face. But it has a tremendous amount of ways to find ways to circumvent.
And so, it's unfree, but at the same time acts in many ways as a very free society, as if the militancy of the regime is somewhere there. But the
people, the more it goes, the more people act as if it doesn't exist. And I've never seen -- I mean, you know, we've discussed this before. I am a
Soviet. I was born in the Soviet Union. I lived under Leonid Brezhnev. So, there's a lot of double think and double speak. I've never seen anything
like that, when the state says one thing, but openly the society lives as if it doesn't exist.
[13:20:00]
GOLODRYGA: Yes, as you know, I was born in the Soviet Union as well. And it's shocking to hear my parents say in the early days of this larger scale
invasion, you know, we escaped that country. And yet, things were not as bad in 1980 as it is today.
You brought up our previous conversation with Nazanin. And I do wonder how Vladimir Putin, how the Kremlin is perceiving how quickly we've seen the
destabilization and the fall of his close allies, that being Nicolas Maduro and Venezuela last two weekends ago, and now seeing what is unfolding with
the Iranian regime.
A lot had been reported about psychologically what the fall of Gaddafi meant and symbolized for Vladimir Putin in Libya. And I'm just wondering
how he is interpreting what's happening in Iran and Venezuela right now.
KRUSHCHEVA: Well, you also mentioned in that in the previous piece, that there's really not much conversation, we actually haven't heard from Putin
at all. There was some responses from his people, from the diplomats, from Nebenzya, the Russian ambassador to the United Nations, but we haven't
heard from Putin. And I mean, once again, and you also, I'm sure you know that they are allies, but Russian connection to this kind of leaders is
very mercenary.
I mean, they're helpful because when the war began, and Russia was turned away from the West, and so yes, we have to seek more connection with others
who are not turning us away. But not that Vladimir Putin really thinks that these are the greatest leaders he can get totally along with.
I think Maduro is more interesting because on one hand, he feels that the United States cannot be trusted. We always know the United States takes
regimes out. But at the same time, I think the Maduro case, when the rest of the elites continue to be there, I think that's very heartening to those
around Putin because they're already thinking, oh, if that's how it happens, that's OK. We're just going to make friends with America at least,
and it's all going to continue.
With Iran, it's a little difficult, but I think they console themselves, is that Iran, it's always been, what, 79, so it's over 60 years, and Russia is
not in that state yet, and it really is not in that state yet. But I think for Putin, I think he's hardened by this, and he really -- if he didn't
trust anybody before, I think he's going to trust anybody even less. So, he would be -- I was talking about sliding into a dictatorship. I think it's
going to be even more. But the economy is not doing really well. People are actually getting tired.
In previous conversations, I was talking about it when the war began, so it was shock and disbelief, and then it was despair, and it was fear, but now
it's actually anger and sort of, this is ridiculous, it goes nowhere. Basically, all the potential support, it's now completely gone. So, I would
imagine that as a dictator, he is going to be much more centered around his power and fear that he may lose this power, even then he was before.
GOLODRYGA: Yes, I'm wondering if there are any Delcy Rodriguez's in his orbit, as you say, he's formed so closely.
KRUSHCHEVA: Oh, I'm sure about that.
GOLODRYGA: What's transpired in Venezuela, especially given the reporting that she may have been in discussions with the U.S. government for quite a
while before Maduro was taken with his wife two weeks ago.
Does that then mean, Nina, when it comes to perhaps any sort of ceasefire, that Putin is further away from an agreement at this point?
KRUSHCHEVA: I think he is, and I never really thought that he was getting close, because -- I mean, first of all, now he's -- I mean, he was very --
he's going to be even less trusting seeing Maduro. So, that's, he's going to be more careful.
But with the ceasefire, no, he is very clear he wants the territory, he wants the Donbas region. He's not going -- I don't believe -- he may, but I
don't believe he's going to be a step away from that. NATO, Ukraine in NATO, no way. The NATO troops on the ground, probably no way, although
probably Donald Trump can convince him that it's in Lviv, sort of far away from the connecting line, then it may be possible.
[13:25:00]
But I think it's really very far away from what Putin wants and to what Volodymyr Zelenskyy may agree, and how much patience Donald Trump has about
it.
GOLODRYGA: To wrap up here, you know, Orwell's 1984 is often used lazily to describe authoritarian regimes, but in Russia's case, it does feel very
precise. In your article, you note, actually, that sales of 1984 soared before the full-scale invasion, and one bookstore chain reported that 1984
was its most stolen book then.
In 2023, you write, Moscow has built a larger repressive apparatus, it has cultivated a climate of fear and uncertainty that encouraged many Russians
to silence not just themselves, but also one another. The accumulation of subtle changes on the part of both the state and society has led Russia
deeper and deeper into tyranny, a cycle that seems unlikely to break as long as Putin's regime pursues the kind of total control that until
recently seemed only to exist in Russia's communist past, or in Orwell's fiction.
How complete is this Orwellian transition, Nina?
KRUSHCHEVA: And that's what's so interesting about this Orwellian transition is that I call it a porous Orwell. So, it's Orwell but with
holes, with many holes, and that's what I mean is that this is the government and the spokespeople, whoever they are, the politicians, some
journalists, TV journalists, they speak about nationalism, patriotism, war, traditional values, whatnot, but the society lives as if all of this is
somewhere else, and that was never possible in Orwell, in actual Orwell.
And that's why Russia is actually something that I said a long, long time ago to Christiane is that Orwell is turning in his grave because he
couldn't have thought about going so far, but at the same time how everybody continues to live their own lives openly.
I mean, Orwell is sold in every store, and stolen is in every store, but the more repression Russia has, the more I'm thinking that Russia has moved
on. I mean 1984 still exists, but it's actually animal farm. I mean that is really kind of the hardcore oppression that we read in other Orwell piece,
the animal farm, something was compared only before to the Stalin and other very, very severe dictatorships.
GOLODRYGA: Sobering analysis as always, especially to hear from an expert like yourself. Nina Krushcheva, it's always good to see you though. Thank
you.
KINKADE: Thank you.
GOLODRYGA: Turning now to Los Angeles, where residents are reflecting on one year since the devastating wildfires that killed dozens of people and
destroyed thousands of homes, many of them yet to be rebuilt. Among those destroyed was the childhood home of MS Now correspondent Jacob Soboroff,
who reported from the front lines of the wildfires.
He's written a book about the experience and what can be learned, called "Firestorm." Soboroff has also reported in depth and written a book about
the Trump administration's immigration policies. And he joins us now live from our L.A. Bureau.
Jacob, it is good to see you. You've had a year to process now what transpired with those wildfires and the catastrophic loss for so many
residents and obviously closer to home for you and your family. Talk about your reflections over this past year and how it's changed you both in your
reporting and personally.
JACOB SOBOROFF, AUTHOR, "FIRESTORM" AND SENIOR NATIONAL REPORTER, MS NOW: It's good to see you, Bianna. It's the fire of the future is what we
experienced, and that's what I have learned and have come to learn over writing this book, "Firestorm." You know, how do you process watching your
childhood home carbonized before your eyes as you cover it live on national television? The answer is you don't. I tried to, but I couldn't.
And I had so many questions. How did this happen? How could it happen? Who's to blame? Will it ever happen again? And, you know, those are all the
questions I set out to answer in writing "Firestorm," and what I thought was this teleportation time machine into my past and watching it all
literally incinerate really turned out to be a story that might read like a sci-fi thriller but is such a true story, a minute-by-minute account of
what it is like to be there inside this fire of the future that I think really truly honestly is a lived experience for Angelenos but in some form
or fashion is coming for all of us all around the country and all around the world.
[13:30:00]
GOLODRYGA: And you talk about this being, as we've reported as well, the costliest wildfire in U.S. history. 16,000 structures were destroyed, yet
only about 3,000 permits to rebuild. That discrepancy is notable, and that tells you about some of the concern that those residents have now about how
much they can trust and what the planning is from the government perspective, both state and federally, to begin to rebuild their lives.
Give us your thoughts on how we got here.
SOBOROFF: I always say, you know, when you get inside these big mass casualty events, whether it was the family separation policy that I covered
during the first Trump term or being there in the middle of this fire, it always lays bare the fissures underneath our society. They become very
clear.
And here in Los Angeles, number one, we're the most unaffordable city and the most unaffordable state in the union, and that is reflected in the
recovery effort. People cannot afford to rebuild. Not only are there premiums going up and the money that they're being paid out in insurance,
and you'll learn about personal stories of people in this book that are going through this, not enough to come back. 40 percent of the people who
are selling their lots are selling them to corporate investors, not to Californians, not to Angelenos who want to stay here because they simply
can't afford it.
And another thing that's stymied the rebuilding effort, quite frankly, is the administration's immigration policy. 40 percent of the construction
workers, by some accounts, in California are undocumented, and the undocumented population is under siege, not the worst of the worst, but
everyday day laborers who stand in Home Depot parking lots here in Los Angeles, and that has directly affected the rebuilding effort.
And again, this is a story, obviously, that is at the intersection of politics and climate, but it's a story as much about people as it is about
those other two things. And you will hear from Pablo Alvarado, the head of the Day Laborers Organizing Network. You will hear from an engineer at Jet
Propulsion Laboratory, Kate Hannigan. Hundreds of her colleagues lost their homes in Altadena. She is having a hard time. Herb and Loyda Wilson, UPS
employees for 30 years that met and fell in love and married there have moved around 10 times in the wake of the fire because they cannot afford to
get back. At the end of the day, this is a story about people, and it's people who are caught in the middle of this and will be all over the world.
GOLODRYGA: And it's also a story about accountability and leadership. You talk about the fact that ICE raids are now happening in Home Depots,
roughly 10 percent of L.A. County undocumented, and immigration -- these immigration policies are having a real impact on not only everyday lives of
Angelenos, but also in this rebuilding process. This is something that Gavin Newsom, the governor of California, potentially viewed as a candidate
for the Democratic Party in 2028, has told you that he's very worried about.
What are his plans? What does he say to you that he believes is the way forward and how to best tackle this issue versus how we are seeing it play
out with the Trump administration?
SOBOROFF: Well, his relationship with the Trump administration is detailed intimately in this book. I spent several hours with him privately in his
office in Sacramento as I wrote the book, and he went on the record about some of the key points during the fire itself and the recovery that have
become pain points for him as he tries to lead the recovery.
And by the way, he's not absolved. Karen Bass, the mayor of L.A., no politician is absolved, no agency is absolved in what could have made the
fires better or worse. Everyone will get a fair shake and does get a fair shake in this book. But what he tells me about the Trump administration is
that during the fires, misinformation and disinformation played a key role in exacerbating, I think, basically pouring rhetorical fuel on the real
flames of the fire by having Donald Trump push conspiracy theories about whether or not you could have a mystical tap open from the Pacific
Northwest and pour water on Los Angeles. Sounds ridiculous to say because it is. And that sowed the seeds of confusion for people in this recovery
effort.
Elon Musk, who was leading DOGE at the time, was pressuring firefighters about the sources of water and why the water pressure was low. And those
firefighters pushed back in real time. And Gavin Newsom cites, and you can read the scene in the book where he's sitting in his makeshift emergency
command center in Los Angeles as the point where he realized he needed to push back on mis- and disinformation harder coming from this administration
if he wanted to get anything done. And he still remains challenged in terms of getting help from the federal government.
The Trump administration and the president himself, Newsom tells me, didn't even have him for a when he was in Washington, D.C. at the end of 2025 to
get billions of dollars in recovery aid. The politics of this are as much a part of the problem as climate change or changes in the way we live or our
infrastructure falling apart. And I think that all goes into this notion of the fire of the future that's detailed in this book.
[13:35:00]
GOLODRYGA: Yes. And you watched and documented the Newsom and Trump dynamic closely during this crisis. Obviously, the residents there aren't a
monolith, even those that have suffered through these wildfires. But who do they blame? Who do they see as the culprit in terms of a failure in
leadership here?
SOBOROFF: And by the way, I completely -- and I was just texting with a resident right before I came on the air with you. I understand why people
are angry. And some of the people that are angry at Mayor Karen Bass, who represented Pacific Palisades, which was half of the costliest wildfire
event in American history.
You know, this was stretched over Los Angeles County, the most populous county in the nation, over three times the size of Manhattan burned.
Thirty-one people died, maybe as many as 400, if you look at excess mortality in the medical literature. And this is going to be a generations-
long recovery process. Some people blame Gavin Newsom. Some people blame the electrical utility in Altadena, where dormant electrical towers that
were not in use electrified and created the spark that led to the Eaton Fire.
What I learned is there is no one proximate cause. Are there questions to ask about should there have been more firefighters pre-deployed to the
Palisades? Should the reservoir have been full in the Palisades? Should those towers have been taken down in Altadena? All of that is ripe for
discussion, for investigative journalism. Some of that is in this book. Some of it is happening still to this day and in this moment.
Ultimately, it will be the voters' decision about whether or not they want to keep on the local leadership here, Karen Bass as the mayor, Gavin Newsom
as the governor. He had promised a Marshall Plan 2.0 to me in the wake of the fires when I interviewed him on "Meet the Press" on NBC. And that
hasn't materialized.
And so, there's lots for the residents here to sort through, in addition to the rubble, the literal rubble of their lives. And I do think that there
will be very real political consequences in the wake of this as well.
GOLODRYGA: And the confluence of politics and natural disasters merge in real time in this book as you lay out, where Katie Miller, the wife of
Stephen Miller, as you're covering these fires, reaches out to you. In the final few seconds that we have here, explain to us what she asked of you.
SOBOROFF: The reason I included the story about Katie Miller, Stephen Miller's wife, asking me to go check on the home of Stephen Miller's
parents, who lived in the Palisades, just as the kid I drove in carpool did, or my brother did, asked me to go look at his house, is because her
bosses, Trump and Musk, were spreading the misinformation and disinformation at the same moment she asked me to go look at the house.
And by the way, I did, just as I did for the other two. The house burned down and I was devastated for them. But the irony here is not lost on me.
And it's important to emphasize the role that misinformation coming from political quarters that she occupies has on events like this.
And so, while I debated whether or not to include the story, I did it for that very reason, that even people who were pushing these very theories
that were hurting Angelinos were suffering from them at the same moment. That includes Stephen Miller, his parents, and their daughter-in-law, Katie
Miller, who asked me to go.
GOLODRYGA: Jacob Soboroff, I really appreciate your reporting. Thank you so much for joining us. Congratulations on the book.
SOBOROFF: Thank you.
GOLODRYGA: We'll be right back after this short break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
GOLODRYGA: Now, as climate change alters weather patterns and landscapes, it's also reshaping the geopolitical stakes in places where resources were
once hard to reach, like the Arctic. With American and Danish officials expected to meet amid President Trump's threats to take over Greenland, the
U.S. focus on the mineral-rich territory signals a growing interest in the changing region, including from other global superpowers like China and
Russia.
[13:40:00]
Journalist Kenneth Rosen speaks to Walter Isaacson about his new book on the topic and how national security could transform in the Arctic.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
WALTER ISAACSON, CO-HOST, AMANPOUR AND CO.: Thank you, Bianna. And, Ken Rosen, welcome to the show.
KENNETH ROSEN, AUTHOR, "POLAR WAR": Thanks, Walter.
ISAACSON: You have this great new book out, "Polar War," which is actually quite chilling in many ways, reading about you in the far north. But tell
me -- let's start with, to what effect is climate change having on the geography of the far north, of the Arctic?
ROSEN: It's really changing everything in the circumpolar north. What once was significant sea ice that covered the Arctic Ocean at the North Pole
during the summer is now dissipating and melting over the summer to the point where scientists believe by 2030 or so that sea will be completely
ice-free. That's probably the most dramatic effect we're seeing.
But with the receding of that ice along the coastlines of, say, Alaska and the Barents Sea and elsewhere in the Arctic Ocean, the communities that
live along the shorelines are now facing no more protection from the ice, protection from typhoons and other weather events that once were trapped
underneath ice or kept at bay because of the ice.
ISAACSON: And your book's mainly about the struggle for power, all the spies being involved. So, tell me how what you just said affects national
security of the United States.
ROSEN: So, as that ice melts and permafrost thaws, one of the main concerns, one of the driving components of a power competition in the high
north is the opening of sea channels, commercial seaways, principally above Russia's land border with the Arctic, what they're calling the Northern Sea
Route. It's a significant change because ships coming from East Asia to Europe would sever about 10 to 12 days off their journey, a huge impact on
shipping and the cost of shipping across what was the Suez Canal and could now be a potential alternative.
ISAACSON: So, this week, of course, the big news is that Secretary of State Rubio is going to negotiate. Tell me about that trip and what you
think they're really trying to achieve there.
ROSEN: Well, as you know, Walter came on the heels of President Trump stating after attacking Venezuela and unseating Maduro that he wanted
Greenland again, which was not something that he has not said before. He said it several times, both in his first presidency and now the second
term.
And it seems as though he was considering a military option, but now is potentially looking at a diplomatic option. He's gone as far as saying that
he would pay for Greenland. And of course, Walter, having read the book, you know that the U.S. has a long history of wanting Greenland trying to
acquire it or having some control over a dormant World War II.
So, it's not out of the realm of possibility that a president would want it. But to do it in such a bellicose way is a little troublesome when, as
we mentioned earlier, the region is in a strange state of affairs already given climate change.
ISAACSON: Well, yes, you mentioned that we've had a long history of this. I didn't realize that right at the end of the Civil War in 1867, we're
buying Alaska, which is somewhat of an analogy to this. And we're also thinking, let's also buy Greenland. So, explain how long we've been
thinking about this.
ROSEN: Well, Secretary Seward, President Lincoln's secretary of state, was the one who wanted to buy what a lot of people in Congress, a lot of
Congress, congressional members thought was an icebox. Right. It would just be this place that would end up getting -- giving nothing to the U.S., just
be this total tear on resources and a strain on the economy. But eventually turned out to be a boon for the U.S., as we know, with the trans-Alaska
pipeline.
ISAACSON: And you're talking about Alaska. Yes, right.
ROSEN: Yes. It's just Alaska. And so, after that, they were considering the Congress and the president were considering, well, maybe we shouldn't
have to fight for a lot of the territory that we won. Maybe we could actually go out and purchase it. They had considered buying Canada as the
U.K. was rolling back its territories overseas. And one of those other potential parcels of land was Greenland turned out to be a much-needed part
of our national defense during World War II.
ISAACSON: And President Truman, I think, was thinking of offering a hundred million dollars, I read.
ROSEN: Yes. Now, they're talking about, you know, 5 billion or just a couple trillion dollars for Greenland. And it's almost a moot point because
the Greenlanders have said that -- the people of Greenland have said time and again that they're not for sale. They want to do business. They
certainly want to open up their economy. They're looking at expanding their tourism and fishery industries. But an outright takeover, whether it be
through cash or arms, is not quite beneficial to their interests. And they know that.
[13:45:00]
ISAACSON: So, there's not going to be an outright sale. What do you -- what could there be that makes some sense? Is there anything that the Trump
administration could get other than what we already have in our treaties, which is military bases?
ROSEN: I think it's an expansion on what we already have. I think that the Trump administration hasn't outlined clearly that the agreements we
maintain with Denmark is that we can build more bases, that we can expand our military footprint there, that we can get leases for mines and that we
can open up the mining industry if we want. Now, that's a whole different conversation about the implausibility of operating mines in the high north.
But we already have a really great relationship. We being the Americans have a great relationship with Denmark that could foster exactly the things
that President Trump is talking about without the excess need of taking over another country or shelling out half a trillion dollars a year to
sustain that economy, which is what Denmark already does.
ISAACSON: Well, wait. You said that it would be impractical perhaps to do a whole lot of rare earth and other mining in the high north. Why is that?
Is the infrastructure impossible?
ROSEN: Well, the infrastructure is impossible because there's the short seasons, right? It's dark for all of winter. The shoulder season of summer
is four or five months where you can get boats in and equipment in. And that is long before you even build out roads or the infrastructure needed
for mining.
I mean, Walter, Greenland is two and a half times the size of Texas and it has 100 miles of roads. So, there would be a lot of development that needs
to go into it. There's already difficulties in Alaska and northern Canada when it comes to building out military bases or rare earth mines. And, you
know, looking down the -- at the longevity of such a place, you need to look at 25, 50 years rather than the normal 5, 10, 15 years of when mines
can be profitable. So, there's a lot a lot more that goes into it. And there's got to be a lot more investment over a longer period of time.
ISAACSON: Let me read you a sentence from the book, which deals with Russia. You say Russia is leading the charge with more military bases in
the Arctic, greater competency in cold weather operations and a fleet of icebreakers that dwarfs the maritime Arctic fleet of every other nation.
So, is it inevitable that Russia has a huge military advantage throughout the Arctic?
ROSEN: They certainly have the positioning and they have the equipment. Their icebreakers somewhere north of 50 or so nuclear-powered icebreakers
have a lot more time in the water and are up there more and more frequently. Whether or not their military capabilities are up to snuff, up
to a conflict or up to readiness for an event in the high north is unclear, given what we saw in Venezuela with unmaintained surface to air missiles
and other equipment. So, they certainly --
ISAACSON: And how have Ukraine -- they're involved in affect their ability in the high north?
ROSEN: Well, one of the interesting notes that I found from traveling the north is that a lot of the drone strikes that were undertaken against Kyiv
were initiated from the Kola Peninsula, which is where Russia keeps its nuclear armed forces and its bastion defense. So, it remains a place of a
launch pad for a lot of the military strikes in Ukraine. And it could be seen that that would translate to perhaps a launch pad for strikes against
Eastern or Western Europe or even the United States.
ISAACSON: You talk about how the Russians are much better with icebreakers, which seems like an obvious tool you need for that region
still. And, you know, in this area, Bollinger shipyards built a whole lot of icebreakers. But they need to get the magnets and some of the rare earth
from China in order to do it. Are we handicapped because of things like that?
ROSEN: I'm not sure. A lot of the issues with the shipbuilding was the fact that the U.S. Coast Guard continued to change the designs of the ships
as they were being developed. These security cutters, these polar security cutters, which is a program long delayed 10 or more years and into 20 years
now. And that's one of Trump's desires for Greenland is to get those rare earth minerals that would ostensibly fuel some of the development of
greater technology in the military.
But I don't think that particularly pertains to the ships themselves, which is a whole another mess, a nightmare, lack of funding, lack of Coast Guard
enrollment, enlistment and loss of the admiral leading the Coast Guard only when Trump took office in January of last year.
ISAACSON: Well, one of the things you described is how our bases are languishing, that even the old technology is falling apart.
ROSEN: So, specifically to the Pituffik Space Base in northern Greenland, the runways are buckling every summer as the permafrost thaws, some of the
buildings are outdated and are collapsing with the permafrost thawing and some of the barracks for the people who live there, the few people who live
there are not even Wi-Fi equipped. They were just living in a sort of tent in the north without the amenities of a modern life.
[13:50:00]
And even in Alaska, this was the case with the fences that were surrounding Eielson Air Force Base becoming exposed to melting -- or thawing permafrost
and melting ice so that someone could even crawl underneath a chain link fence now and get access to the base.
ISAACSON: When you look at China, it's got no border on the Arctic, but they're calling themselves a near Arctic nation. And of course, what you
described makes sense to me suddenly, which is they could get whole new routes for their entire supply chain and trading system if they do it. What
are China's intentions in the Arctic?
ROSEN: It wants to develop what it's calling a polar silk road also along that northern sea route to get a stake in the Arctic. Right now, the Arctic
Council, the primary governing body in the high north, is composed of eight nations. And China is just an observer state. So, as long as it can keep
pushing its way into the north and find reasons to support Russia and its endeavors, it can also become a player up there.
But ever since Russia's invasion of Ukraine, you know, as you were mentioning in Svalbard, you know, Turkey signed on to the Svalbard Treaty.
All these other nations are claiming near Arctic status and wanting to have a piece of what was traditionally just the littoral states and then a few
others.
So, you know, a lot of different nations are making headway. India is making headway and saying, you know, we are an Arctic nation because
climate change affects us all. There's a valid argument there. But as far as cooperation in the high north, search and rescue, fisheries inspections,
that has largely been retained by the Arctic powers. And a lot of them don't want to lose that.
ISAACSON: Well, you say that China is trying to create, I love the phrase, an Arctic Silk Road through there. It was just a few months ago, right,
that they did the first route up there. So, they seem to have much more of a claim than any of these other nations talking about being part of the
near Arctic.
ROSEN: Well, it's a catch 22, right? We let China steam across this northern sea route. And actually, South Korea just announced that it was
planning on doing one of these routes in the coming months from East Asia to Rotterdam. The problem is that Western nations can't undertake it
because of sanctions and they'd have to face permits given by Russia in order to even transit that area or face military buzzing, as I mentioned in
one of the chapters of the book.
So, while we could potentially have American or Western companies transit that route, the cost of insurance premiums is really high. You'd have to
somehow evade sanctions and pay Russia for the sponsorship to be able to go through that route. And you'd have to have the vessels in order to be able
to navigate safely were ice to appear and not -- and stop the vessel in its tracks.
So, it's something that's possible, I think, but it's also hard to undertake when we're also sanctioning the country that is overseeing that
very route.
ISAACSON: At the end of the Cold War, we kind of thought that the Arctic in some ways could be a great place of international cooperation. What
happened then? And is there any way we could get back to some something like that?
ROSEN: Right. Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev called it a zone of peace, right? And now, from what -- from the reporting that I did over the last
two and a half, three years, it's become something of a zone of war. And what we can do to keep it together, to keep that cooperation ongoing, it's
very hard to say, Walter. I mean, just with all the recent rhetoric coming out of Washington, I think a lot of people in Denmark and the Scandinavian
nations, the Arctic nations more broadly, are worried about the next two weeks, let alone scientific cooperation. They're worried about their own
borders and their own populations.
And I think we're moving much, much farther away from that conversation of how do we get back to peace and cooperation and more toward a conversation
of do we need a different framework for managing our international relations up there?
ISAACSON: If we wanted to get back to an era of peace and cooperation and you could have two minutes with Secretary Rubio as he goes on this trip,
what would you advise him?
ROSEN: I would tell Secretary Rubio that we are stronger together in the north and that it's a long-known facility of living in the cold regions
that you will come to rely on your neighbor and your neighbor will come to rely on you no matter what kind of relationship you've had, it will always
come down to who you know and how well you cooperate together.
[13:55:00]
We have a lot of assets in the high north and we need to strengthen them, not deteriorate the cooperative mechanisms that we do have in the hopes of
getting something that isn't there yet.
ISAACSON: Ken Rosen, thank you so much for joining us.
ROSEN: Thanks, Walter.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GOLODRYGA: And finally, it's a winter wonderland a sense of home for these giant pandas at Vienna Zoo. This pair of black and white bears are seen
enjoying the snow, climbing on two branches and chewing on bamboo. According to the zoo, the current cold weather conditions are not unlike
the climate in China's mountainous forests, which is their natural habitat.
Pandas are able to stay warm with the help of their thick fur covering even the soles of their feet so that they don't slip. Our brilliant producers
knowing that I love to end the show with animal footage.
All right. That is it for now. Remember, you can always catch us online and on our website and all-over social media. Thank you so much for watching,
and goodbye from New York.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:00:00]
END
