Return to Transcripts main page
Amanpour
Interview with Former U.S. Ambassador to NATO Julianne Smith Interview with Lebanese National Bloc Executive Committee Member Lynn Harfoush; Interview with "Return-ing" Author Nicholas Lemann. Aired 1-2p ET
Aired March 31, 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 coming up.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARCO RUBIO, U.S. SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: The upcoming days will be decisive. Iran knows that. And there's almost nothing they could military
do about it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: U.S. ground troops heading to the Middle East as gas prices hit $4-a-gallon. How long will the Iran War go on? I'm joined by former U.S.
NATO ambassador, Julianne Smith.
Then --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER (through translator): In Lebanon, I've just instructed to further expand the existing security zone
in order to decisively thwart the threat of invasion.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: The Israeli military pushes forward with military operations in Lebanon. Correspondent Jim Sciutto reports from Northern Israel.
And --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LYNN HARFOUSH, EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBER, LEBANESE NATIONAL BLOC: I am here to tell you that millions of Lebanese, including many Shiites, want a
different future.
GOLODRYGA: -- from Beirut, I speak with Lynn Harfoush, a political activist who came of age in Hezbollah-controlled southern Lebanon.
Plus --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NICHOLAS LEMANN, AUTHOR, "RETURN-ING": I love being Jewish. It's a source of wonderful enrichment and joy and meaning in my life.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: -- Walter Isaacson talks with veteran journalist Nicholas Lemann about his rediscovery of faith and family.
Welcome to the program, everyone. I'm Bianna Golodryga in New York, sitting in for Christiane Amanpour.
Crude oil prices spiked after an Iranian attack on a Kuwaiti tanker off Dubai, hitting a world economy already reeling from the fallout of the war.
And while Europe deals with its second major energy shock in less than five years, the White House is venting its frustration with them. This morning,
President Trump posted a message to European allies saying, quote, "You'll have to start learning how to fight for yourself. The USA won't be there to
help you anymore, just like you weren't there for us."
And in a press conference today, when asked if the U.S. is still committed to NATO's collective defense, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said, that's
up to President Trump.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARCO RUBIO, U.S. SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: When we ask for additional assistance or simple access-facing overflight, we get questions or
roadblocks or hesitations. And the president's pointing out, you don't have much of an alliance if you have countries that are not willing to stand
with you when you need them.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: The economic and military fallout from Iran is adding even more pressure to Ukraine's war effort. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says that
he's received messages from some of Ukraine's partners urging him to scale back attacks on Russia's energy infrastructure.
So, what's the best course for Iran and NATO in the face of White House pressure? Joining me now to discuss Julianne Smith, who served as U.S.
ambassador to NATO under President Biden. Julianne, it's good to see you. Welcome back to the program.
So, let's go back to what we heard from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, once again, laying into NATO this morning at his press briefing there
alongside the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Knowing European leadership the way you do, how do you think they interpreted his comments?
JULIANNE SMITH, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO NATO: Well, my guess is, and in speaking with a couple of folks in Europe already just in the last hour,
what I think we can expect is a lot of shock on the other side of the Atlantic. I mean, for Secretary Hegseth to suggest that NATO allies are not
showing up is something that a lot of Europeans, I think, find shocking.
This is an intervention, a war, a conflict that the U.S. began. It didn't consult with its European allies. It did not take any information about
this intervention to NATO, to the NATO allies, to warn them that there could be asks coming from the United States. And suddenly, about a month
into the conflict, now the administration is expressing enormous frustration that the European allies are simply not showing up.
Now, what has happened in recent weeks is that 22 nations, both in the Indo-Pacific and Europe, have issued statements saying that when the
violence stops, when the conflict stops, they are willing to look at ways to help monitor and maintain safety and safe passage in the Strait of
Hormuz.
[13:05:00]
But right now, no European leader is expressing any willingness to join the United States in this conflict that it started on its own with Israel.
GOLODRYGA: Right. And we heard as much from Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Friday as he was departing from a meeting with his counterparts in Paris
at the G7 and saying that the United States does not need NATO's help right now. What he did talk to those leaders about, however, was the day after
and how to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, saying that that is going to be largely their problem as well.
I do want to ask you, though, because the narrative that the White House is putting out there, whether it's accurate or not, is that when the United
States was in a time of need or was in a military confrontation, that its allies in NATO did not come to its defense. And this is a point that
President Trump had even speculated about over the last few months, especially into his second term, saying that the United States has always
been there for NATO. The question is whether the NATO allies will be there for the United States.
Knowing all of that, do you think that the NATO members, at least publicly looking back, could have or should have responded differently in the first
few days of this conflict?
SMITH: Well, first of all, let's review a little bit of history. So, the NATO alliance has been around for 76 years. And there's a clause in the
treaty that says when one ally is attacked, all the other allies will come to their aid. That's Article 5 in the Washington Treaty. The only time that
NATO has invoked Article 5 of the Washington Treaty was after 9/11. The United States was obviously attacked that day, and NATO allies stood up and
came to the aid of the United States and joined us in a 20-year mission in Afghanistan.
So, Europeans find it a bit incredulous, they are in shock, that the United States president would suggest that Europe has never been, that NATO allies
have never been willing to stand shoulder to shoulder with the United States when it's been under attack. The facts simply don't prove that to be
true.
Now, in terms of what's happened over the last month, if the United States had gone to NATO allies, to individual countries, I really in truth don't
see this as a NATO mission, but they could have consulted with our European allies through NATO channels. You can sit down with all 31 members, talk to
them. If we had briefed them on the operation, if we had walked through various contingencies, if we had made certain requests in advance that we
wanted their assistance with the strait, with intelligence, anything, I think Europeans would have been a little bit open-minded.
But where the Europeans were frustrated is when they had to read about this in the newspaper. There weren't any consultations in advance. And they also
feel quite confused, to be honest, about what is the actual objective of this mission. Are we going after Iranian missiles? Are we going after
Iran's nuclear capabilities? Is it regime change? Is it to get the oil, as the president suggested just a couple of days ago?
And I think that also makes it hard for the Europeans or, frankly, any country around the world to really join in in the effort if there's not a
fundamental understanding of what the United States is trying to do. And that objective seems to change by the hour, sometimes by the day, depending
on which U.S. official you're actually hearing from.
GOLODRYGA: So, set aside whether the Europeans should have or weren't consulted ahead of this operation and war in Iran, the drumbeats were
pretty loud, though, in the last few months. I mean, I remember as we were focused on the crisis over Greenland, and this was when the president was
in Davos at the start of this year, we'd already seen troops amassing and sort of a buildup there of U.S. assets in the region. Are you surprised
that European leaders, from their own security perspective, weren't prepared more for this possibility?
SMITH: My sense is that the leaders in Europe were closely monitoring the situation. They could obviously see the buildup of U.S. forces. They were
monitoring the rhetoric coming out of the White House and other agencies across Washington. But they didn't hear any requests coming from the United
States.
Certainly, my guess is that behind closed doors, they were asking themselves where they might be asked for assistance, things like mine
clearing or intelligence sharing or counter-drone assistance, although there, that's where the Ukrainians actually can play a greater role than
many European allies. But because there was never any sort of outreach towards Europe and not a clear indication as to what the objectives were, I
think the Europeans had a hard time lining up possible forms of assistance.
[13:10:00]
But also, let's be clear here. There are a number of opinions about what's happening in Iran across Europe. There are some countries that see utility
in it. They're glad to see the degraded Iranian missile capabilities. And they were thankful for the fact that the United States took action with the
Israelis. There are others that feel the opposite way. There are countries that are deeply uneasy about what the U.S. is doing. So, talking about
Europe is complicated because there are a variety of views across the continent.
GOLODRYGA: Yes, and a number of countries within this alliance as well. You mentioned President Zelenskyy and his role in the war in Iran.
Obviously, a lot of concern in Ukraine about what that means for that war now into its fifth year. And we did see President Zelenskyy travel to the
region and met with leaders there in the region, even striking deals with them. He's claiming that Gulf nations, Bahrain, Oman, they're formally
requesting Ukraine's expertise on defeating, in particular, the Iranian Shahed drones.
Has Ukraine's battlefield intelligence suddenly become a crucial asset for America's operation, regardless of what U.S. officials are saying publicly
about that?
SMITH: Well, it's really an interesting moment for Ukraine, because over the last couple of years, they've really been described as a security
consumer, that they need our help. They need Europe's help. They need the United States' help, many countries around the world, to help them defend
their territory against Russian aggression.
What's changed in the past couple of days is that Ukraine now has transitioned to become a security provider. It's providing expertise and
training to countries in the Gulf. We've seen them send about 200 experts to the region to help the Gulf countries understand what this drone threat
could look like going forward and how they can better guard themselves against those types of drone attacks. Also, the Ukrainians very cleverly
are signing long-term defense cooperation agreements with the leaders in Saudi Arabia, in Qatar, in the UAE, et cetera. And what they're getting out
of that is they're exchanging cheap drones for very high-priced missiles and interceptors, which they desperately need, as well as some financial
support.
So, I think President Zelenskyy has managed this quite well, and he's also tried to provide the United States and the Gulf countries with some
intelligence that he's picking up on. For example, there's some evidence that Russia is providing some targeting assistance to the Iranians that's
enabling them to go after U.S. troops. And that's something that Zelenskyy has been trying to make clear to U.S. officials, as well as countries in
the region.
GOLODRYGA: Right. And the response to that claim, that Russia is providing intelligence and assisting Iran here, is only getting pushback by the
United States not denying it, but by saying, and I'm going to quote what Secretary Rubio said, that Russia is doing nothing to impede our
operations.
Are we underestimating the direct military threat that Russia could pose to U.S. operations in Iran? I mean, are we, in a sense, perhaps even in a
proxy battle at this point?
SMITH: I think we have to take the Russia-Iranian relationship very seriously. Let's not forget that when Russia started the war in Ukraine,
Iran provided direct military assistance. They provided them with those Shahed drones, as well as missiles that have been very important to
Russia's campaign on the ground.
Now, in a sign of perhaps returning the favor, there's some evidence that Russia is providing some EW assistance, electronic warfare, and that
potentially they're going to be sending upgraded Shaheds that they're now producing in Russia to Iran. So, this cannot be underestimated. This is
something that we should watch very closely and not underestimate the deepening relationship between Moscow and Tehran.
GOLODRYGA: Yes. And there's also concerns, as this war is entering its fifth week, whether there will be U.S. weapons that had been on their way
to Europe to then go to Ukraine that are now being diverted for the United States and its stockpile. I do want to ask about the consequences of this
war thus far, not just on the battlefield and on the war in Ukraine, but obviously for the economy overall, the spike in energy prices.
And President Zelenskyy is saying that Western allies -- so, this leads one to believe that it's more than one country -- are actively pressuring Kyiv
to halt strikes on Russian oil facilities to protect the global energy prices. So, how does a coalition function if their goal is to help Ukraine,
but basically right now telling Ukraine to continue fighting your war with one hand tied behind your back?
[13:15:00]
SMITH: Well, the strikes deep inside Russia have always been a bit controversial. There are a number of views across the NATO alliance on the
degree to which the Ukrainians should be using long-range weapons to target Russia hundreds of kilometers inside its territory, whether you're talking
about energy infrastructure or cities themselves or even defense production. Lately, what we've seen is that the Ukrainians quite cleverly
have been able to reach ever deeper into Russian territory, and now they are actively, in some cases, going after energy infrastructure.
I think the question for Europe that they believe they're going to feel the shock, the energy shock of this war in Iran quite soon, possibly in weeks,
as now Asia is already feeling, that they are wondering whether or not Ukraine going after those facilities will only make the situation much
worse.
It's complicated. Europe has reduced its dependency on Russian oil and gas since the war in Ukraine started, but some countries do still rely on that
and may find themselves in the future turning to Russia for energy.
GOLODRYGA: And quickly, just to follow up on that, it's complicated. I know, as you said, but President Zelenskyy doesn't seem to be willing to
back off with this strategy because, in his view, he's saying this is hurting Vladimir Putin, where he thinks this could actually be the most
vulnerable position for Putin if this goes on longer to bring him to serious negotiations. What do you make of that argument?
SMITH: Well, Zelenskyy's thinking is, look, Russia right now is seeing a huge windfall in its oil revenues. I mean, it has completely reversed the
situation. The oil revenue earnings that Russia had in the compared to the past. And now, we've seen a complete reversal of fortune in that Russia now
is benefiting from this war in Iran.
And so, I think for Zelenskyy, he's trying to imagine ways in which he personally can put added pressure on Moscow to get them to the negotiating
table and feel like they're losing. He obviously is in a very different position than the countries that are supporting him right now. But I think
that's the logic of his thinking on going after these energy facilities.
And let's not forget, Russia has very aggressively gone after Ukraine's infrastructure and its energy facilities for many years and hasn't held
back in any regard from doing so over the last couple of years.
GOLODRYGA: Yes. Ukrainian drone strikes have knocked out Russia's principal Baltic oil terminals, and that has proven to be quite costly for
Russia. Thank you so much, Julianne Smith. We'll have to leave it there. Really appreciate the time. Good to see you.
SMITH: Thank you.
GOLODRYGA: And just stay with CNN. We'll be right back after a break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
GOLODRYGA: Now, as war in Iran dominates global news coverage, Israel's military is escalating its war in Lebanon. More than a thousand people have
been killed by Israeli strikes, including at least 125 children and some 52 health care workers, according to the Lebanese health military.
And France called for an emergency meeting of the United Nations Security Council after two U.N. peacekeepers were killed in Southern Lebanon on
Monday. Israel says Hezbollah was responsible.
[13:20:00]
And we learned today that four Israeli soldiers were killed in combat with Hezbollah. Ten have died so far in the latest offensive.
In northern Israel, residents welcome Israel's push to secure the border from Hezbollah attacks, as correspondent Jim Sciutto reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
NISAN ZEEVI, ISRAELI SECURITY SQUAD VOLUNTEER: OK. Let's go to the --
JIM SCIUTTO, CNN CHIEF U.S. SECURITY ANALYST: OK.
SCIUTTO (voice-over): It's a fact of life on Israel's northern border that incoming Hezbollah fire comes frequently and without warning.
SCIUTTO: So, this is life up in the north. They say about 40 warnings like that a day. We just had two of them in the span of five minutes.
Combination of rockets, sometimes anti-tank missiles, but also increasingly drones. And some of them can't be intercepted.
SCIUTTO (voice-over): The Kibbutz Kfar Giladi lies just about a mile from the border with Lebanon. After the October 7, 2023 Hamas attacks, Israel
evacuated communities like these, but during this war, they're staying.
ZEEVI: You know, our children in the shelter for more than 29 days, in a shelter, not allowing to go out. You know, all the economic ecosystem
collapse.
SCIUTTO (voice-over): What's different now is that Israeli forces are pushing into Southern Lebanon. They say to push Hezbollah further back.
CAPTAIN M, ISRAELI DEFENSE FORCES: At the hills past the wall, you will see them.
SCIUTTO (voice-over): This company commander, the IDF only allows us to identify him as Captain M, regularly leads operations inside Lebanon.
SCIUTTO: What leads you to go across? Is it a particular threat? Or is it just establishing a regular presence?
CAPTAIN M: It's a bit of both. More often than not, it's a concrete threat that we'll get from the intelligence that we have terrorists that are
trying to come near the border, that we have ammunition that is stored somewhere, that there are tunnels that are stored at, whatever it is.
SCIUTTO (voice-over): Visiting the north himself Sunday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced Israeli forces would push even further into
Lebanon.
BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER (through translator): In Lebanon, I've just instructed to further expand the existing security zone
in order to decisively thwart the threat of invasion and to push anti-tank missile fire away from our border.
SCIUTTO (voice-over): It's a move that Zeevi and other northern residents welcome.
ZEEVI: This time, the IDF actually did what us, the civil society that settled here years ago, expect them to do.
SCIUTTO: Which is?
ZEEVI: To go in front of us, not behind us. We cannot be the first line of Hezbollah.
SCIUTTO (voice-over): The Israeli government now speaks of military operations all the way up to the Litani River, some 20 miles into Lebanese
territory. To create this so-called buffer zone, Israel has now forced hundreds of thousands of Lebanese civilians from their homes into southern
part of the country. And yet, Hezbollah fire continues. Today, the IDF has prepared to operate inside Lebanon for as long as they are ordered to.
CAPTAIN M: I can tell you that when we get an order, we will do whatever we need to do. And I think, and I want to believe that the Army will make
decisions for what is best for the Israeli civilians that love here.
SCIUTTO (voice-over): The questions for Israel are, how much further into Lebanon and for how long? For now, Israeli officials leave those questions
unanswered.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GOLODRYGA: Our thanks to Jim Schuder reporting there. Well, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz reiterated today that Israel will position
itself in a security zone south of the Litani River in Lebanon and stay there after the current operation ends.
What will that mean for the people who live inside the planned security zone? Katz says that more than 600,000 evacuated residents will be
prohibited from returning until northern Israel is declared safe and that homes and villages near the border will be destroyed to remove threats,
citing the IDF model in Gaza.
Well, political activist Lynn Harfoush grew up in Beirut's southern suburbs in a region controlled by Hezbollah. Though she once supported the militant
group, she now opposes them while also opposing Israeli occupation. And she joins me now from Beirut. Lynn Harfoush, welcome to the program.
Before we get to the current war right now and conflict, another one between Hezbollah and Israel, I do want to tell our audience a little bit
more about you and your backstory. You recently spoke at the U.N. Security Council a few weeks ago and noted that you grew up knowing nothing except
for Hezbollah's hegemony and you once supported them.
[13:25:00]
And now, you are openly opposed to them. You told the Security Council that after the 2006 war, the mask fell off, you would return to your destroyed
neighborhood and realized Hezbollah was exploiting Lebanon and the citizens there, including your family for an expansionist project. So, was that the
turning point for you some 20 years ago? And just walk us through where you stand today.
LYNN HARFOUSH, EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBER, LEBANESE NATIONAL BLOC: Hello and thank you very much for having me. Yes, as I mentioned in my in my
speech in front of the Security Council, I grew up in Beirut's southern suburb, which had Hezbollah's hegemony over it and over the entire
community. It was normal for us to think that Hezbollah was a saving us from Israeli oppression.
However, with time, we came to realize that Hezbollah was actually an Iranian armed militia acting for what's the best of Iran's interest. And
the 2006 war, specifically after we returned and we saw our homes down and we saw how Hezbollah started acting within the community with a certain
excess of force and excessive power.
And then we observed Hezbollah trying to pull our Shiite community away from all the other communities, triggering inner conflict and making us
believe that they were coming for us and making us think that they are the only protectors, refusing the idea of the state. We came to realize that
Hezbollah was, in fact, the problem and that it had been dragging us into wars. And over the past 20 years, I've been quite a fierce opposition of
Hezbollah and its hegemony over the community. And it has proved to us over and over again that what it considers foremost important is Iranian
interests and not the Lebanese ones.
GOLODRYGA: And yet you also note your opposition to an Israeli occupation. And as I just noted, the Israeli defense minister saying that he has now
unveiled plans for southern Lebanon, similar to the operations in Gaza, proposing 15-to-20-mile security buffer over a million Lebanese citizens,
that some 20 percent of the population would be displaced.
Just walk us through what that reality would look like and does look like already for that portion of the community.
HARFOUSH: We are currently in one of the worst times of Lebanon. There is more than one million people displaced and who are at the risk of losing
their homes eternity. And this is very dangerous. In fact, the Israel, the Israeli forces are moving even more forward towards the south. And this
means that entire villages are at risk of being completely wiped out.
In reality, what does this mean for us? We cannot be OK with the Israeli occupation, but this does not mean that we are accepting Hezbollah's
hegemony over the south. In reality, and between 1978 and 2000, from the first Israeli invasion to the full withdrawal, Lebanon endured 22 years of
occupation. During that time, the south of Lebanon was effectively integrated into Israel's national security doctrine.
This is a reality that we refuse to relive. This is our land. But there is also another period that we must also reject, which is the period from 2000
until 2023, the time when Hezbollah opened what it is called the Support Front for Hamas. Then south Lebanon became in practice a part of Iran's
security sphere through Hezbollah. This, too, is unacceptable to us. Hezbollah has operated as an armed extension of Iranian strategy,
particularly in the south, gradually entangling Lebanon in regional conflicts that do not serve its national interest.
Today, with more than one million people displaced, these people have the right to return to their homes under full Lebanese state authority. This
displacement cannot be permanent, nor can we continue to expose civilians, paramedics and journalists to the ongoing Israeli danger.
GOLODRYGA: Got it. You mentioned journalists. Three Lebanese journalists were killed in what Israel claims was a targeted strike, saying one of the
journalists was a Hezbollah intelligence operative, but no proof was actually presented to validate that claim. What does this mean for the
safety of journalists there and for UNIFIL workers we know that were killed as well and are in harm's way as this war only escalates?
HARFOUSH: In reality, this means that there is no such thing as safe area and there is no such thing as people who are excluded from this war. Israel
has been committing hideous crimes against the Lebanese civilians and journalists included.
[13:30:00]
It claims that this journalist is part of Hezbollah militia, and this is not something that I'm here to discuss, but rather many other journalists
have also been part of this Israeli aggression. So, basically, in reality, it is coming after journalists. This is something we completely disagree
with, regardless of what political opinion this journalist has.
As for the U.N. peacekeepers, we know that both Hezbollah and Israel have been against the U.N. peacekeepers, and we are very sorry that more lives
have to be sacrificed in this turmoil, especially that this is not our war, but it is the war of Iran and Israel and the Lebanese people are being held
captive of this conflict. The U.N. peacekeepers had a sole purpose of restoring peace, and this is the objective that we also want right now.
GOLODRYGA: Yes, let me play sound from Danny Danon, who is Israel's ambassador to the United Nations in response to the killing of the UNIFIL
workers.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DANNY DANON, ISRAELI AMBASSADOR TO THE U.N.: Regarding the attack that took place yesterday, March 30th, we can confirm now that UNIFIL forces
were hit by Hezbollah explosive devices in an incident near Bani Hayyan in Southern Lebanon. Israel did not choose this conflict. Hezbollah did.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: So, without digging too deep into the blame game here, I think what's important to focus on, Lynn, is the party that has been absent thus
far in our conversation, and that is the Lebanese government itself. As you've mentioned and as you've noted, more and more Lebanese citizens are
becoming disillusioned, frustrated, angry at Hezbollah for what they see as being a branch and an arm of Iran, focused more on Iran's demands and needs
than its own people.
And the Lebanese government took an unprecedented step in designating Iran's ambassador, Persona Nangrata. He's flat out refused to leave. Does
this expose a weakness, a fatal weakness, because we know that authority has been weak, but the fact that he won't leave, how detrimental is that to
the Lebanese government's leadership in authority?
HARFOUSH: Unfortunately, this is yet another time where Hezbollah stands against the state. Yes, it does expose a certain weakness, but it is not a
fatal one. And we still believe that the state in all of its institutions is the only solution to this war. But what is most important to learn from
this, from whether this incident or all the other incidents that have happened in terms of confrontation between Hezbollah and the state, is that
Hezbollah's primary enemy is not really Israel, it is the Lebanese state itself, because a strong and functioning state, it's capable of ensuring
security, stability, negotiating Israel's withdrawal, and protecting all Lebanese citizens equally.
But if such a state were to fully emerge, then what role would remain for Hezbollah? Its very justification to exist will go away. And this is why
Hezbollah continuously fuels internal divisions and undermines state institutions and figures through confrontations like the one it did for the
Iranian ambassador.
Hezbollah thrives in conditions of conflict, both domestic and external. And its reliance on ongoing tension helps explain its repeated role in
dragging Lebanon into wars that we did not choose, as well as its persistent defiance of state authority.
GOLODRYGA: Then there's the question of what role the United States can play here. And you've argued that supporting the Lebanese Armed Forces
isn't charity, it's a necessary investment in regional stability. And there are those, there are many even Israeli analysts who view this expanded
operation as a bad idea from Israel's perspective and their own security.
But there is the argument that we've heard time and time again, that the reality shows only the IDF can aggressively tackle and fight against
Hezbollah and weaken it to a place, or willing to fight and weaken it to a place that then the Lebanese Armed Forces can take over from.
Do you agree with that argument? And what will it take to get there? Why is the Lebanese army not doing more here?
HARFOUSH: Well, no, I do not agree with this theory, because I believe that Hezbollah's rebellious against the state needs an end need to be put
to that by the state itself.
[13:35:00]
Now, of course, there is a role that the International Community can play and that the U.S. can play. And this is something I need to be put to that
by the state itself. Now, of course, there is a role that the International Community can play and that the U.S. can play. And this is something that I
mentioned in my speech. And this is something I say, again, we cannot accept for Lebanese interests to be compromised on again. This has happened
before during the negotiations of the nuclear deal. And when international actors chose to overlook Iran's proxies and the networks that they sustain.
Unfortunately, Lebanon cannot bear to be sidelined again.
What we need right now is sustained and serious support to the Lebanese Armed Forces, which are the sole legitimate military institution with the
credibility to unite the Lebanese people and strengthening this army is not optional, but it is the essential thing to restore the sovereignty and the
stability of this country. The state has taken very important decisions. And now, it is a matter of implementation.
And for this implementation to happen, all the state institutions, its military, its diplomatic, and its social institutions need the maximum
support there is, because what we are battling against is a militia supported by Iran, and the state alone cannot do it. We have limited
resources. And unfortunately, we are in one of the worst financial crises ever. We need to act upon that.
But at the same time, we also need guarantees that Israel will fully withdraw from the Lebanese territory, we will not give up or compromise an
inch of our land just because Hezbollah decided to turn it into a battlefield. And the state is the only one that is capable of accomplishing
that.
GOLODRYGA: Is there still among the population, and specifically the population most affected by this current cycle of violence and potentially
being removed from their homes and displaced again? Is there still faith and support in the current Lebanese government as weak as it is, that these
are, in fact, the actors, the people, starting from President Aoun, who you have trust in, still working to bring this to a peaceful resolution or a
ceasefire?
HARFOUSH: The way to regain the government's trust is to show some concrete actions. The fact is Israel's plan and its occupation of the south
is really not building the case. And it is causing this population that is mostly affected by the displacement to feel that Hezbollah is their only
resort of protection. And this is very dangerous because what the Israeli occupation is doing right now is it is re-legitimizing the existence of
Hezbollah.
What needs to happen for all of the population to restore its faith in the government is concrete actions. The Lebanese armed forces need to start
dismantling Hezbollah. And this means all of its institutions, whether military, educational, social, financial, and all the other institutions
related to Hezbollah, need to be dismantled. The locations that he took over in the Beirut southern suburb that have an entire information and
communication system needs to be controlled by the Lebanese armed forces. If this is the only way for people to actually believe that the state is
capable of fighting against it.
GOLODRYGA: Lynn Harfoush, we'll have to leave it there. Thank you so much for offering your perspective. Appreciate the time.
HARFOUSH: Thank you.
GOLODRYGA: And we'll be right back after this short break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:40:00]
GOLODRYGA: Now, with Passover approaching, Jews across the globe prepare to celebrate, and many cities are heightening security around synagogues
amid the war with Iran. Anti-Semitism has been surging since the October 7th attacks, and our next guest is part of the task force tackling it at
Columbia University.
In his new book, Professor Nicholas Lemann delves deep into his family's history as the son of German Jews. And he joins Walter Isaacson to speak
about reconnecting with his faith and the wider Jewish community's relationship to Israel.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
WALTER ISAACSON, CO-HOST, AMANPOUR AND CO.: Thank you, Bianna, and Nicholas Lemann, thank you for joining us.
NICHOLAS LEMANN, AUTHOR, "RETURN-ING": Thank you.
ISAACSON: You've written this very rich memoir and multi-generational history, much different from your non-fiction books of the past. What set
you on this journey?
LEMANN: Well, I started to get interested in my family history. And that's a thing that happens to most people later in life, and it doesn't happen to
all people later in life, but a certain subset of those over a certain age kind of get obsessed. And I think the reason for that is for a lot of your
life, and for some people for their whole life, they think it's just me on stage, you know, enacting my life, and that's what really matters.
But sometimes, you know, you start thinking, well, I'm actually a link on a chain, you know, and there's people who came before me, and there's people
who came after me, and that's what's more important than what I did as an individual.
So, you want to learn more about who you came from so the people who come after you can know more. And then the other part of it, Walter, is that
there was a proverbial elephant in the room. One of -- as you know, I'm from New Orleans like you, so you know that I have a lot of cousins. And
one of my cousins many years ago gathered up a lot of family papers and put them at Tulane University where you teach, and it's a really big archive.
You work in archives, so you know the metric. It's over 100 linear feet of material.
So, I kind of knew it was there my whole life, and I thought, well, the one thing I'm not going to do is look in this material. Then I decided, you
know, that's a little perverse, so I'm going to go look in the material. And, you know, the rest is history, as they say.
ISAACSON: You know, we biographers like to think that clue number one to anybody is it's all about dad. And boy, is that the case in this book. Tell
me about your father, Thomas Lemann, and his feelings about being Jewish and being a Southerner.
LEMANN: Well, he was -- I mean, you knew him. So, we should note that. And he was a remarkable character, a brilliant and eccentric guy, a lawyer in
New Orleans. On the Jewish front, he was, I guess, what we'd call very, very assimilated. He would -- we belonged to a Reformed temple, and he
would take us there once a year, and that day was Thanksgiving.
So, he was into sort of leaving whatever restrictions and confines there were to being Jewish, particularly in New Orleans, and, you know, becoming
a full member of the wider world, not being real ethnic. But on the other hand, he was very Southern and proud to be a Southerner. He lived in -- I
mean, it's really remarkable. He died at the age of 97 in the same hospital where he was born. That hospital is where his mother worked as a nurse, and
there was a plaque outside his room memorializing her service, and it's the same hospital where I was born. So, it's a very, you know, traditional,
non-mobile, if you will, un-American world, and we felt like we were very deeply, deeply rooted in the South.
Now, one of the surprises of my research was that I had no idea of this. I found that my family actually had moved to New York before the Civil War
and left the South, so I had to sort of process that. If we were so Southern, why did we leave way back then? And then if we were so un-
Southern, why did we move back?
ISAACSON: There's a story in your book that, do you know, struck me, which involved an invitation you got to a Junior Mardi Gras ball and your
father's reaction. Tell me that and tell me how that informed the book.
LEMANN: OK. Well, first of all, given that not all of the viewers will be from New Orleans, you have to do a little explaining, like, you know,
Pulitzer Prizes, Nobel Prizes, having your company do an IPO, the equivalent of that in New Orleans that we grew up in is these Mardi Gras
social organizations. They're the pinnacle of everything, and they matter incredibly to people. So, that's the context.
[13:45:00]
And, you know, I got an invitation to a sort of Junior Mardi Gras ball that I didn't respond to. I was, like, 13, and my father came to my room very
seriously and said, you know, did you get this invitation? And he said, no, I didn't. You know, you're the first Jewish kid ever to be invited to this
ball, and you need to accept because it's a step forward, you know, for our people, and we're going to stop. You know, these organizations typically
didn't let Jews in. And so -- but we're going to -- our generation's going to end that and we're going to be fully accepted.
But, you know, you're allowed to invite a couple of guests. Don't invite any Jewish guests, you know, because you don't want to, like, push this too
fast. So, that was when I was kind of officially introduced to this, you know, one of the endless variations of this struggle about assimilating
what you give up, what you gain, what you might gain, et cetera, and it sort of went on from there.
ISAACSON: This book is basically about the assimilationist instinct. That took you all the way back to Germany four or five generations ago. How does
that assimilationist instinct for Jews, and for that matter, every other ethnic group probably feels an assimilationist instinct? How did that
inform your book?
LEMANN: Well, you know, it's a tradeoff. That is -- and you see this going back into -- I mean, in a funny way, the story of assimilated Jews really
begins with one person, which is a man named Moses Mendelssohn, who rode into the gates of Berlin on a donkey in 1743. And he was really the, I
mean, Jews did not live outside the exclusively Jewish world, including my family. In those days, my family, we didn't have last names, which was
typical of Jews.
So, there's this whole story in Germany, before we even get to America, of Jews trying to join the modern world. And it's called the Haskalah. And,
you know, there's two sides to the story. One is, would the rest of the world let us join? And the other is, what would we lose if we did join? So,
there's these struggles that just go on forever.
And as you say, they go on for all ethnic groups, you know. Go watch "The Godfather" for the 50th time. You know, it's an American story.
ISAACSON: What are the lessons about desiring to assimilate that seem sometimes to lead to great tragedies, especially in Germany in the 1930s?
What are those lessons about the desire to assimilate have for today when there's been a rise of anti-Semitism, both in Europe and the United States?
LEMANN: So, there was this long-running process in Germany of what's called Jewish emancipation, which was not completed until 1871. That was
when Jews became completely, you know, full citizens with full rights of the German nation. And then by ten years later, there was a very active
anti-Semitic movement in Germany that sort of built and built and built until you got the Nazis.
So, in America today, you know, you have half roughly of the Jews in the world, there aren't that many, living in Israel. And you have a tremendous
amount of anti-Israel sentiment, both on the left and the right. And so, you know, most American Jews were raised to think that, you know, Israel is
our homeland, and even if we don't live there, it's part of our identity. But especially if you're younger, you really get challenged on that and
kind of asked, are you a Zionist?
And so, people like my kids really struggle with that. It's almost every family I know has some kind of internal dissension over that. It's a tough
time, not just because of the anti-Semitism, but again, although there's that, but the internal, you know, questioning of how to do citizenship in
the U.S. and other countries. Is assimilation a good idea? Are you accepted in the wider world? Those are all really tough questions that a lot of us
are dealing with right now.
ISAACSON: After the October 7th, 2023 Hamas attacks in Israel, you were asked to serve as the co-chair, you're sitting there at Columbia University
now, of the anti-Semitism task force there. What in your research and in your book helped inform you for that work on anti-Semitism?
[13:50:00]
LEMANN: Well, I guess first of all, working on the book very much led me to accept this assignment and informed the way that I understood the
assignment, not just in terms of asking what previous members in the family would have done in this situation, but also understanding how rich and
complicated and contentious the history of Zionism is in the Jewish community on all aspects. And that helped me sort of understand the
conflict we were having on the campus much better. So, you know, all of that helped.
And then as I was revising the book, it probably was in my mind that, you know, watching, you know, issues pertaining to being Jewish go from a pot
that simmers to a pot that was on full boil. And what it felt like to be in the middle of that, it made it feel as if the -- you know, going back to
what we were talking about, about assimilation, that the process of being a Jewish American isn't a settled matter and isn't just simple and all the
old conflicts around this aren't part of the past, they're part of the present too. And we just -- you know, at least I have to wrestle with them
a lot.
And, you know, there's conversations -- there's a conversation at Columbia, there's a pretty hot-blooded conversation in the religious community I
belong to, kind of internal to Jews about how we're supposed to feel about Israel, about Zionism, about peoplehood, about all those things. So, it's -
- there's just a lot on the table right now that, you know, the world seems so different from the way it seemed on October 6, 2023, when, you know,
Israel was supposedly about to sign an agreement with Saudi Arabia and had signed these other agreements, the Egypt agreement had held, and you sort
of thought, OK, Israel's accepted, now clearly, it's not.
ISAACSON: Has this whole process since October 7th made it harder to be very anti-Israel without being accused of being anti-Semitic and anti-
Jewish?
LEMANN: Well, it depends on who's doing the accusing. I think in the Jewish world that I've come to or returned to and that I live in, it's --
outside of that world -- I think most -- many of my friends have a -- who are not Jewish, have a very, very, very harshly negative view of Israel.
And it's become harsher in the last couple of years. They don't see that as anti-Semitic at all, or most of them don't.
But most of my Jewish friends that I belong to a synagogue with, it seems like -- you know, we -- in universities, we use the term unconscious bias,
seems like an example of unconscious bias, or at least it makes them feel uncomfortable because, you know, in the Jewish world I live in now, which
is pretty observant, everybody has family in Israel. Everybody's kids have spent significant time in Israel studying. They themselves are back and
forth to Israel all the time.
So, to say to them, you don't truly understand your Jewish identity, which is completely unconnected to Israel. It's sort of like, what world are you
talking about exactly? That doesn't feel like you're describing my life and my soul and my consciousness.
ISAACSON: And the other big lesson at the end of your book is the comfort that comes from re-embracing, returning to your tribe.
LEMANN: Yes. So, I want to say that, you know, because again, as we've covered, I'm in a lot of troubled and agonized and painful conversations
about this, and it's a good note to end on. I love being Jewish. It's a source of wonderful enrichment and joy and meaning in my life. It takes up
hours of every week, and it's a very, very positive thing.
So, you know, without all these fights that we're all having about Israel and Zionism, I just, you know, I just want to say that, you know, I'm
having a Seder. It's a real high point. And, you know, I don't want to feel like the debates about our place in the world in our various locations
vitiates the meaning of prayer and observance and community, because it doesn't.
[13:55:00]
ISAACSON: Nicholas Lemann, thank you so much for joining us.
LEMANN: Thanks, Walter. Great to see you, and thank you.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GOLODRYGA: And finally, the wait is over. Celine Dion announces a remarkable return to the stage.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CELINE DION, SINGER: This year, I'm getting the best gift of my life. I'm getting the chance to see you, to perform for you once again.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: She's been battling a rare neurological disorder since 2022, affecting her vocal cords, which has caused her to step away from concerts.
But the power ballad icon, defiant as ever, will perform again. In a birthday message to fans, she confirmed ten concerts in Paris starting in
September. The Eiffel Tower was even shining in celebration. It is official. Celine Dion's voice will go on.
And that is it for now. Thank you so much for watching, and goodbye from New York.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:00:00]
END
