Return to Transcripts main page
Amanpour
Interview with European Council on Foreign Relations Senior Fellow Ellie Geranmayeh; Interview with Former Lebanese Deputy PM and Lebanese Parliament Member Ghassan Hasbani; Interview with Former Atlanta Mayor and "The Rough Side of the Mountain" Author Keisha Lance Bottoms; Interview with NOTUS Perspectives Editor Richard Just; Interview with University of Oklahoma Student Emma Rowland; Interview with University of Idaho Student Seyi Arogundade. Aired 1-2p ET
Aired April 20, 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]
PAULA NEWTON, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, everyone, and welcome to "Amanpour." Here's what's coming up.
Iran vows retaliation after the U.S. seizes one of its ships as uncertainty hangs over peace talks. We will bring you the very latest. And a look at
Lebanon. I speak with a member of parliament about Israel's unprecedented attacks and whether the shaky ceasefire will hold. Then, "The Rough Side of
the Mountain." Atlanta's former mayor, Keisha Lance Bottoms, joins us on her new memoir and her run for Georgia governor. Plus, Michel Martin hears
from college students about the disconnect they see between Gen Z and Washington, D.C.
And a very warm welcome to the program, everyone. I'm Paula Neaton in New York, sitting in for Christiane Amanpour.
The clock, it's ticking down to the end of that two-week Iran ceasefire, and confusion here still reigns. Every day, it seems a different answer to
the very critical questions, are peace talks happening in Pakistan? When may they be happening? Is the Strait of Hormuz closed, or is it open?
Meantime, Iran says it will retaliate after the U.S. Navy fired on and seized an Iranian-flagged cargo ship that tried to bypass its blockade in
the Gulf of Oman. Dramatic night team footage, you see it there, shows U.S. forces boarding the Iranian vessel, a helicopter hovering over the ship,
and Marines rappelling down. U.S. Central Command says the ship's crew failed to comply with warnings, so it told them to vacate their engine room
before opening fire.
We want to go now to our Ellie Geranmayeh. She is a senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, and I welcome you to the program
when, even now, we are still trying to parse exactly what will be happening in the next 48 to 72 hours. It's been a weekend of whiplash. The Strait of
Hormuz briefly opened, then closed again. The U.S. seizing, as we just showed there, an Iranian ship, and Tehran now wavering on whether or not it
will even attend peace talks in Pakistan. And J.D. Vance, we don't know if he's going or not going. We keep seeing different things.
All of this confusion, what do you say about whether or not it's actually damaging, compromising the diplomatic track right now?
ELLIE GERANMAYEH, SENIOR FELLOW, EUROPEAN COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: Thanks for having me on the show. Well, look, on Friday, it looked like we
were seeing glimpses of hope that there would be renewed talks in Pakistan. But for some reason, and it remains to be, you know, seen why, President
Trump created this maximum pressure move to say that Iran's -- the blockade of Iranian shipping would continue despite the fact that we had these de-
escalation moves on Lebanon, the shaky ceasefire, but there was still some move towards progress. We also had the Iranian foreign minister declare
that the Strait of Hormuz would be open for more free shipping. But then the president announced this blockade on Iran, which basically made
everything go south.
It seems to me that President Trump wanted to take another move of maximum pressure to try and make Iran capitulate to U.S. demands, but instead he's
caused maximum confusion now about whether peace talks will happen or not.
NEWTON: But where does that leave us then? And, you know, you have seen it in the press that some people actually believe that this blockade is a good
thing, the U.S. is maintaining that blockade, firing on and boarding Iranian vessels as we just saw, but at the same time, they are pushing for
that diplomatic solution. Can those two tracks really succeed in bringing peace and bringing those much-needed negotiations?
GERANMAYEH: This is an old, tried and tested U.S. policy of maximum pressure on Iran that you could argue has been in place for over 40 years
now. But what we've seen as a result of the maximum pressure is where we are today, which is this profound war conflict that is causing global rip-
off effects, damaging ones across the world's economy. And Iran has shown that in response to maximum pressure, it will always respond with maximum
resistance.
[13:05:00]
So, my sense is that Pakistan has been working the phones over the past 24 hours since the U.S. boarded this Iranian cargo vessel to try and find de-
escalation moves. And again, my interpretation is that Iran will only show up to Pakistan if the U.S. makes some sort of move to try and find some
sort of a signaling move that it's willing to de-escalate that could involve things like releasing the crew of that tanker or the tanker itself
to open the pathway for these peace talks to happen.
NEWTON: Those would seem like minimal moves of trust. I note that Iran continually says, we've been at the bargaining table with the United States
even in recent history twice, and they feel betrayed by those negotiations.
But I want to ask you, if there's no agreement before the ceasefire expires, what could we be looking at? I mean, do you think a return to
full-scale war is possible or do you believe it's more localized conflict?
GERANMAYEH: Well, at this ceasefire, what it was intended to establish was some degree of confidence that the two sides would adhere to their words,
that Trump would implement the U.S. side, that the Iranians would implement the Iranian side, despite the fact that the senior leadership had been
assassinated during the course of this war.
If we get to, you know, two days' time and the two sides cannot extend the ceasefire, and I do think an extension is now necessary because I don't see
them making the massive political breakthroughs that's necessary for a big deal in the next 48 hours, then I really do think it's possible for them to
go back to full-scale conflict, and perhaps even worse than what we saw before this ceasefire.
NEWTON: Even worse. Chilling words from you, and yet everyone in the region understands that that's a risk. Pakistan understands that that's a
risk. It's emerged as a key intermediary here, helping, hosting, trying to shape these talks. And really, they've gone above and beyond. What
explains, though, Pakistan's influence here?
GERANMAYEH: Well, look, first of all, I would say that there has never been a shortfall of mediators on the Iran-U.S. diplomacy over the last few
decades. But in the course of this war, a lot of those traditional mediators, like Oman, like Qatar, were directly caught in the crossfire
between Iran and U.S., and so they couldn't step in.
And so, we needed some new interlocutors. Pakistan has emerged as one. Egypt is another one. Turkey is another one. And it's these parties that
are essentially on Iran's borders, Pakistan on Iran's shared border, Turkey on Iran's shared border. They're very concerned about what instability in a
country the size of Iran's with a population of over 90 million might mean for them directly.
But importantly, they have direct lines to both Trump and Tehran. And that's key right now to try and do the shuttle diplomacy that's necessary
to importantly bring the two sides to direct face-to-face negotiations of the type we saw having a real breakthrough in Islamabad last week.
NEWTON: Yes, despite what's gone on here, those were extraordinary talks, even if at the end they didn't get it over the line. We talked about
Pakistan's influence. What about China? How do you see their influence in these negotiations? Is it possible that it is intervening with Iran more
than we see, more than we see transparently anyway, or does China actually have more to gain if this plays out a little longer?
GERANMAYEH: Look, I think absolutely behind the scenes, Beijing is present, both in terms of its relationship, very close relationship
militarily also with Pakistan to try and have Pakistan as the sort of forefront of these mediations at a time where frankly, Beijing cannot play
that role given its sensitive relationships with the U.S.
But also given that China has very important energy interests in the Middle East, a prolonged war between the U.S. and Iran will not serve Chinese
energy interests, but also it will not serve really global energy interests as well, including the pump stations in the United States. And I do think
there is an interest for both the U.S. and China ahead of this grand summit that's being planned for this war to wind down. And I think President Trump
understands the need for that.
NEWTON: Can the confusion in Iran itself with the leadership get in the way though? There are increasing contradictory signals really coming out of
Tehran, diplomats suggesting openness to talks, military linked voices taking a much harder line. How have you been viewing that in the last few
days?
GERANMAYEH: So, for me as a watcher of Iran-U.S. relations, I have personally found the U.S. dynamics much more confusing in this war to read
between the lines of the social media posts and the actions of the U.S. versus the statements of the president.
[13:10:00]
But you're right, look, Iran has faced an unprecedented war against the U.S., against Israel. It has had its senior command control wiped out. But
at the same time, they have been very quick in these unprecedented times to establish some degree of authority. They did come to consensus amongst the
military and the civilian political factions to engage J.D. Vance in direct diplomacy for the first time since the 1979 revolutions.
And we should expect that there's going to be divisions, even though we currently have the most hardline, most securitized establishment
controlling Tehran and the surrounding areas of the military. We do see some divisions in how they want to see the continued responses to the U.S.
Some want more confrontation because they think that the U.S. only understands hard power.
Others realize that there has been perhaps over $200 billion worth of economic damage done to Iran's economy as a consequence of this war. And
the sooner it ends, the quicker they can get on with the business of reconstruction and giving some hope to the people of Iran that desperately
need it.
NEWTON: Yes, and it is indeed the humanitarian problem here in so many places, not just in Iran, but in other countries as well. Ellie Geranmayeh,
thank you so much for bringing some clarity as much as we can to this issue. Appreciate it.
GERANMAYEH: Thank you.
NEWTON: Now, after Lebanon and Israel separately reached a temporary ceasefire, some displaced Lebanese are returning to their homes only to
find that they've been reduced to rubble.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (through translator): A lifetime of history in this house. It is not about the stone, if we build it better or uglier, it is
about our space, the space that is ours, the place that held us. The construction doesn't matter. The appearance doesn't matter. The outer
facade doesn't matter. What's missing is a spirit inside, and that's what hurts, to come back to find it this way.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEWTON: So, despite the ceasefire, as you heard there, the violence continues, and so do the humanitarian repercussions. Israel says it struck
a Hezbollah weapons site in Lebanon overnight, and that two Israeli soldiers were killed in southern Lebanon over the past few days. France
says one of its U.N. peacekeeping soldiers was killed Saturday by Hezbollah.
And it's been, of course, a devastating six weeks for Lebanon, where more than 2,000 people have been reported killed in Israel's unprecedented
bombing campaign. U.S. and Israeli officials say there will be a second round of direct talks between Israel and Lebanon in Washington, D.C. on
Thursday.
Joining us now to talk about all this is Ghassan Hasbani. He is a Lebanese member of parliament and a former deputy prime minister. Good to have you
on the program. I do want to get first to that ceasefire. It is fragile, but it's now been holding for a few days. But let's give everyone the state
of play here. There are five Israeli divisions inside your country still, a security zone that stretches up the Litani River, and for anyone who hasn't
seen a map, it is significant, right? That is the whole southern portion of Lebanon blockaded there. Many villages in the south have been razed by the
IDF. And Beirut has also been hard hit, I don't have to remind you. We're showing a map of it now.
Some people, though, tentatively want to return to the south, and your government is right now, as we just mentioned, in direct negotiations with
Israel. And this is significant. The first time since 1983. Where do you sit? Where do you stand in this moment that is equally one of both danger
and opportunity?
GHASSAN HASBANI, FORMER LEBANESE DEPUTY PM AND LEBANESE PARLIAMENT MEMBER: No, absolutely, we need to grab this opportunity. Let's start by clearly
saying that the state of Lebanon was and is not at war with the Israeli side. Who's at war is Hezbollah, who dragged the Lebanese population into
this war that had nothing to do with Lebanon initially, in support of Iran, the main sponsor of Hezbollah. This is actually what brought the Israelis
into Lebanese territory further.
After the war that happened more than 15 months ago, the Israelis were present in about five points along the borders of Lebanon. After this six-
week war, they are where you have shown in the map several kilometers into Lebanese territory due to the intervention of Hezbollah and bringing
Lebanon into this confrontation that most Lebanese people had -- did not want. In fact, all Lebanese people had nothing to do with.
It caused more than a million people displaced. It destroyed tens of towns, reaching areas across Lebanon in terms of destruction, where Hezbollah is
operating and not reaching any viable conclusion.
[13:15:00]
So, now, the ceasefire is a new window of opportunity. The Lebanese government is negotiating to try to find a solution that would eventually
result in a withdrawal and the deployment of the Lebanese armed forces and in some kind of a commitment to prevent Hezbollah from attacking further.
NEWTON: OK. But you know as well as I do how difficult meeting those parameters will be. And there is a valid question here and it's a question
many have asked for a generation in Lebanon. Who's really calling the shots here? I want to play some sound from Lebanese President Joseph Aoun from
Friday who said Lebanon is negotiating for itself. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOSEPH AOUN, LEBANESE PRESIDENT (through translator): I am ready to bear the full responsibility of these choices and I am ready to go wherever
necessary to liberate my land, protect my people and save my country. Today, we negotiate for ourselves and decide for ourselves. We are no
longer a card in anyone's game nor an arena for anyone's wars and we never will be again.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEWTON: I understand the words but the reality on the ground is much different. You know the reporting suggests that even the ceasefire was
shaped significantly by Iran. That Hezbollah's own TV station Al Mayadeen announced it even before President Trump did. You know, Tehran took public
credit and briefly opened the Strait of Hormuz as a signal. So, help us understand here how did this ceasefire actually come together and who
negotiated it?
HASBANI: Definitely the Lebanese State will is to have a separate path in terms of negotiations from Iran and this is also the United States and
Israel's position. Definitely there's a direct link between Iran and Hezbollah but not between Iran and the Lebanese State. So, it was Iran that
basically called the shots when Hezbollah shot six missiles on Israel at the beginning of the Iranian war and for sure there is a direct link
between the Iranian Revolutionary Guards and Hezbollah in Lebanon.
But with whatever capacity the Lebanese government can manage the president is trying to negotiate to find a solution that would support the Lebanese
government in controlling Hezbollah on the ground that would require international support for the Lebanese armed forces to perform that task
given that in the past 15-16 months it hasn't been able to fully dismantle the infrastructure of Hezbollah following the previous ceasefire and
knowing fully well that Hezbollah could, at any point in time, re-initiate an engagement at the directive and the order from Iran and that is a
possibility that's always there.
So, all of these make the situation very complex. A government negotiating without having full capacity to control the situation on the ground but
with the international support it can.
NEWTON: But I do want to get to the heart of the matter. What changes that equation? What will actually disarm Hezbollah and get the Lebanese
government negotiating with Israel?
HASBANI: Disarming Hezbollah requires a multiple step or a multi-step approach. It requires them being cut off from their sponsor Iran to start
with. It requires them to be cut off from their illicit activities through the deep state in Lebanon that still funds them or support them or
sympathizes with them. It does require international support to perform that task but also an internal Lebanese will to curb the capacity of the
deep state that may still be supporting the activities of Hezbollah.
And this is something that the current government is -- could -- is basically working on. The current president is working on, but this cannot
happen without commitment and support from the International Community, the friends of Lebanon, both in supporting the Lebanese armed forces but also
supporting the international environment that may still allow Hezbollah to be linked to Iran and to be helped by Iran.
So, there is a link with Iran. It cannot be fully decoupled, but at least in these negotiations the Lebanese State is actually making the decisions
and making the commitments for the help to come.
NEWTON: I understand that you say that it cannot be fully decoupled but it is still an extraordinary statement especially if you're Israel, right? I
mean, last month Hezbollah -- you called Hezbollah's decision to re-enter the war and you restated at the top of this interview that it was a suicide
action, that it dragged all of Lebanon into the unknown.
But since March 2nd, your government has taken steps that it has never done before. It has outlawed Hezbollah's military wing, expelled the IRGC,
ordered state media to stop referring to Hezbollah as a resistance group. But at this point in time, if you are Israel and you want to stop the
rocket fire that has besieged your northern territory for, as I said, well over a generation, decades in fact. Where do we come to a meeting of the
minds here?
[13:20:00]
HASBANI: No, absolutely. The Lebanese government has taken multiple steps to ensure that Hezbollah cannot operate freely within the state, but we
have to also understand that Hezbollah has been building its capacity unchecked for the last 40 plus years in Lebanon, and they've created a
parallel state to the former sovereign state, and the state of Lebanon has been made very fragile.
So, the Lebanese government would continue to act. Yes, it has taken unprecedented steps, contrary to many governments that have been in power
before, this government has been able to take advanced steps to curb the actions of Hezbollah on the ground, but this hasn't proven to be enough
yet.
So, for us to prepare for a long-lasting stability across the southern borders of Lebanon with Israel, something that has been the case post-1949
armistice, for example, for many years before Palestinian factions started attacking Israel from Lebanese territory, and then following that,
Hezbollah started doing the same thing. So, over this period of decades, there's always been somebody on Lebanese territory attacking Israel outside
the Lebanese State.
Now, it is the time for the Lebanese State to take control, to stop Hezbollah, but given that this entity has been left unchecked for so many
years, this does require international support, and does require a full understanding from the Israeli side to create a collaborative model with
the Lebanese government, which is now we have a great opportunity to do so under U.S. support.
NEWTON: Understood. And I hear you it is quite an opportunity. I point out that you are a Christian MP, and there have been viral images of an Israeli
soldier who took a sledgehammer to a statue of Jesus in a Lebanese Christian village that we point out is under Israeli occupation at the
moment. Netanyahu condemned it. I'm wondering your reaction, especially what is it like to be a Lebanese Christian right now, caught in between all
this?
HASBANI: It's very difficult. Of course, you know, acts like this do not help stabilize the situation, do not help those who are pushing against
Hezbollah, carrying weapons outside the government in Lebanon, but let's not forget also there are many Christian towns where its people have not
left the south.
They insisted on staying in the south, and they are kind of isolated from the destruction that is happening because they have not allowed Hezbollah
to operate from their towns. We support them, and we hope that they could continue to do so, which would prove also that anyone who is not acting
outside the will of the states of Lebanon to create wars would remain also intact.
I hope this message is very clear to everyone involved there, and we continue to hope that the current talks will actually lead, not just for,
it is not about Shias or Sunnis or Christians in Lebanon. It's about those who want the state to be a sovereign state in control and with everyone
abiding by the law and the constitution, and those who want to act separately with respect to orders from Iran using Lebanese territory and
Lebanese people and Lebanese assets to cause wars that most Lebanese people, if not all, do not want.
NEWTON: And we will wait to see the outcome of again those talks on Thursday in Washington, D.C. Ghassan Hasbani, thanks for being with us.
Appreciate it.
HASBANI: Thank you.
NEWTON: Now, coming up for us, the race for governor of the State of Georgia. I asked Democrat and former Atlanta mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms
about her political hopes and how her family history shaped who she is today. We'll talk to her right after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:25:00]
NEWTON: Now, to hear in the United States where the Democrats are working to strengthen their party's future as they aim to flip seats and turn
entire states blue in the November midterms. Our next guest wants to help lead that charge. Former Atlanta mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms is running to
become Georgia's next governor. Her politics have always been influenced by being a daughter of the South as well by growing up as the daughter of an
R&B singer, Major Lance. Her candid new memoir, "The Rough Side of the Mountain," details the experiences that shape the woman she has become
today. And Keisha Lance Bottoms joins us now. Congratulations on the memoir and welcome to the program.
KEISHA LANCE BOTTOMS, FORMER ATLANTA MAYOR AND AUTHOR, "THE ROUGH SIDE OF THE MOUNTAIN": Thank you so much for having me.
NEWTON: It is really good to have you here. As you reveal the memoir here, I want to start with what I consider to be the two totems of your memoir,
right? Both really, the first we have to start with that picture on the front cover. Our viewers are seeing it now. Your posture betrays your sass,
your irrepressible. And that is the way most picture you. But then there's the other side of this, right? The title, "The Rough Side of the Mountain"
by the Barnes family. I want to play a few seconds of it. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEWTON: You know, I had to play that when I was reading your memoir because I thought it is pretty much the soundtrack through this whole book.
It's an inspirational gospel song. It's all groove and God. How are both? Both that picture of you and this song, this gospel song emblematic of your
life today?
BOTTOMS: Well, thank you so much for playing that. And thank you for taking the time to read the books.
NEWTON: I loved it actually. It's great.
BOTTOMS: It brings back great memories. My grandmother used to play it in her kitchen as she cooked. So, thank you for that.
You know, that picture was taken when my parents were still together and my dad. We had just moved back from London, England, where my dad had a
resurgence as an R&B singer. He gave this little unknown guy named Elton John his start in music, his professional start. And that was -- that
picture completely captures my personality at that time. But I also write about my dad going to prison and how in an instant it was like a light
switch went off.
My dad was arrested before me. I came home from school one day and saw him being led away in handcuffs. And it changed everything about our lives. And
I often reflect on that time. And you think that you want life to be really easy. But by the grace of God, I've really come to see that it really is
the rough side of the mountain that gives you something to hold on to. Aretha Franklin said it best.
So, for me, it has been this full circle moment, finding that courage that that little girl had and owning it, putting away imposter syndrome and
feeling free just to be authentic in who I am and knowing that in an imperfection, there is a connection with people. And for so many of us who
are climbing the professional ladder, we often think that we have to hide those parts of ourselves, those things about our family members that may
not be as pristine as we want the world to see.
But I'm so glad that I've had the opportunity to tell the -- to -- the totality of who my dad was. He was a wonderful, flawed man who loved me
deeply, loved our family deeply. And I am just honored that I get to tell our story. And I know that it's going to resonate with so many people.
NEWTON: And why now? Why decide to really delve into this family trauma now?
[13:30:00]
BOTTOMS: Well, it's really interesting. It is not at all how I planned it. I started working on this book when I left the mayor's office. And the
intention was to have it out a long time ago. At that time, I didn't even plan on running for governor.
When I went to work in the White House as senior adviser to President Biden, I had to go what we call pins down. I couldn't work on the book. And
then when I left the White House nearly a year later, I picked it back up. So, it's not at all how I would have planned it. But I'm grateful that the
story is being told. And I said when I wrote it that if nobody else read it but my family, I'd be happy. But I do hope other people will read it and
see themselves in our story.
NEWTON: It is very much a tribute to your family. I mean, in fact, you remained very close to your father until he died in 1994. It was, in fact,
just weeks before your wedding.
I want to tell viewers something that you wrote in the book about how you describe him and your relationship. You describe it as the man who taught
me that no matter what level of chaos or misery had a hold on my life, I needed to step outside looking like I had it all together. The man who
showed me what reaching for a dream and grabbing it looked like, who insisted that I deserved everything I wanted and had nothing to lose by
just asking.
You know, whether, in fact, it was law school, motherhood, you know, politics, whether it was joy, whether it was trauma, how did he shape and
those comments about him, how did he shape your aspirations?
BOTTOMS: It's been a blessing and a curse because he did teach me that I always had to go out looking like everything was OK, even when it was not
OK. The blessing was the strength that I found in that. But the curse is the baggage that you carry with that. There's a great poem by Paul Laurence
Dunbar, we wear the mask that grins and lies. And when you keep so much on the inside, it can become isolating and you feel as if you are the only
one, that your family is the only one going through very difficult times.
So, even when my mom was working three jobs and really struggling to make ends meet, we still had to get up and look like everything was just fine,
even when it was not. And one thing that I can say, especially about generations who come after me, I really respect the openness that people
have in talking about so many issues, whether it's about struggling with mental health or just openly discussing what their challenges are.
I write in the book about my struggles with infertility, my eating disorder. I write about being inappropriately touched by a neighbor. Many
of these things I've never spoken about publicly and had not shared with many people outside of my immediate family.
NEWTON: Yes, you write very poignantly and as you said, with clarity and you're very revealing about the struggles in your life. Many --
unfortunately, that many other people can relate to. You also speak, of course, of your love for your city, Atlanta. You write that the city is
both the memory of what America used to be and what it can become.
You became mayor with great ambitions for your city. But as you write, it was rough going. Cyber-attack, COVID, the George Floyd protests to, of
course, painful incidents in law enforcement that happened under your watch and further traumatized the city. You walked away after one term to get a
breather and I think many people can understand that. But why run for governor now?
And look, you've heard the criticism, no matter who says it to you or when, you're going to hear it again. Some people say you weren't up to the job of
mayor. That's why you walked away. So, why do you want to run for governor?
BOTTOMS: Well, when I made the decision not to seek a second term as mayor, my approval ratings were at 68 percent. And I know that if I felt
that I had something to prove, I would have stayed for a second term. But I made that decision from a position of strength, not weakness. When I
reflect upon that time, I write about my dad passing suddenly at 55.
And when I turned 50 -- I was 51 when I made the decision not to seek a second term. I thought about the four years that my dad had left when he
turned 51. And I thought about what I wanted those four years to be. I made the best decision for myself and for my family. And I don't regret it at
all. My kids were much younger. We had been through a very trying time as a city, as a country, quite frankly.
[13:35:00]
And I was very proud of all we had accomplished with leaving money in the bank, millions of dollars in the bank, creating affordable housing,
balancing the budget for four years, not raising property taxes, all the things that any elected official wants to accomplish. But it was really an
examination of what I wanted those next four years to be.
And for anyone who's ever lost a parent, especially a parent at a young age, the point of their death is a marking point. And I think like so many
people around the world, 2020 helped many of us prioritize and reassess what we wanted in that moment.
NEWTON: I want to give our viewers just a sense of how difficult, you know, things were in your tenure as mayor. And one of them was a tipping
point that happened at a protest downtown, in fact, very close to CNN, and a speech that you gave. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BOTTOMS: This is not a protest. This is not in the spirit of Martin Luther King Jr. This is chaos. A protest has purpose. When Dr. King was
assassinated, we didn't do this to our city. So, if you love this city, this city that has had a legacy of black mayors and black police chiefs and
people who care about this city, where more than 50 percent of the business owners in Metro Atlanta are minority business owners. If you care about
this city, then go home.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEWTON: You know, what also got me about that moment and the way you wrote about it is you were very, very transparent about what your son said to you
at the time. And he said, ma, you don't know what it's like to be a black man in America. I mean, that really got me as a mother. It clearly got you
as a mother. But you were also the mayor. And you also write candidly in your memoir that you're not sure things in terms of things dividing Atlanta
or Georgia along racial lines or the country, for that matter, that things haven't necessarily gotten better.
I mean, what do you hope to achieve going forward, whether you have success in the governor's race or not?
BOTTOMS: And you asked the question, why am I seeking office now? And it's because I know what it's like to serve as a leader under the Trump
administration. And I know what solid leadership means to our communities. And in this moment, I reflect on the words of Nelson Mandela, who said each
generation has an opportunity to change the world.
And for me, it is about what I'm called to do in this season and what will my leadership mean to the people of Georgia? I can't say that I have all
the answers and I'll be able to fix all of the problems, but I do know how to stand up and fight for people. I do know how to make decisions in the
chaos. I do know what it means to working families.
I know what it means to people with kids that you're just trying to make sure you're doing the best they can so that they can have a better future.
So, I really hope that across this nation, early voting in Georgia begins April 27th. But I really hope across America, people will take the
opportunity to allow their voices to be heard through their votes. I am a daughter of the South. Congressman John Lewis was my congressperson.
So, I know we aren't the first generation that's faced difficult times, but I know that each generation has a responsibility to do what it can to make
life better, and that's why I'm running for governor.
NEWTON: Keisha Lance Bottoms, I want to thank you for being on the program again. Congratulations on the memoir, "The Rough Side of the Mountain."
Thanks so much.
BOTTOMS: Thank you.
NEWTON: Coming up for us, what does Gen Z think about Washington? We take a look at the disconnect between young students and their political
leaders. How to solve it after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:40:00]
NEWTON: So, what is Washington getting wrong about GenZ? That's the central question of a new group of essays published by NOTUS Perspectives,
investigating the growing division between the U.S. government and the country's young people.
Now, crucially, the project only accepted pieces from those with a personal connection to this issue, American college students. NOTUS Perspectives
editor Richard Just and two student contributors joined Michelle Martin to discuss the importance of intergenerational messaging.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MICHEL MARTIN, CONTRIBUTOR: Thanks, Paula. Richard Just, Emma Rowland, Seyi Arogundade. Thank you all so much for joining us.
EMMA ROWLAND, STUDENT, UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA: Thank you.
SEYI AROGUNDADE, STUDENT, UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO: Thank you for having us.
MARTIN: Richard, I'm going to start with you. You lead something called the Perspectives Forum. It's based at a Washington-based newsroom. Just
tell me what it is.
RICHARD JUST, EDITOR, NOTUS PERSPECTIVES: Sure. We're the opinion section of a Washington-based publication called NOTUS. We publish essays, we
publish long-form narratives, and we publish forums where we ask a bunch of different writers to weigh in on one pointed question.
MARTIN: And you had the idea of, instead of reporting on young people, you asked 22 student journalists from across the country to write about what
Washington gets wrong about them. How did you come up with that idea?
JUST: Yes. Well, we were interested in the topic of trying to figure out where the disconnect was between Washington and young people across the
country. And I feel like there's this D.C. or New York media instinct where when you want to know what a group of people think about something, you
send a reporter to find out.
And we wanted to do something different here. Instead, we wanted to hear directly from those voices. And we thought this was a great opportunity to
do that because the country is full of amazing college journalists who are the experts on this topic and who we thought would have really interesting
arguments to make.
And so, we reached out to a ton of college journalism professors, and we asked them to recommend some of their best students. And they did, and we
ended up with 22 great writers.
MARTIN: Yes. And the essays were really interesting. Emma, I'm going to start with you. You're a senior at the University of Oklahoma. In your
essay, you wrote that Gen Z is used to things moving fast. Washington's pace is unbearably slow. I co-sign that. And you also say, for my
generation, a constant adrenaline-fueled need for speed isn't a preference, it's the norm. Groceries arrive in 30 minutes. Breaking news alerts vibrate
in our pockets the moment something happens. Our world moves fast. Our attention even faster. Washington is the opposite. And it's been built to
operate on a rhythm from a different era, something that for minds used to instant gratification is hard to grasp or accept.
I just thought that was such a fascinating observation. And when I read it, I thought, yes, that sounds right. How did you come to that conclusion?
What did you see that sparked that?
ROWLAND: Well, this past summer, I was actually able to be in D.C. from May to August through a program from OU. And being up there, I feel like I
kind of got more of an insider look on what other people from my generation see.
And so, while, yes, there is a substance part of why people from my generation are upset, whether that be policies or other things in
Washington, what I also saw is that there is this disconnect between the understanding of why issues that have gone on for decades are not able to
be, not completely fixed even, but maybe just partially resolved or even done without any type of gridlock.
MARTIN: Did you have like a eureka moment or something where you thought, wow, this is really slow?
ROWLAND: I was able to be there for -- of course, there was the big beautiful bill that was passed and just big instances like that where I was
able to hear the people from my generation respond to things like that. We were born into a generation where we're used to politics almost being a pop
culture element rather than more of a procedural, formal element in our life.
[13:45:00]
And the more that I thought about it, the more that it made sense, well, I'm so used to things happening so quickly and I'm getting text alerts
while bills are being passed around, while everything's happening that my brain is wired to really question why are things so difficult to get
through in Washington? And why are things so almost gridlocked all the time?
MARTIN: Seyi, you are a senior at the University of Idaho. Congratulations to you both, by the way. In your essay, Seyi, you write that young people
aren't disappearing from public life. We're just waiting for a political system worth showing up for. You go on to say that while some leaders may
see low voter turnout or low party registration and equate it with apathy, they're misreading the moment. This break from the status quo is a silent
protest against the system, an absence from a political game that young people see as rigged.
From what you see on campus and among your peers, it was really the same question I was asking Emma, which is how does that silent protest kind of
show up in real life? How did that insight come to you?
AROGUNDADE: It really stemmed from the 2020 and the 2024 election. A lot of what I was seeing on social media and a lot of what my peers were seeing
on social media is we have to vote for this person because they're the lesser evil, quote unquote, than the other candidate. And that just didn't
really resonate with me at the time. And I know it didn't resonate with a lot of my fellow friends and fellow students as well.
And so, I think this idea that we have to vote for someone because they're slightly better than someone else is just not working for a lot of young
Americans. And they can't just keep on giving us the same old, same old, you know, line or script of, well, X, Y, Z is our enemy and we have to
defeat them or we need to do everything in our power to defeat this candidate because it'll be worse in the long run. OK, but then what after
that?
And so, when I see a lot of politicians, you know, using that as their anchor of we need to beat this candidate because, you know, it's necessary
instead of talking about actual policies or how, you know, they're going to make young Americans lives better. I don't know. It's just it's a real
disconnect for me and I think a lot of young people. And so, yes, I think that silent protest is us just demanding more of our politicians and
expecting more of them.
MARTIN: Richard, did you see a through line in the essence? Did you see a common theme among all of them?
JUST: Yes. I think part of it was just the young people are engaged in politics. There's a there's an ugly stereotype out there among folks who
are middle aged and older. The young people are disconnected, that they're not interested, that they've given up on politics. And certainly, our group
was self-selecting. I mean, we went to college journalists who maybe are a little bit more predisposed to be interested in politics than the average
population.
But collectively, they made a very convincing case that this is a generation that is engaged, that does expect more from their politicians
and that wants the country and the world to be a better place. But to the points that have been made, this generation is frustrated by what it takes
to make that happen and frustrated by the ways that politicians are carrying that out.
So, I would just say that the overall through line with there is engagement, there is idealism, there is a desire for things to be better.
And that doesn't always come through in what we stereotype young people.
MARTIN: One of the things that you pointed out, too, is that the tone matters, that like Washington doesn't always get the tone right with young
people from messaging to social media. And in fact, you know, some of the ways that they see politicians trying to connect with them is like cringe.
Can you just give an example of that?
JUST: Yes. I mean, the chief example, probably in the one that was at the forefront of probably many of our minds. And then somebody wrote a really
good piece about it was about six-seven, that by the time politicians, as they have started invoking six-seven in their in their social media posts
and in their speeches, it was already past the point where young people wanted to hear that. And it was already it had already become a little
cringe.
And I think the larger point is just that young people don't want to be condescended to. They don't want to be talked down to. And there's when
politicians are saying six-seven or trying to appeal to young people in that kind of superficial way, it feels condescending and it feels empty.
MARTIN: And, Seyi, you also talked about this idea of being told that you have to choose the lesser of two evils. Can you just sort of say more about
that? I mean, just I am in Washington. I have been covering politics for a long time. And, you know, the conventional wisdom is that the reason that
negative campaigning persists is that it works is that people respond to it.
AROGUNDADE: Well, I think it's such a turnoff because, you know, there's no real policy basis behind lesser of two evils, if that makes sense. And
as students and as Emma pointed out, we are dealing with so many things, whether that's the growing climate crisis, student loans, whether we can
afford to buy a house in this lifetime.
[13:50:00]
And so, when these are real tangible issues that are on the forefront of our minds, when politicians are telling us that we have to vote for them
because they're the best choice, but they're not showing us why they're the best choice. I think that just falls on deaf ears. And I noticed a lot
within, you know, 2024 election, especially when a lot of young people were wanting to vote third party or not even vote at all, because there was no
candidate there to really represent young issues.
Now, there were candidates that were pandering to our social media, to memes, to pop culture and events, but not really talking to us like we are
informed people who want to live as best as lives as we can. And so, when we see that constantly in the news, I think as young people and as talking
to my peers, we just need something different. And we need candidates who are actually treating us like we're adults, like we understand these
issues, like these issues affect us in real time because they do.
MARTIN: So, Richard, I'm going to bring some data in here. According to a Gallup report published in January, 56 percent of Gen Z identify as
politically independent. But we also keep hearing that young people are shifting right, or at least they were. Can both those things be true or is
one of them off the mark? How do you see this based on the reporting that you've done with this group that you've had?
JUST: Yes. I mean, one of the through lines of the pieces was that there's a complexity to the way young people are thinking about politics that
defies kind of our old ideas about the left right spectrum. So, we had someone argue, I think correctly that young people are turned off by
centrist politics and find themselves gravitating towards the further left or towards the further right.
I think that could be part of the explanation. Somebody else argued that young people don't really care about party labels. They're not as
interested in the old kind of partisan, you know, calling themselves Republicans calling themselves Democrats. What they're interested in is
particular issues. And those issues can don't necessarily neatly aligned with the classic definitions of where the Republican or Democratic parties
are.
So, I just think that there's a complexity to the way young people are thinking about politics that may defy some of the old ideas we have about
left and right.
MARTIN: According to the Harvard Institute of Politics Fall 2025 Youth Poll, you know, Harvard does this youth poll every year, only 13 percent of
young Americans say the country is headed in the right direction. Does that sound right to both of you? Emma, Seyi, does that figure sound right to
you?
AROGUNDADE: It does.
ROWLAND: Yes, I would say that it does sound right to me.
MARTIN: And does that sound -- how does that make you feel when you hear that?
ROWLAND: There seems to be almost a feeling of that is just the way it is. But I do think that while there is almost like, OK, does everyone feel like
this when they first get into understanding politics when they're 20? And, you know, when they start getting out of college, and a lot of this stuff
actually does start applying to you and in the real world to, OK, is there really a concern to where a lot of this doesn't seem right to us?
And a lot of this does seem like there's a lot of heavy blockage almost when it comes to Washington working together and getting a lot of this
stuff done to where we can feel sure that, you know, it's heading in the right direction.
MARTIN: Well, you mentioned hopefulness. Seyi, what about you? Is there anything giving you hope right now, other than that graduation is in your
sights?
AROGUNDADE: Yes. I think like Emma said, I think that our generation is very, very powerful. And maybe that's what the rise of social media, but
the ability for us to organize and come together as communities and as a nation is just really, really beautiful to see. And I really think back to
when my local community was doing a protest.
And, you know, the University of Idaho was, you know, the center and young people organized it and put out signs and all these things. And we're
marching around campus and around the city. And that was just a really beautiful thing to see that, you know, yes, there's maybe some apathy from
some folks.
But, you know, as a generation, we want our nation to be better. And as a generation, we are going to continue to fight for peace and equality and
justice and all these things. And so, it just it makes me feel like a huge sense of pride, knowing that, you know, a lot of these things that we're
seeing that are changing, a lot of positive changes are coming out because we demanded for them.
And I think that as we grow, and as we continue to get older, you know, I hope and pray that our zeal and our fight doesn't leave us. But even if it
does, that we'll have the next generation to kind of pick that back up for us.
MARTIN: I'll tell you what gave me hope is that there were 22 awesome student journalists all around the country doing this amazing work. So,
Richard Just, Emma Rowland, Seyi Arogundade, thank you so much for talking with us today.
AROGUNDADE: Thank you.
JUST: Thank you.
ROWLAND: Thank you.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
[13:55:00]
NEWTON: And finally, for us, a centuries-old folk tradition breathes new life into an Indian village near Mumbai. In this annual colorful, as you
can see for yourself, celebration, members of the Agri-Koli community compete to erect huge decorated bamboo poles to honor their local goddess,
Raiba Devi. From those who brave enough to scale their ceremonial creations to those celebrating down on the street, the festival creates a welcome sea
of color throughout the village. It certainly does.
And that does it for us. If you ever miss our show, you can find the latest episode shortly after it airs on our podcast. And remember, you can always
catch us online, on our website, and all-over social media. Thanks for watching, and goodbye from New York.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:00:00]
END
