Return to Transcripts main page
Amanpour
Interview with Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Senior Fellow Michael Kofman; Interview with CNN Global Affairs Analyst and Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Senior Fellow Karim Sadjadpour; Interview with Detained in Iran for Five Years and Iranian-American Conservationist Morad Tahbaz. Aired 1-2p ET
Aired July 06, 2026 - 13:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[13:00:00]
BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN ANCHOR: Hello everyone, and welcome to "Amanpour." Here's what's coming up.
Russia strikes Kyiv with ballistic missiles, outgunning Ukraine's air defenses on the eve of a NATO summit. Military analyst Michael Kofman joins
me to discuss what's at stake.
Plus, thousands in Tehran pay tribute to the late Ayatollah Khamenei, who will have an on-the-ground report and analysis from regional expert Karim
Sadjadpour. But behind the scenes of unity, the regime's hidden crackdown, former detainee Morad Tabaz explains.
Also, ahead, thousands of people still feared missing in Venezuela, more than 10 days after twin deadly earthquakes. We'll have an update on the
search and rescue efforts.
And later in the show, sport and politics collide at the FIFA World Cup after President Trump lobbied the head of FIFA to get a red card
overturned. We'll bring you the very latest.
Welcome to the program, everyone. I'm Bianna Golodryga in New York, sitting in for Christiane Amanpour.
A major Russian assault has lit up the skies of Kyiv and surrounding areas, killing at least 21 people and injuring many more. Ukraine's president says
not a single one of the 29 ballistic missiles fired on Kyiv were shot down because Kyiv simply does not have enough interceptors to defend against
Moscow's attacks.
Now, ahead of tomorrow's NATO leader summit, President Zelenskyy has made a fresh plea for more air defense missiles. Whatever NATO allies decide will
be key to Ukraine's ability to protect its skies. But it's also happening as Russia, too, is seeing increasing losses of both territory and of
troops.
Michael Kofman is a military analyst and a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. In his latest article for Foreign
Affairs, he describes this moment as an inflection point for Russia, which could shape its long-term military strategy.
And Michael Kofman joins me now live from Alexandria, Virginia. Michael, welcome back to the program. It's great to have you on.
So, let's start once again with this plea from President Zelenskyy on the eve of this NATO summit. As we mentioned, not one of Russia's ballistic
missiles was intercepted. President Zelenskyy is asking NATO to step in and help with missile defense.
Can NATO, in your view, coming out of this summit, actually give President Zelenskyy what he is asking for?
MICHAEL KOFMAN, SENIOR FELLOW, CARNEGIE ENDOWMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL PEACE: Look, Bianna, I think the challenge is that NATO does not have much in the
way of stocks, but they can certainly be doing a lot more when it comes to providing ballistic missile defense interceptors. Here, Ukraine remains
heavily dependent on the United States.
And the issue is that while Ukraine is doing very well across much of the front, in fact, this is a second month now where Ukraine is taking back
more territory likely than it's lost, the one negative trend remains the Russian bombardment campaign and the deficit of munitions for ballistic
missile defenses.
Ukraine is also looking for technology transfer and for help with license production. That is ultimately the solution will have to be coming up with
some cheaper alternative to what are right now fairly expensive and low availability interceptors provided for U.S. missile defense systems.
GOLODRYGA: So, if this is really more dependent on whether the United States can step in as it relates to interceptors, is the issue here
interceptor production or just U.S. will?
KOFMAN: The issue here is both interceptor production, which is being ramped up but slowly because these are very expensive and fairly slow to
produce capabilities. Also, stock availability. And lastly, yes, U.S. will, especially after the vast expenditure of munitions in the Iran war. The
United States has been reticent to take more interceptors out of stocks and is primarily supplying Ukraine with newly produced munitions.
Unfortunately, that is not enough because Russia has increased the size of ballistic missile strikes and it is increasingly getting more out of those
capabilities. So, this trend continues to be negative. And as you can see in the most recent attacks, Ukraine is simply out of munitions.
GOLODRYGA: And it's happening, as you've also noted, that momentum has become more on Ukraine's side over the last few months in particular.
[13:05:00]
And yet, as it relates to these missile strikes, there does seem to be a disconnect. Because over the weekend, the Times reported from eastern
Ukraine that Russian soldiers are now infiltrating not in units but one at a time, and that matches the analysis that you've concluded in your piece
that Russia is sending, quote, "one to two soldiers at a time to infiltrate Ukrainian positions."
So, is this really a story about two types of Russian military at this point? One is their air dominance, and the other is the fact that they are
bleeding on the ground? I mean, how should we read into this?
KOFMAN: Sure. So, there are different aspects to the war. There is the fight on the ground at the tactical level. But both sides have had
extensive strategic strike campaigns, Russia starting in fall of 2022, and Ukraine's really ramping up after summer of 2024.
And the more that the Russian effort flounders, right, the more that they run into problems on the battlefield, the more Moscow is going to switch to
a strategic bombardment campaign. And that's why we've seen the increase in the size of strikes.
Now, most of these use one-way attack drones of various types. But increasingly, Russia also uses ballistic missiles alongside cruise
missiles. If you look on average from 6,000 to over 6,000 drones being used per month, the most recent statistics has gone up to 8,000 of one-way
attack drones now being used on a monthly basis by Russia to strike Ukrainian civilian infrastructure.
And even though strategic bombardment campaigns don't have a great track record of being decisive on the war, nonetheless, Moscow is going to focus
on this because it's the one way that they can continue pressuring Ukraine.
GOLODRYGA: And you also write that Kyiv's strategy of making this war futile for Russia is working. And I'd like to ask you to elaborate on that,
specifically as it relates to what we're seeing in Crimea, where you have Russian-installed authorities now declaring a state of emergency. We have
blackouts, fuel reserved for the state there on shortages. The Kerch Bridge has been choked off, a real blockade happening at what has been a crown
jewel for Vladimir Putin.
Is this the point that you were trying to make, just one example of Ukraine's strategy right now?
KOFMAN: Yes, absolutely. There are several parts to Ukraine's strategy. The first is stabilizing the front line, and they've done a good job of
that, especially since in recent months, they've really gone after longer- range strikes into Russian operational depth, and have choked off Russian logistics. And so, the Russian offensive effort has stalled for many months
now.
Another one is isolating Crimea and using that as a pressure point. Crimea now has a real energy and fuel crisis there, under the belief that Moscow
cares a lot more about Crimea than it might care about many other regions of Ukraine that it's trying to occupy, and essentially using that also to
gain leverage.
And lastly is the deep strike campaign into Russia, targeting Russian energy export infrastructure, Russian fuel refineries, Russia's undergoing
a fuel crisis with long lines at the gas stations across the country, and also key nodes in the Russian defense industry to reduce the Russian
production of missiles and various strike drones.
GOLODRYGA: And despite all of these challenges that Russia is facing, you yourself described them as visibly struggling, you also say they can
reconstitute into a major threat in five to seven years. What do you base that timeline on?
KOFMAN: Sure. And there are active debates. I mean, NATO actually often pegs it to a much shorter timeline, within only a few years after the
Russia-Ukraine war. And the reality is that the debates on how long it will take Russia to reconstitute are really narcissism of small differences.
At the end of the day, in defense planning terms, anything less than 10 years is a rather short timeline. What I base it on is the assumption of
how long it might take Russia after this war, even though its military has been degraded, although it also has expanded and improved in other ways, to
regain the ability to functionally employ that force on a larger scale.
Now, Russia after the war may be able to conduct all sorts of small or limited type scenarios that might threaten NATO members. But the thing that
should really concern the alliance is a large-scale invasion or a large- scale assault on one of its member states. And for that, I think it might take a bit longer.
But that said, the important point is that even though the Russian military has been degraded, it is likely to reconstitute. We're not debating the if
so much as we are only debating the when.
GOLODRYGA: OK. So, let's talk about the figures in terms of what's been degraded and what already is being reconstituted. So, by your figures,
Russia has lost 14,000 armored combat vehicles, 2,100 artillery pieces, yet what it's rebuilt is quite striking.
And we should note for our viewers, thousands of vehicles have been refurbished or newly produced. They're getting artillery from North Korea.
More than 200 of its most advanced tanks are rolling out annually. And its manpower has actually gone up from 850,000 to 1.3 million. And then,
obviously, there's the tactical drone component of this too.
[13:10:00]
So, after over four years of grinding war here materially, how much has Ukraine actually degraded the Russian army?
KOFMAN: So, there's unfortunately duality to the story. On the one hand, the Russian military in quality has really degraded. And the war once again
revealed all the problems that the Russian armed forces have in terms of the military culture, practices, lack of professionalism. And Russia spent
a lot of its best equipment and lost much of the initial force that invaded Ukraine.
On the other hand, that military has also substantially expanded. They took a lot of equipment out of storage that they inherited from the Soviet
Union, and they kitted out this larger force. How much that they'll be able to retain after the war is not yet clear because a lot depends on what
happens with the Russian economy.
But where the Russian military changed significantly is in their ability to conduct precision strikes, both at depth, as we just discussed, looking at
the strike campaign against Ukraine, but also the vast expansion of drone units and the use of drones as a main form of precision strike, supporting
the Russian military across the force, things that they couldn't do earlier, now better able to translate theory into practice.
Now, the rest of the Russian military can't capitalize on these advantages. They're not capable of conducting large-scale combat operations or
offensive maneuvers like they used to. And it's going to take them a year to reconstitute that ability.
But the Russian military threat has changed. And I think NATO and Western planners need to be mindful of that, that the Russian military that fought
in 2022 is no longer there. And what the Russian military looks like after this war is something we should discuss. We need to update our scenarios.
And lastly, in a lot of exercises with Ukrainian troops, from which I think our forces are doing a great job learning, it's clear that Western
militaries are not yet well-positioned to operate in a drone-structured environment. And that's the way that the Russian military tends to use
drones.
And so, these tactical exercises with Ukrainian troops reveal that we still have quite a bit of learning to do in order to catch up to the battlefield
realities of what's been seen in this war.
GOLODRYGA: Expand upon that last point that you've made, because you write that Russia is launching some 6,500 one-way attack drones a month and has
contracted at least 100,000 more this year. And you note that NATO still lacks sufficient air defenses and counter-drone technologies. So, what are
the weaknesses that perhaps the Kremlin could see in some NATO countries, even along its border?
KOFMAN: Sure. So, as I suggest in the article, NATO is not well-adapted yet to the air and missile defense challenge being posed by this sort of
cheap forms of mass precision. Secondarily, while NATO is heavily dependent on air superiority, air power itself still takes a while to adapt to these
kind of challenges.
If you look at how ground forces operate, if you look at counter-drone systems, there's still a long way to go in terms of getting NATO both up on
doctrine, tactics, and technology based on lessons from the battlefield.
Now, not everything from Ukraine is necessarily applicable to NATO. To be clear, traditional advantages still hold in how our forces operate, in air
power, in precision strike capabilities. But we have a ways to go to integrate both the technology and the lessons from this war. And so, I
think it's important to balance the conversation.
On the one hand, it's very clear that Russia is not winning in Ukraine. Time is not on Russia's side. In fact, right now it's quite visibly losing.
But on the other hand, not overly dismissive, because the Russian military will reconstitute over time, and the world will continue to pose a threat
to NATO members. And that threat is going to be different and a bit more evolved than what it was prior to 2022.
GOLODRYGA: So, on the eve of this NATO summit, what would you say is the single most consequential decision that NATO should be making within the
next few months? And what is the role of the United States here, Michael?
KOFMAN: Well, I mean, the number one job of these summits is always to keep the alliance together and keep the alliance on the same page in terms
of strategy, especially given the various, you know, re-accommodations that took place over the Iran war from the United States side.
But to me, the biggest decisions have to do with spending, with rearmament. And to be honest, they're the more boring, practical things that alliance
has to do in defense planning, in setting requirements and figuring out what does the alliance need to do? What does it need to be able to produce?
And by what point, when you look at capabilities and also the forces, the alliance needs to feel?
GOLODRYGA: Michael Kofman, always great to have you on. Thank you so much. Thank you for the piece. I highly recommend everyone read it. Learned a lot
from it, as always. Really appreciate the time.
KOFMAN: Thanks for having me on your program.
GOLODRYGA: All right. Still to come tonight, hundreds of thousands of people swarm Tehran's streets for the funeral procession of Iran's slain
Supreme Leader. CNN's Fred Pleitgen reports from the Iranian capital.
[13:15:00]
And later in the program, a dramatic World Cup win for England. We look at how it all unfolded in Mexico City last night against the tournament co-
hosts.
And what President Trump's controversial call to the FIFA chief about a red card means for tonight's matchup between the U.S. and Belgium.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
GOLODRYGA: We turn to Iran now, where thousands gathered on the streets of Tehran for the funeral procession of the late supreme leader ayatollah, Ali
Khamenei, killed by a U.S.-Israeli airstrike on the first day of the war. It's part of a nearly week-long funeral, with Khamenei set to be laid to
rest in Mashhad on Thursday.
Fred Pleitgen is in Tehran, and he was in amongst the crowds as Khamenei's casket went by. And a reminder, CNN operates in Iran only with the
permission of the government, but maintains full editorial control of its reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: This is as close as they're going to get to the casket of Iran's late supreme leader
ayatollah, Ali Khamenei, as well as several of his family members who were killed in that U.S.-Israeli airstrike on February 28.
As you can see, as we stand here, the atmosphere is extremely charged up. Many of the people here, and it's a big, big crowd, are screaming, and
they're vowing revenge, both against the United States, as well as President Donald Trump, and, of course, against Israel as well.
The government has certainly brought out people in force here. They say they expect several million people to come out on the streets. And to
witness this, as the casket is now making its way through Tehran, to then, at some point, be brought to other cities, in case it's finally resting
place in the east of Iran, in Mashhad.
Fred Pleitgen, CNN, Tehran.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GOLODRYGA: Well, as Fred was mentioning, Khamenei's funeral is set to continue for several more days. It's an event steeped in symbolism and
pageantry, but is coming as Iran's people are deep in economic crisis and still feeling the impact of the war.
Karim Sadjadpour is an Iranian-American policy analyst and joins me now from Washington, D.C. Karim, welcome back to the program.
So, let's just start with what we were watching transpire over the last few days in Tehran. Hundreds of thousands of people in the streets, a tightly
choreographed week-long spectacle. We saw the president, the parliament speaker, the head of the judiciary, the top IRGC generals appearing side-
by-side in public, really for the first time since the war began.
[13:20:00]
But what does this funeral say to you about the current state of the regime today?
KARIM SADJADPOUR, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST AND SENIOR FELLOW, CARNEGIE ENDOWMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL PEACE: It's a very good question, Bianna. And
I think those images reflect how polarized the society Iran is. So, in a country of around 92 million people with around, let's say, 60, 65 million
adults, this is a regime which isn't popular, but it still has a loyal base of perhaps 20 percent of society. So, that's -- of an adult population,
that's perhaps 10, 12 million people. And they are very effective at mobilizing those folks and projecting unity.
It's a regime which is not good at governance. As you alluded to, it has 70 percent inflation, triple-digit inflation on foodstuffs. But what is
prioritized over the years is resistance against America, repression of its own people. And it's very effective at conducting these mass grieving
ceremonies for its leaders.
GOLODRYGA: It's highly unusual, as you know, in Islam for a funeral to take place months after a death. Talk about the timing now. We're about
halfway through this MOU. And we have seen more days of ceasefire now than we've seen of actual kinetic war.
SADJADPOUR: So, the regime initially couldn't conduct a public ceremony for Ayatollah Khamenei, given that so many of its leaders had bullseyes on
their backs. The Israeli government had sought to assassinate Iran's top officials. And so, for months they weren't able to grieve.
And what we saw -- what we've seen over the last couple of days is the -- for the first time, a lot of the regime's public officials, people like
Ahmad Vahidi, the Revolutionary Guard commander, are being seen in public, former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
I thought what's notable, Bianna, is we still haven't seen the successor to Ayatollah Khamenei, his 56-year-old son, Mojtaba Khamenei. And it was
thought that perhaps he would make an appearance, but it raises even more questions about the state of his physical and mental health.
GOLODRYGA: Right. He skipped his father's funeral. He skipped his wife's memorial. He hasn't shown his face. We haven't heard his actual voice in
four months. You spent years studying his father and the power that he wielded. Can a supreme leader that nobody sees actually rule a country of
91 million, especially today?
SADJADPOUR: You know, that's doubtful, Bianna, because Ayatollah Khamenei, it took him -- he'd ruled for 37 years. By the time of his killing, he was
the longest-serving autocrat in the world. And that process of him becoming powerful, it was a power which had been accumulated over many decades. His
son inherits a system which is, you know, obviously deeply unpopular. And it's a regime which has gradually transformed from a clerical dictatorship,
one ruled by the clergy, to a military dictatorship, one ruled by the Revolutionary Guard.
So, it's not clear whether Mojtaba Khamenei in the coming months or years is going to be Iran's most powerful figure. I expect that the person who
will emerge as Iran's next strongman is not likely to be a cleric wearing a turban. It's more likely to be someone with a military background.
GOLODRYGA: And is that one person, or is this a group of leaders? Because I guess this leads to the question of whether a one-man rule over Iran is
officially over, or was this the direction that the country was headed in even before the war?
SADJADPOUR: You know, in Iran, over the last century, the country has effectively been ruled by four strongmen. In the early part of the 20th
century, you had Reza Shah. He was succeeded by his son, Mohammad Reza Shah. Then you had the 1979 revolution led by Ayatollah Khomeini, and then
Ayatollah Khamenei. So, there's few countries of that size like Iran that have been ruled by so few people.
So, certainly at the moment, there appears to be a power vacuum. People are still jockeying for power. But I think what was likely to happen -- and
this process could take years, that we will see the return of a strongman perhaps similar to what we've seen in post-Soviet Russia.
GOLODRYGA: And what these leaders will have to govern in a society dealing with inflation that's raging, economy desperate on hard currency. We talk
about the unemployment rate in that country. Washington has offered to unfreeze billions in Iranian funds if Iran drops its demands to charge
tolls on the Strait of Hormuz.
[13:25:00]
It's hoping to collect some $40 billion a year in fees. The United States is saying you drop that ask, and you'll get billions more in unfrozen
assets that are yours. And perhaps even eventually, you'll be able to maintain economic relations with more of the outside world. We're 30 days
into the 60-day MOU. Iran has yet to agree to that. Why?
SADJADPOUR: So, what the Trump administration has sought to do, Bianna, is to present two very distinct paths to Iran. The first path is one of global
economic integration. Iran would be reintegrated into the global economy and political system. They've talked about hundreds of billions of dollars
in assets being invested in Iran. Iran would be sanctions-free.
At the same time, they presented an alternative path, which is if you want to continue to prioritize revolutionary ideology, death to America, death
to Israel, that's only going to bring you continued sanctions and hardship and isolation.
And the reality is that for a revolutionary regime like Iran, the economic well-being of its population has never been its priority. Its top priority
is always its own survival. And I think this regime is likely going to double down on revolutionary ideology because they believe that if they
were to open up to the outside world, to open up to the forces of international capitalism and civil society, that would likely loosen their
grip on power rather than entrench them.
GOLODRYGA: Is there a risk, though, that they may be overplaying their hand? And I ask this because clearly their one and biggest leverage point
was control over the Strait of Hormuz. Vice President Vance said sort of the quiet part out loud when he said the U.S. signed this MOU, in part to
let the world refill some of their fuel stocks. We've seen now oil prices even lower than they were before the war. Gulf producers are pumping again.
Is time now not on Iran's side?
SADJADPOUR: Well, I think to your point, they will absolutely overplay their hand. Right now, I think that Iranian officials are experiencing what
I call a sugar high. They are very confident given that they were able to survive. That was their only priority, which was to survive. They feel that
they've done that. And then some -- then they're likely not going to easily relinquish their control over the Strait of Hormuz. And I'm also skeptical
that they're going to offer meaningful compromises on the nuclear file.
But as I said earlier, this is a regime which is good at resistance. It's good at repression. It's terrible at governance. And for that reason, few
countries in the world have experienced more popular uprisings over the last two decades than Iran.
So, I expect that whatever happens, whenever the dust settles, it's going to be a regime which remains deeply unpopular at home.
GOLODRYGA: Interesting. Karim, if we could just end where we began, and that is some insights that we can glean from this funeral. More than 100
countries sent representatives. Pakistan sent its prime minister and its army chief. But Iran's two great patrons sent stand-ins. Putin sent
Medvedev. Xi Jinping sent a parliamentary vice chair. As for Gulf neighbor, Saudi sent a deputy minister. Qatar was led by a parliament speaker. UAE,
Kuwait, Bahrain, they didn't send anyone.
What does that guest list tell us about where Iran stands in the world and in the region right now?
SADJADPOUR: It's a great question, Bianna. And the reality is this is one of the most isolated, friendless regimes on Earth. Most of its neighbors
fear it. It's the countries who are, it's from their vantage point, their strategic allies, countries like China and Russia are fair-weather friends.
Even if the country were to open up to be removed from sanctions, very few countries want to invest in Iran. And so, Henry Kissinger put this many
years ago, that Iran has to decide whether it's a nation or a revolutionary cause. I think this regime has continued to decide to be a revolutionary
cause. And for that reason, I think it's going to remain a largely isolated nation internationally and a largely unpopular regime at home.
GOLODRYGA: And, of course, it is for those citizens at home who are the biggest losers, given that we are at this point right now. We'll remember
the tens of thousands who lost their lives at the beginning of this year, fighting for their own dignity, a freer economy, and domestic policy. The
president said the war started because of that, and yet help never really came for those people.
[13:30:00]
Karim Sadjadpour will continue to cover all those fronts. Thank you for joining us.
SADJADPOUR: Thank you, Bianna.
GOLODRYGA: Well, as the Iranian regime is focused on projecting unity, a serious crackdown is taking place behind the scenes. More than 6,000 people
have been arrested since the war began, according to Amnesty International, and some of them have been executed.
Last week, two well-known animal conservationists were detained with no information on their charges. Houman Jokar and Sepideh Kashani are a
married couple who previously spent six years in Tehran's notorious Evin Prison in 2018, after the regime accused them of espionage over their use
of wildlife camera traps. They were later pardoned.
Imprisoned alongside them was Morad Tahbaz, a fellow environmentalist who was detained for more than five years. He's written about his own
experience in his upcoming memoir, "Green Parrots" A Memoir of Survival in Iran's Evin Prison." And he joins me now from Weston, Connecticut.
Morad, welcome to the program. Thank you so much for taking the time. Let me just ask you, when you heard that your two friends had been arrested
once again, what was your first reaction?
MORAD TAHBAZ, DETAINED IN IRAN FOR FIVE YEARS AND IRANIAN-AMERICAN CONSERVATIONIST: My first reaction was really shock as to why they had
chosen to reopen a case that had created so much internal negative press and media for the IRGC itself. So, it was quite shocking, surprising and
very emotional because it obviously took me back to that time when I was arrested and this whole saga begun in 2018.
And, you know, we've -- or at least I and I know many others have been trying to find out why they've been taken into custody, where they're in
custody. And we're unable at this moment to really know anything other than one phone call they were allowed to make to say they were OK. At this
juncture, we don't know anything.
GOLODRYGA: That is so frightening. And as you noted, you spent years alongside them in Evin Prison. So, if you could just take a moment to tell
our viewers a little bit more about who they are, what they were working on at the time that they were detained and accused of espionage.
TAHBAZ: Bianna, at the time, back in 2018, I was I was I had been the co- founder of a foundation called the Persian Wildlife Heritage Foundation, along with a friend and close associate of mine who actually died in
custody at the time, Dr. Kavous Seyed-Emami.
And we were obviously wrongfully detained. A case was fabricated and all of us were imprisoned. And a few of us, myself and two of us and another two
were actually accused of corruption on Earth, which carries a death sentence. And that was really not lifted in our trial until the very last
minutes of my trial, at least.
And this kind of psychological torture is very, very common. And what goes on is even if you're unjustly arrested, unjustly imprisoned and convicted,
this -- you know, it's a case that then stays with you. It's not something that goes away. They can always come back and reopen a file on someone as
if you were a criminal and had previously done something wrong.
And in our case, our case was something that was heavily contested by the government of President Rouhani at the time, including the ministry of
intelligence. And it's just amazing that they are now reopening cases like this. And I just don't know what they're being subjected to.
I know what I went through included, you know, physical torture, psychological torture, withholding medical care, you know, everything you
can imagine.
[13:35:00]
So, so it's terrifying to think that they may have to go through an ordeal like this again after being there for six and a half years already.
GOLODRYGA: And a reminder, the authorities claimed wildlife camera traps used to monitor endangered cheetahs were somehow being used as tools of
espionage. That just reads government paranoia and Stalinesque type of policies that we only read about now.
But these are your friends. This is the modern age. 2026. We're talking about this taking place eight years ago. Just tell us a little bit more
about who Houman and Sepideh are, their characters, their backgrounds.
TAHBAZ: Yes. Yes. Houman is really an exceptional person. He is probably the foremost expert on big cats in Iran. He is an extremely knowledgeable
conservation scientist. His wife as well. We work together for a period of over 10 years. Houman had a hand, a very large hand in the emblem of the
Asiatic cheetah being placed on Iran's national football team's jerseys.
So, it's extremely ironic that, you know, right within this period of the World Cup being played and Iran's national team having this symbol on their
shirt. The person who was probably most responsible for getting there has been arrested.
I can't say enough positive things about Houman. I mean, you know, he was a very, very close friend, colleague. He -- actually, as well as being part
of our foundation, he also ran the conservation of the Asiatic cheetah program for the United Nations Development Program together with Iran's
Department of Environment.
So, I mean, his background, he's known in the International Community as a conservation scientist. And literally, both he and his wife, Sepideh, have
devoted their lives to this cause. They have never done anything other than conservation.
So, this whole thing, I mean, was somewhat a fantasy to start with. And obviously, the IRGC never backed down from their position, although there
was never any evidence. And it was actually countered by the ministry of intelligence, who came out public and said, you know, these guys haven't
done anything.
GOLODRYGA: Yes. And as you said, they had been pardoned. They had been pardoned. And then, now, they've been taken back --
TAHBAZ: They were -- yes.
GOLODRYGA: And now, they've been taken back into custody. And they are now in jail alongside Sepideh's sister, who I understand is suffering from
multiple sclerosis. What is the message that you think authorities are trying to send to society right now by doing this?
TAHBAZ: You know, Bianna, it is an enigma. I don't know what kind of a message they are trying to send, because Houman and Sepideh are people who
are very, very well known in a society in Iran. And there is always a tremendous amount of sympathy towards what they've been through already.
So, what there is to gain other than just the -- you know, put more fear in people's minds. I just don't -- I can't fathom what upside there is for
them for doing this.
This is -- I just think it's creating this sense of fear. If anyone's -- you know, puts their foot the wrong way, they'll be taken in. They'll be
questioned. You know, anything could happen to them. I think that's the bigger message they're trying to give.
GOLODRYGA: And they're not just experts in some sort of niche field. Iran is facing one of the worst environmental crises in its modern history. We
reported on this water shortages, collapsing ecosystems due to just government mismanagement for years now. How important was the work they
were doing for everyday Iranians?
TAHBAZ: It was very important because what was being done was raising awareness and raising awareness, as you know, is really the beginning of
the conservation process.
[13:40:00]
When people are knowledgeable, knowing that their actions are causing detriment to the environment they're living in, once they're aware, it's
the first step. And then you can move on from there into actually taking action with support, and getting -- or convincing people within the
government to put some, you know, personnel, budget, et cetera, behind trying to save what's left of a very fragile landscape.
We have so many different issues to confront there, and very little budget ever allocated towards the environment. Water -- you know, water has just
been used as if it's, I don't know, you know, you're going to get a rainfall every day.
GOLODRYGA: Yes.
TAHBAZ: But Iran is a dry, arid landscape. Water is scarce, and has to be used judiciously.
GOLODRYGA: And this indiscriminate crackdown continues. Amnesty International says more than 6,000 people have been detained since the war
with Israel and the United States started in February. Morad Tahbaz, thank you for taking the time to talk about at least two of those who have been
wrongly detained. You have been their voice, and we really appreciate your time.
TAHBAZ: Thank you.
GOLODRYGA: Coming up, criticism of the Venezuelan government grows as hope fades for the thousands of people feared to be missing amid the earthquake
rubble. CNN's Stefano Pozzebon reports after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
GOLODRYGA: Now, to Venezuela, where thousands of people are feared to still be missing, nearly two weeks after a devastating double earthquake
with at least 3,000 lives lost. It's one of Latin America's deadliest ever disasters.
The country's acting president, Delcy Rodriguez, honored foreign rescue teams with the Heroes of Venezuela medal over the weekend. But anger is
growing as thousands of families wait for answers, accusing the government of failing to adequately respond to the crisis. CNN's Stefano Pozzebon has
more from Caracas.
[13:45:00]
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
STEFANO POZZEBON, CNN CONTRIBUTOR (voice-over): Zo Santander (ph) has not seen her son in 10 days. They were separated in the twin quakes that shook
Venezuela on June 24th, but her nine-year-old, Xavier, was trapped under the rubble. Four days later, she saw a video of a child being rescued at
night. She believes it was her son. But in the chaos that followed, she hasn't been able to find him. She's not going to rest. But from here there
is little she can do.
POZZEBON: These used to be a golf course. La Guaira was a tourist hot spot by the Caribbean Sea. And so here is where tourists will come and play golf
and relax. Now, of course, it's a tent city for hundreds of displaced, many of whom actually used to live there in those blocks. And every day they
wake up and they see their homes and flats broken down by the brutality of the earthquakes.
POZZEBON (voice-over): Sheyna Ceballos is also looking for a loved one. She's lost hope of finding her mother alive, but will not leave the golf
course until she recovers her remains.
SHEYNA CEBALLOS, EARTHQUAKE SURVIVOR (through translator): If I had the money, I'd dig her out, but I have none.
POZZEBON: This is what's left of Sheyna's home. An entire life shattered in an instant. Now, like her, thousands of Venezuelans are only beginning
to grasp the magnitude of this catastrophe.
POZZEBON (voice-over): Before this tragedy, Venezuela was already in a deep humanitarian crisis, facing chronic shortages of food and medicines.
World Central Kitchen has been operating here since 2019. In response to the earthquake, they have stepped up with free meals for survivors and
volunteers.
POZZEBON: Can you describe a moment that Venezuela is right now, when it's been 10 days since the earthquake?
MIGUEL TORTOSA, COMMUNICATIONS RESPONSE MANAGER, WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN: The numbers keep increasing and we are still in the first phase of the
operation. I would say this is still the emergency phase, and our teams are still like finding the exact numbers so we can get the amount of meals
needed to cover all the needs.
POZZEBON (voice-over): Survivors and relatives of the victims have criticized the government's response as inadequate and delayed. Many point
to the armed forces, who they say showed up too late or didn't do enough.
DELCY RODRIGUEZ, VENEZUELA'S ACTING PRESIDENT (through translator): Our officials were deployed immediately. You can count the hours between the
quakes and when we signed the emergency decree. There were 4,000 officials out in the first 24 hours. 10,000 officials the following day.
POZZEBON (voice-over): The government also laying out credit agreements with the International Monetary Fund and plans to begin the reconstruction,
but at the golf course in La Guaira the present is too dark to look ahead.
CEBALLOS (through translator): Now I just want to find her remains. To think about the future makes no sense.
POZZEBON (voice-over): Stefano Pozzebon, CNN, La Guaira, Venezuela.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GOLODRYGA: Coming up next, the World Cup has taken some more extraordinary twists with history being made on and off the pitch. The high altitude and
Mexico's strong record on home soil were no match for the England team who pulled off a dramatic victory over the co-hosts at the same stadium where
Diego Maradona's hand-off-god goal helped eliminate the Three Lions four decades ago.
And for the first time ever, Norway have reached the quarterfinals after two goals by Erling Haaland, sending five-time champions Brazil crashing
out of the tournament. And of course, amid all of it, an extraordinary move from FIFA, which suspended U.S. striker Folarin Balogun's one-game ban for
a red card after intervention from President Donald Trump, a decision that has rocked the football world.
For more on all of this, let's bring in CNN senior sports analyst, Darren Lewis. Darren, welcome to the show. I thought this would be a lighter
subject matter. And in a way, it is. And this has been an incredible World Cup thus far.
But this was not the conversation I was expecting to have today. I thought we'd be talking about that game, in which we will, that England won last
night, previewing tonight's game between the U.S. and Belgium. And in just an hour's time, we're going to see Portugal and Spain. And let's not forget
Cape Verde and their incredible Cinderella story.
But news happened, and President Trump got in the mix here. So, I do want to get your take on how this has impacted European football's reaction
specifically. Belgium's foreign minister, who was a former referee himself, says that a phone call, if a phone call explains this, it undermines,
quote, "the most basic rules of the sport."
How is this being received in London, Brussels and across the continent?
DARREN LEWIS, CNN SENIOR SPORTS ANALYST: Well, it's been horrendous. Thanks for having me on, Bianna. It's been horrendous.
And I just want to, if I may, for our viewers who may not be abreast of this row, I'd just like to just recap where we are so far, because it
started off with a Balogun sent off for a tackle. Viewers who may not be abreast of this row, I'd just like to just recap where we are so far,
because it started off with a Balogun sent off for a tackle on a Bosnian player, Tarik Muharemovic, and it caused his ankle to buckle.
[13:50:00]
Now, Balogun committed a foul that contravened law 12 of football's laws, which penalizes players for endangering the safety of an opponent.
Now, Bianna, just for context, there have been 13 players sent off at this World Cup. FIFA's decision means that while the other 12 have all served a
suspension of at least one World Cup game, their next game that their country's taken part in, Balogun will not. He will play. And that has
caused, as you say, anger from around Europe.
UEFA have accused FIFA of crossing a red line. The Belgian FA have said, look, this has stopped being about us and has started to be about football
and its integrity and defending the interests and the transparency of the game.
And I've got to tell you, in the last few minutes, Gianni Infantino himself has posted to social media and has said, look, I've read and I've seen the
reports that I've spoken to the president. I do that on a regular basis, but these decisions are taken by an independent committee.
Now, that may well be the case, but we've heard from the Oval Office and we've seen before situations where Cristiano Ronaldo was sent off after the
last qualifier for Portugal. He should have missed his first game of this World Cup for Portugal. Instead, he played and it is said the Oval Office
was involved in that decision as well. So, there are more questions than answers around this one, Bianna, and I think it's going to run and run.
GOLODRYGA: So, I'm just going to be a little biased here, but I think from my perspective, it comes from an objective place. When I was watching this
game, it did seem a bit too much. They went too far with the red card, a foul, yes, but it didn't seem as if it was intentional. And then, of
course, across the Internet, you see the same image of the same foul being committed by Messi and no calls at all.
But we've sort of -- we've gone past that moment because the U.S. men's team sort of accepted that and they played one man down for the rest of
that game. We were expecting for Balogun to not be playing tonight. The president seems to be saying that he did the U.S. team a solid by doing the
right thing. Do you think ultimately, though, that this has the U.S. team?
LEWIS: I think -- you know, I think the language in this whole situation is a huge part of the problem. Doing a solid. Thanks to FIFA. Thanks to
Gianni. The personal, informal nature of this, when this should be procedure, the rules should be sacrosanct and intention. And this is quite
key. Intention is not a part of the rules. If you break the rules, nobody can read your mind. Nobody can decide if you meant to do it or you hadn't.
But the facts are, and England were very much victims of that when Harry Kane committed a foul inside his own penalty box on in the early hours of
Monday morning. It was an involuntary action, but it contravened the rules. And if we do not have the rules in football, we have nothing. And that's
why this is so grave, because it's a step taken by the world football governing body.
GOLODRYGA: I do want to end on actual football play and what we saw yesterday in England. And this was really a team that, though on paper are
better, stronger than the Mexican team they were playing at home. Obviously, the Azteca has a long history as well. It was only Mexico's
third competitive loss at that stadium.
How significant was England's performance in shaping that team as a genuine tournament contender now?
LEWIS: Well, Bianna, it was huge. I mean, I want to stay professional here, but obviously, as an Englishman, you defended your case. I've got to
try to defend mine. The players were heroic last night against Mexico. They did so well. They fought so hard. All that talk about altitude, but their
attitude was spot on.
If I'm honest, I look at the Spanish, the French and the Argentines, and I say that they have better balance throughout their side. They work as a
team. And we have yet to do that last night the first time. But it showed a lot of promise. And there is still a lot of football to be played in this
World Cup. So, maybe, just maybe, we might defy the odds.
GOLODRYGA: Yes. Harry Kane did not lose his skills at all, maybe his voice, but nothing else. And also, Norway. That was quite a game too. You
want to wrap it up in 20 seconds, Darren?
[13:55:00]
LEWIS: All I'll say is Erling Haaland continuing his bid to become a global sporting superstar. YouTube next. Maybe even CNN. Who knows? World
Sport might be the destination for a chat with him. But he has been absolutely outstanding. And I don't think it's going to be easy for England
this weekend at all.
GOLODRYGA: I love watching him play. And man, is he fast. He -- and by the way, just seeing all these players then react to their families sitting in
the stands too, just reminds you that they're human beings as well. So, this has been a delight to watch thus far. Darren Lewis, thank you so much
for your analysis.
LEWIS: It's been a delight to be on. Thank you, Bianna.
GOLODRYGA: And go Team USA tonight, if I can. All right. That is it for now. 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
