Return to Transcripts main page
Amanpour
Interview with Religion News Service Senior Analyst Rev. Thomas Reese; Interview with Fordham University Center on Religion and Culture Director David Gibson; Interview with "Redwood" Author Ben Macintyre; Interview with Austin American-Statesman Investigative Reporter Tony Plohetski. Aired 1-2p ET
Aired September 28, 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]
CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Hello, everyone, and welcome to "Amanpour." Here's what's coming up.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
POPE LEO XIV (through translator): Today, relations between individuals and states are becoming increasingly uncivilized. The value of keeping
one's word is dismissed. Instead, people boast of lies and deceit.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: Pope Leo ends his trip to France with a call for unity. We look at the message he sent to the heart of secular Europe.
Then --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BEN MACINTYRE, AUTHOR, "REDWOOD": The truth is always, I think, stranger than fiction, but it's also sometimes completely sort of incredible.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: -- an extraordinary tale of human vulnerability set against the apocalyptic threat of Cold War nuclear annihilation. Author Ben Macintyre
joins me to talk about his new bestseller, Redwood.
And --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TONY PLOHETSKI, INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER, AUSTIN AMERICAN-STATESMAN: ICE says very little about their efforts, their operations. So, much of this is
shielded in secrecy and remains opaque.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: -- violent encounters with ICE are in the news again. Hari Sreenivasan looks at the latest with investigative reporter Tony Plohetski.
Welcome to the program, everyone. I'm Christiane Amanpour in London.
An enthusiastic reception for Pope Leo as he wraps up a four-day visit to France. The Pope called for peace and unity while also speaking to critical
issues within Europe. Calling on Russian and Ukrainian negotiators to, quote, "sacrifice some positions to achieve peace." Urging Europeans to
embrace equality and the rule of law. And praising multiculturalism at a time and in a place where far-right populism is gaining strength.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
POPE LEO XIV (through translator): Europe has flourished and progressed when it has known how to draw upon the positive aspects of its past and
present them anew in creative forms, thanks to encounters with others. To welcome a person means to integrate them as if they were part of one's own
family, offering them the opportunity to develop their gifts, abilities, and sensibilities.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: In Paris, some 800,000 people thronged to the Champs-Elysees to welcome the Pope. And during a visit to the miracle shrine town of Lourdes,
he acknowledged that the Catholic Church must also admit its own failings and heal, quote, "deep wounds" before meeting with seven survivors of
sexual abuse.
Though once staunchly Catholic, only 5 percent of the French people now say they attend church regularly. Joining me to discuss the significance of the
Pope's visit there, David Gibson, director of the Center on Religion and Culture at Fordham University, and Father Thomas Rees, who's a senior
analyst at the Religious News Service. Welcome both of you to the program.
Father Rees, let me ask you first. You know, unity he called for and peace. That's pretty normal stuff for a pope. What do you make of it being said
now and in Paris, in France?
REV. THOMAS REESE, SENIOR ANALYST, RELIGION NEWS SERVICE: Well, absolutely, it is traditional for popes to be supporters of unity and
peace. The popes, since the League of Nations at least, have been supporting multilateralism, have been supporting peaceful negotiations,
have supported diplomacy as an alternative to war. All of these things the popes have been for.
And at this critical time, of course, Leo is speaking out on these things when they're needed more than ever because of what's going on in the
Ukraine and what's going on with divisions even within countries in Europe.
AMANPOUR: And, David Gibson, we've interviewed you quite a lot about religion, about Catholicism, and occasionally about this pope.
[13:05:00]
Why France, do you think? Generally, the big trips, I think, are reserved. Well, probably I'm wrong, but, you know, for maybe the Southern Hemisphere,
there where the faith is growing. And it's not necessarily the case in the Northern Hemisphere and definitely not in France.
DAVID GIBSON, DIRECTOR, CENTER ON RELIGION AND CULTURE, FORDHAM UNIVERSITY: Well, that's actually the very reason that Pope Leo wanted to go to France,
which no pope has really made a major visit to France in about 20 years. France, the eldest daughter of the church, they used to call her. But Leo,
remember, he's the first American pope. Can you imagine any other American leader getting a reception like this in France today? So, that's
remarkable.
And he, again, his father, his father was on the beaches of Normandy helping to liberate Europe from Nazism. This, in many ways, is personal for
him and as an American and certainly as a pope to go also to the heart of Christendom, really, and call it back to its roots and not just to see what
it can do for Europe, but what it can do for the rest of the world, which, as you say, is where Catholicism is growing.
AMANPOUR: You know, that is such a good reminder to know that this American leader is welcomed at a time when you might find that others
aren't, to know that his father really gave his life and his youth to defending democracies and the values of what we all believe in, human
rights, on the shores of Normandy.
I also am struck, and I want to ask you both to respond to this, by his deliberate appeal for multilateralism, multiculturalism. He was very clear
in his message that don't get seduced by this very narrow identity-based populism. So, let me play what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
POPE LEO XIV (through translator): International law and multilateralism emphasize the genuine equality of states and their relations and constitute
the best antidote to the desire for domination, which lies at the root of every conflict.
Today, relations between individuals and states are becoming increasingly uncivilized. The value of keeping one's word is dismissed. Instead, people
boast of lies and deceit.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: So, that was today, the last day of his trip. It was in the city of Metz, and that is the hometown of Robert Schumann, who was one of the
founding fathers of European integration and who's been considered for sainthood. So, that's not an accident, Father Reese. He made that speech in
that hometown for that, you know, political endeavor of integration. Do you think it's deliberately political?
REV. REESE: Yes, I think that what the Pope is doing is articulating the foundations of Christianity, which are about love and fellowship and peace
and justice and working towards the common good, which is what Robert Schumann, of course, did with his life after the Second World War. This is
extremely important at this time when things are so divisive in Europe because of the opposition of right-wing parties to immigration.
The church is on the side of the immigrants. It used to be that, you know, we would think of the church as aligned with right-wing parties. It's not
anymore. It is on the side of unity. It's on the side of acceptance. It's on the side of welcoming different peoples and different cultures. And what
the Pope is saying is that these are the things that help Europe grow as a culture and as a civilization.
AMANPOUR: There we saw him with the French president, Emmanuel Macron, on that stage and, I believe, the Archbishop. But, David Gibson, it's so
interesting what Father Reese just said. The Pope is on the side of immigration. The Catholic Church probably should be. But, of course, if we
look to the American church, it has been a rather different aspect. It has been a lot about the culture wars. That was challenged a lot by first Pope
Francis and now by Pope Leo.
And I was struck by an article you just recently wrote about the values of some of our Catholic leaders, political leaders, whether it's J.D. Vance in
the United States, whether it's the current and the new prime minister here, Andy Burnham, and what motivates Burnham. It's not the culture wars.
It's something else motivated by his Catholicism.
GIBSON: Yes, it's about the common good. It's about building things up, not dividing people. And, again, I think, to pick up on what the Pope was
saying in that great clip you played, people boasting, leaders and nations boasting of deceit, breaking their word.
[13:10:00]
He's talking about character. He's talking about civility as much as he's talking about civilization. And in many respects, when you talk about those
kinds of things and you talk about people who are trying to break down civility, who demonstrate no recognizably Christian character, a lot of
people would say that's an automatic, you know, shot at Donald Trump. Whatever you want to hear in that, I think there is something to that.
But I also think, picking up on Father Reese's point, he's also going to France and to Europe where they're facing national elections in France, in
Poland, in Italy, and in Spain, where there is a resurgent right, just as we saw in those regional elections in Germany recently. And he really wants
to put the Vatican and this American Pope down as standing strongly against that, not just for the common good, not just on behalf of immigrants, but
on behalf of democracy, liberty, equality, fraternity. He embraced and endorsed that slogan of the French Revolution, which you wouldn't have
thought possible a few decades ago.
AMANPOUR: Yes. And just quickly, before I turn to Father Reese, you said that somebody like Andy Burnham is -- and he's talked about it, is
motivated by the concept of social justice. And you wrote in this article that Pope Leo, you know, here's this kind of slogan, Pope Leo believes in a
healthy culture of negotiation that leaves no one behind, building on what you, what Pope Francis used to talk about, a culture of encounter. In other
words, meeting the people where they are.
Do you think many leaders, including Catholic leaders, have gotten away from that, David?
GIBSON: Very much. What he's, you know, he's seen so many leaders, Catholic leaders in the United States and elsewhere, going for this
tribalism, going for this kind of blood and soil type of ethno-nationalism. And he's putting the Catholic Church firmly on the side of universal
rights, of openness, dialogue, and encounter.
AMANPOUR: Father Reese, do you think that too many leaders, and I mean inside the Catholic Church and outside, are forgetting that idea of
leadership? We know that trust is collapsing in so many institutions. People feel really alienated by so-called leaders, whether they're
political or others. And this idea of bringing them back through real encounter and meeting them where their needs are, do you see that as
lacking in the United States, particularly amongst Catholic politicians and maybe even church leaders?
REV. REESE: Well, I think that Pope Leo would be the opposite of the kind of American leaders that are pushing for what's called Christian
nationalism, this view that Christians should be in charge of governments and should tell everybody else what to do. This is not where he comes from.
He comes from a place of dialogue, of conversation, of working together with people of all faiths, working together for the common good, working
for peace, for justice. This is what the Catholic Church is about under the leadership of Pope Leo. And earlier, under the leadership of Pope Francis.
This is the kind of leadership we want. You notice that the pope is always talking about what he's for, not who he's against. I mean, many people want
to try and get him to talk against Donald Trump, and he dodges that. And rather, he prefers to talk about what he's for. He's for peace. He's for
justice. He's for reconciliation. He's for a civilization of love, not a position where might makes right, rather where all nations can work
together for peace.
AMANPOUR: And, David, he also has spoken about the threat of A.I., and he's really called for, you know, the human link to remain in that, and we
know that this is a huge issue right now. But also, also, we saw those pictures, just as you were all talking, of a lot of young people coming up
to him, hugging him in France. And I just want to read some of these stats, which are pretty interesting. There's kind of a Catholic revival, maybe
around, but certainly in France. Young people being baptized in growing numbers there, even as regular church attendance remains low. It's about 5
percent.
But, for instance, in the Archdiocese of Chicago, his hometown, found that 34 percent of converts to Catholicism were Gen Z, 35 percent were
millennials. There seems to be a resurgence. To what do you attribute this?
[13:15:00]
GIBSON: Well, I think there's a real search, especially among young people, in this very fragmented world of alienation, where there is this
culture of division from the top. They're looking for community. They're looking for a sense of meaning. And Pope Leo spoke so powerfully about
meaning and looking for the higher good and the higher purpose of one's life. He does that all the time, but he did it so powerfully here in
France. And that resonates with young people around the world, but especially in the West.
And I think you see that in France. You see it in England. You see it certainly in the United States, where people are looking to come back to
places that will welcome them, not divide them. And Leo made a big point of that. He said, we've got these young people coming into the church. We have
to make this a place of welcome for everyone. It's very inclusive, not exclusive. And that's really what people are looking for. And that's
really, I think, what is part of Pope Leo's appeal.
Look at -- you saw him coming down the Champs-Elysees, the main boulevard of France, 800,000 people coming out to line the Champs-Elysees there and
cheer him on. There's something going on, and Pope Leo is tapping into that. And I think statesmanlike was almost the way to describe his visit.
And I think he's the person who's filling a gap that people see out there. And perhaps the church and faith is filling a gap that people find within
themselves.
AMANPOUR: And yet, as we said, he is very cognizant that the church has to remember and atone for its own failings, notably the clerical sexual abuse
catastrophe. Here's how one survivor, he met seven in France. Here's what one of them told the press.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): His depth, his listening, it reconciled me with what I experienced at the time. Ten years ago, when we
were speaking into the void, when we were not received by the pope, when we wrote to him and he did not reply, I think that there has been a clear
change, a major awakening.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: It's really interesting that, Father Reese. And, of course, many of the recent popes have promised reform and change. What do you think Pope
Leo can do differently to make that happen?
REV. REESE: Yes, I think what we're seeing here is that both the church and the world have changed. The church is no longer the church of our great
grandparents or great-grandparents. It's not wagging its fingers at people. It's coming and welcoming. It's embracing people of all different kinds,
where they are, and listening to them and trying to bring them together as a community.
What we find in young people around the world is that they're seeking spirituality, they're seeking something greater than themselves and the
world in which they live, and they're seeking community. Well, this is what churches were supposed to be about, communities that had a spirituality
that helped people connect with something bigger than themselves.
And I think that the combination of the fact that the church has changed and the world has changed has made this a unique opportunity for us to go
beyond the past, to go beyond the anti-clericalism that was so rampant in France in the past, to go beyond the authoritarianism that was so ingrained
in the Catholic Church so that we can have a reconciliation and move forward.
AMANPOUR: Yes. Reconciliation is an incredibly important word. Father Thomas Rees and David Gibson, thank you both for being with us. And stay
with us. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:20:00]
AMANPOUR: Now, after President Trump rejected Iran's proposal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said that his country
is ready for more peace talks, and he said it is also ready to stand up for its interests no matter the cost.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ABBAS ARAGHCHI, IRANIAN FOREIGN MINISTER: We are ready to negotiate as much as we are ready to face any challenge. We stand firm in the face of
any challenge -- any aggression, sorry. We stand firm in the face of any aggression against us, even it comes to a doomsday war.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: Iran has a long fraud history as a possible tripwire for a doomsday scenario, and in his new book, "Redwood," the best-selling author
Ben Macintyre uncovers the untold story of a Russian spy in Tehran who betrayed the Kremlin at the height of the Cold War, and he may have helped
avert a nuclear confrontation. I spoke with Macintyre here in London recently about a story that's stranger and scarier in many ways than
fiction.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
AMANPOUR: Ben Macintyre, welcome back to our program with yet another thrill-seeker and a page-turner anyway.
BEN MACINTYRE, AUTHOR, "REDWOOD": Thank you.
AMANPOUR: So, "Redwood," one day in October 1981, a tall Russian in Tehran walks into the British embassy. Take it from there.
MACINTYRE: This is Major Vladimir Kuzichkin of the KGB. He's one of the most experienced intelligence officers that the Soviets have in Tehran.
He's running all their illegals networks, which are the undercover spies that are running throughout the Middle East.
And he walked into the British embassy across the road. I mean, the British embassy was directly across the road from the Soviet embassy.
AMANPOUR: I grew up there.
MACINTYRE: Of course. So, you would know that.
AMANPOUR: I know exactly where --
MACINTYRE: What used to be Winston Churchill Street had recently been renamed Bobby Sands Street after the IRA hunger striker. So, Kuzichkin
walked in and offered his services to MI6. Now, a walk-in in spy parlance is a very dangerous quality because somebody who volunteers to spy may be a
double and triple, maybe a provocation. So, initially, MI6 was very concerned about this offer.
AMANPOUR: And what was the offer? What was he doing? What was his main job in Tehran?
MACINTYRE: He was --
AMANPOUR: Because really, this was right after, like a year or so after the Islamic revolution.
MACINTYRE: Absolutely. So, this is 1981. So, it's the Ayatollah has come to power. The Islamists are in the ascendant, but they don't have full
control of the country. There are still different factions fighting, including the Communist Party, which was then very powerful still, very
well-funded. They had weapons and so on. But they were tolerated by the Islamic regime. So, it's a time of great ferment.
And the British have one spy in the country that the British diplomatic representation is tiny. The Americans have gone after the U.S. embassy
hostage crisis. But the Brits have a tiny group of people there, one of whom is this man, Ian McCready, who was nominally a consul, he was
nominally a commercial attache. In reality, he was the only MI6 spy in the country. So, it fell to him to handle Kuzichkin, this kind of volunteer
spy.
AMANPOUR: And just to remind the sort of geopolitical moment, I mean, I remember growing up that the British, the Americans, at all costs, wanted
to fend off any Soviet encroachment into Iran and threatening the Persian Gulf, which they wanted to own since Peter the Great died. We grew up
knowing this.
MACINTYRE: Yes. I mean, Iran, as you know, had always been a kind of center of the great game, the battle between czarist Russia and imperialist
Britain to try and control the country, Central Asia and the oil fields, latterly. So, it had been a crucial battleground of the Cold War. And while
the shah was in power, the CIA and MI6 and SAVAK, the brutal secret police of the shah's regime, were in control. It was all going great.
Then the shah is toppled and the KGB moved into the vacuum. They began to build up power in the country. And secretly, this is what Kuzichkin
revealed, secretly, they were planning to set up the Communist Party to take over the government. It was a long-term plan. It was no plan that
wasn't going to happen immediately, although it could have done.
[13:25:00]
But the idea was that the two-day party, as they were known, which means the party of the masses, was going to take over the government, oust the
clerics, and then the Red Army would come in to support them.
Now, this was a long-term nightmare for Western analysts, because had the Red Army come in and taken over Iran, it would have been a long-term
nightmare for Western analysts. had they got control of the warm water ports and the oil fields and the Strait of Hormuz, they would have won the
Cold War. So, America had contingency plans in place to deal with just such an eventuality. They didn't have enough conventional weapons or troops in
the region, really, to hold back a Soviet advance. So, the contingency plan was nuclear.
AMANPOUR: Really?
MACINTYRE: Yes. There was already plans in place. Now, these were contingency plans. They weren't necessarily hard plans that were going to
be put into effect. But a man called Bob Blowtorch Komer, long now forgotten, but was then a very senior official in the Pentagon, had drawn
up a series of responses, the least radical of which, in nuclear terms, was to send special forces into Iran, armed with man-packed nukes, literally
portable nuclear weapons, that they would then set off and bring down the mountain ranges in the north, the Alborz Mountains, and block the passes so
that the Soviets couldn't get in.
I mean, it was a very radical move, but that was the least of the nuclear options. The next one was the use of tactical nuclear weapons, and if
necessary, they were prepared to countenance using nuclear weapons to take out the nuclear bases inside the Soviet Union. If that had happened, the
Soviets would have responded with nuclear force. So, this is one of those what-ifs of history, but it was on the drawing board very firmly for the
KGB.
AMANPOUR: So, given the way, you know, you're describing that moment in history and how hugely dangerous a moment it was, with a very, I mean, the
Islamists were pretty dug in, but they hadn't fully consolidated, you know, power. They had, but there was all sorts of fights internally. It was a
huge big deal, and this guy, was he up to the job, this Redwood? Did he, was he into it? Why did he defect?
MACINTYRE: Well, his reasons for defecting are complicated and extremely unlikely. I mean, first of all, he was the linchpin of this conspiracy. So,
he was the KGB officer who was responsible for passing over the money and the guns and encouraging the communists at the behest of the Central
Committee to prepare for this potential coup.
So, he knew all about it, and it was an incredibly stressful job. I mean, he was finding it very, very difficult. I mean, Kuzichkin, Vladimir
Kuzichkin, is not your James Bond spy. He was six foot four. He was incredibly handsome. He was a tough cookie. He was deputy head of the whole
operation in the KGB of that region, but he had a problem, and he explained it to his case officer the minute they got together, so he and Ian
McCready, and he said, I have a problem, and I hope the West will cure it for him. So --
AMANPOUR: And the problem?
MACINTYRE: The problem was erectile dysfunction.
AMANPOUR: You've got to be kidding me.
MACINTYRE: I promise you not. I promise you not.
AMANPOUR: The great game depended on erectile dysfunction?
MACINTYRE: In a sense, yes. I mean, he -- that was his main motivation. So, there's an old acronym that is often used to describe the motivations
of somebody who turns a double agent, and that's MICE, money, ideology, coercion, and ego. Now, money didn't play a part for Kuzichkin. He didn't
want money. Ideology did play a part. But he was bitterly alienated from the Soviet regime. He hated the job he was doing. He despised the KGB.
So, coercion and ego didn't play a part in it. His main motivation was that he was impotent. It was destroying his marriage. He was desperate. He loved
his wife dearly, and he was trying to save their relationship. Like many Soviet citizens at the time, he had a kind of almost mystical faith in
Western medicine. He believed that Western medicine could cure anything.
And so, it was a radical, extremely perilous plan, which was that he was going to walk into the British embassy, agree to spy for them for a year.
They would cure him. That was the plan. And then he would defect with his wife Galina, and they would start a new life in the West. It was based on
this assumption that the West had already invented Viagra, which they had not, because Viagra wouldn't be invented for another 14 years. But
Kuzichkin didn't know that. So, the whole thing hinges, really, on his expectation that the West could help him.
AMANPOUR: And since they didn't deliver, why did he keep helping? How did that all happen? What did they do, the West?
MACINTYRE: Well, so Ian McCready said to him, we will do our best. We will try to help you. And in fairness to MI6, they did. They did what they
could. There was no medical cure for this.
[13:30:00]
But they sent him advice. They sent him red vitamin tablets to try and get some sort of placebo effect going. They gave him advice on lifestyle. They
tried to persuade him to stop drinking. He was a huge boozer. You know, to -- relaxation methods, sleep, everything they knew of that might help. But,
of course, it didn't work. It didn't make it worse. It didn't make it better.
And what's more, this problem for Kuzichkin was clearly stress-related. And the stress of being a double agent was double that of being a KGB officer.
So, actually, they were making it worse. But Kuzichkin was a fascinating character because --
AMANPOUR: But he never said, hey, you're not making me better. What's in it for me?
MACINTYRE: He didn't. Because he was a sort of soldier, Kuzichkin. And I think once he'd swapped sides, once he had thrown in his lot with the West,
I think he also realized that he didn't have much chance of backing out at this point, that he was reliant on them, that he really was going to do
what he had to do. And he was an extraordinary spy.
I mean, he was able, over the course of nine months, to provide MI6 with the kind of intelligence they had never had before, how the KGB operated,
how the illegal system worked. Every single undercover spy and agent in the Middle East, I mean, everybody that Kuzichkin knew about, they provided
him, McCready provided him with a spy camera, a little miniature camera. And he would go into the Soviet embassy, into the KGB rezidentura, and
photograph every single document he could get his hands on, thousands of them.
AMANPOUR: In Tehran?
MACINTYRE: In Tehran.
AMANPOUR: Yes. So, this is the slightly farcical side of his reason for doing this. But it had a dramatic and pretty violent impact. The
information that he was giving to the Brits and the Americans, right? What did they do with that information? What happened to Tudeh?
MACINTYRE: Well, some operational intelligence is too valuable to use. So, the Brits decided they could not share it with America until Kuzichkin was
out. Once they'd got Kuzichkin out, a decision was made jointly with the CIA, with Bill Casey, then head of the CIA, to share this information with
the Iranians. They saw the problem strictly through the prism of the Cold War. This was a way of stopping the next domino from falling.
But there was also a hope, I think, on Casey's part, that this would be a way to open a back channel to Iran, always the holy grail of Middle Eastern
politics for Washington. This would be a way, he hoped, that they could have a conversation, that they could begin to open up the Islamist regime.
So, Kuzichkin flew out. He met with a senior delegation, again in deep secrecy, of the Iranians, of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. The
Iranians said, thank you very much. Well, actually, they didn't, really. They stony-faced, they left the three-day meeting with all this evidence.
The names of the Tudeh party plotters, the safe houses, the money streams, the weapons caches, the contacts with the KGB, everything, went back to
Tehran. And within a few months, within about three months, something like 8,000 communists were rounded up, of whom perhaps half were executed. It
was a terrifying bloodbath. You will probably remember stories of it from your youth. I mean, it was the moment when the Ayatollah's regime clamped
down on all internal opposition. From that moment on, fear of fifth colonists within became a kind of central motivating force for the Islamist
regime.
And inadvertently, it did stop the Soviets. I mean, dozens, I think a dozen and a half Soviet diplomats were kicked out of the country. I mean, it
created a complete chasm between Moscow and Tehran. And it stymied any ambitions that the Soviets had for a takeover of Iran. So, in one sense, it
worked really very effectively. In another sense, it actually emboldened the Islamist regime. It ended up making the Ayatollah stronger.
AMANPOUR: Fast forward, and there's a lot of parallels, different dynamic, but a lot of parallels. Do you see any line at all between that time and
now?
MACINTYRE: There's almost a direct line. I mean, many of the people who in 1982 and 1983, figures inside the Islamic regime, people like Ali Khamenei
and Shamkhani, Ali Shamkhani, they were then young officers. In Khamenei's case, he was already president. These were the people pushing really hard
to destroy the communists. And they went in as hard as they possibly could.
Those are the same people who were still in power this year until February, when the first Israeli airstrike took out Khamenei, Shamkhani, the same
figures who had been young sort of radicals in the 1980s were still there. They were now the ancient despots running this autocracy. So, there is a
direct line.
[13:35:00]
And I think when you see the terrible clampdown on protest that took place in Iran when the protests were there late last year and early this year,
those are straight out of the Tudeh playbook. They are the same response to what is seen as internal subversion. You just wipe it out.
AMANPOUR: Are any of the characters alive? Is he still alive?
MACINTYRE: Very much so.
AMANPOUR: Redwood is?
MACINTYRE: Redwood is not.
AMANPOUR: No.
MACINTYRE: Yes. ' AMANPOUR: But the Brit is?
MACINTYRE: Redwood died in 2009. Ian McCready, the case officer who ran him, is very much alive and a central figure in this story.
AMANPOUR: And you got a lot of info from him, presumably.
MACINTYRE: A lot of info from him. And all the other MI6 officers who ran this case. And there is also Kuzichkin's daughter. That gives away part of
the story because, of course, he does recover from what ailed him.
AMANPOUR: I'm glad you told me. I didn't twig. Yes.
MACINTYRE: So --
AMANPOUR: It was a lack of stress as opposed to Viagra.
MACINTYRE: Absolutely. So, by the time he came to Britain, he'd been in Britain for a few months, he had completely recovered really from that --
AMANPOUR: Stayed with his wife?
MACINTYRE: No. You see, he had to abandon his Russian wife in Tehran.
AMANPOUR: He couldn't get her out.
MACINTYRE: He could not get her out. And that is one of the heartbreaking aspects of this story. I mean, he did it in a way for love. He did it to
try to preserve his relationship. But he could not bring her with him. They both retained this kind of lifelong affection for each other. I mean,
Kuzichkin remarried. He had a daughter. You know, he had a sort of -- he rebuilt his life in the U.K. He made himself into someone new with MI6
help.
He took on a new name. He took on a new career. Believe it or not, he became a very successful acupuncturist in Weston-super-Mare. If you put
that in a novel, people would say that is the most preposterous nonsense. You can't write that. But it's true. That is what happened to him.
AMANPOUR: And that's why these stories are so amazing.
MACINTYRE: They are extraordinary. I mean, truth is always, I think, stranger than fiction, but it's also sometimes completely sort of
incredible. I mean, you think that couldn't happen. I mean, one little coda to that is that one of his clients, one of his main patients as an
acupuncturist was Alec Guinness, the actor. So, at the time that Alec Guinness was making Smiley, the second most famous fictional spy in British
literature, at the time he was making Smiley, he was having needles stuck in him by an enormous Russian spy and had absolutely no idea that that was
what was happening.
AMANPOUR: That is really funny. And finally, Redwood, of course, because of his massive size and the famous trees.
MACINTYRE: Yes, he was six foot four. He was broad as a bullet. You know, he was a huge, huge man. Yes. So, Redwood was the code name. I mean, spies
do this all the time. I mean, there's a convention in the spy world and in all the agencies that you're not supposed to use a code name that gives
away the story, that gives any hint of what you're talking about. And spies around the world violate this rule all the time. I mean, every spy agency
does it.
And Redwood was the perfect name for him because he was six foot four. There was also, of course, another meaning to Redwood, which to this day
MI6 maintains was accidental because, of course, in fact, it's probably even a triple entendre. So, Red, because he was communist, and Wood,
because that was the problem.
AMANPOUR: Right.
MACINTYRE: I'm sorry. You may not want to put that in there.
AMANPOUR: Yes, yes, yes. Turn around.
MACINTYRE: That may have to be dropped.
AMANPOUR: Maybe not. We'll leave it to our viewers' imagination. Ben Macintyre, thank you very much indeed.
MACINTYRE: It's been a huge pleasure.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
AMANPOUR: Not sure how to follow that? We'll be back after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:40:00]
AMANPOUR: Now, to the United States and Texas, where protesters in Austin took to the streets on Sunday calling for federal immigration officers to
leave their home city and state after an agent shot Wilber Perez in his car a week ago. Perez remains in ICE detention with supporters concerned about
the bullet that's still lodged in his back.
Tony Plohetski is investigative reporter for the Austin American-Statesman, and he speaks to Hari Sreenivasan now.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
HARI SREENIVASAN, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Christiane, thanks. Tony Plohetski, thanks so much for joining us.
Tony, you work at the Austin American-Statesman, and you have been following ICE activity in Austin and other places throughout the state.
Just recently, we had a federal immigration agent shoot and wounded a, a Venezuelan man who was working as a DoorDash delivery driver. Can you walk
our viewers through what happened or what we know that happened?
TONY PLOHETSKI, INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER, AUSTIN AMERICAN-STATESMAN: And the story is still coming together in terms of the sequence of events. But what
we know is that this started on a Sunday afternoon in broad daylight in North Austin, and the person was initially stopped. He's a 28-year-old
Venezuelan, and he was initially stopped by ICE agents, and we know that because it was captured on video from an off-duty Austin police officer who
had a mounted video camera on his personal car. He was out running errands, and he saw that two black SUVs had stopped this blue Chevrolet Corolla and
were at the driver's side talking to this person they were planning to detain.
At that point, the driver of the Corolla led authorities on a brief chase in North Austin before one of the ICE agents used what law enforcement
commonly refers to as a PIT maneuver to stop this vehicle. Then at that point, for reasons that are entirely unclear at this point, the ICE agent
opened fire shot three times, apparently into the car and wounding the man in the back.
SREENIVASAN: So, we do not know whether there was -- and again, this is days later now. We still don't know was there a weapon? Was there a threat?
Was there something that would have motivated that agent to shoot into the car?
PLOHETSKI: That information has just not been made available, and strikingly so, Hari. I mean, I've covered local law enforcement and state
police in Texas now for decades. And so, for the authorities to not, in any way, shape, or form, introduce a sequence of events into the conversation
to explain what exactly happened, as you can imagine, that raises more questions about the totality of the circumstances here.
SREENIVASAN: OK. So, what we have also are photographs and testimony that say that this is, this bullet, at least one of them, went through the seat
and into close to this person's spine. And what does his lawyer say happened after that arrest?
PLOHETSKI: This has been -- and to many people who have been following this case, a very disturbing sequence of events. We know that local
paramedics here in Austin took the man, his name is Wilber Rafael Garces Perez. They took him to the local hospital, and according to the attorney,
she could not locate him for some hours.
In fact, we know that the mayor of Austin personally went to the hospital to try to help his wife and his legal counsel locate him. He remained at
the hospital only a relatively short period of time for someone who had been shot. At about four thirty in the afternoon, about four hours after
this encounter unfolded, we're told that he was taken into custody by ICE agents and then taken to a detention facility about two hours south of
Austin, near San Antonio.
And according to his attorney, who is a well-known immigration attorney here in the Austin area he received very little medical treatment did not
receive ample pain medication. She has made a number of claims that have been echoed by others, including Congressman Greg Casar.
[13:45:00]
But yet, at the same time, ICE officials and Homeland Security officials really dispute some of the claims that they have made with regard to his
care behind bars.
SREENIVASAN: The man's lawyer, Kate Lincoln-Goldfinch, said, we need the dash camera footage and body camera footage from ICE and having these
bystander videos does not give us a full picture. My client has said he was not intending to flee. He was trying to get out of traffic and out of
danger.
The DHS secretary, Markwayne Mullin, says this person is an illegal alien who has no legal status to be here and has been given some of the best
medical care he's ever received in his life. No amount of smears and false narratives will slow down ICE from doing its job by removing dangerous,
illegal aliens from our communities and making America safe again.
You covered back in August Victor Martinez Nieto and his five-year-old son, Liam Tadeo. They were on their way to, I think, a soccer practice. What
happened in that incident?
PLOHETSKI: A five-year-old boy who was living in Austin with his father, he was set to start school the next week. And ICE agents, while on his way
to soccer practice, essentially arrested the father and also took him into custody. There was some dispute about what would happen to the five-year-
old boy in this case. What we are told, though, is that his father wanted to maintain custody of him.
And so, ultimately, they were both deported to Mexico and reunited with the help of the Mexican government with their family members in Mexico. But,
Hari, that story and what happened to him is so significant because it highlights, again, for people in Austin, a very liberal, progressive city,
just how disruptive and how disturbing all of this has been.
And then when you add a shooting now, which is something that many people in Austin have been concerned about as these ICE operations have unfolded
across the country, there's been growing fear, growing anxiety that that type of violence could come to the streets of Austin, as it did on that
Sunday afternoon.
SREENIVASAN: The DHS says Martinez Nieto is a Mexican national who entered the U.S. illegally near Laredo in March of 2022. ICE arrested him in Hutto,
Texas, in November 2025, and he accepted voluntary departure, being removed from the U.S. on February 12, 2026. He then illegally reentered the country
at an unknown time and place before this most recent August 16 arrest.
The question I think, you know, parents really are asking is, is there an opportunity there for the child to stay in the United States with his mom?
And there was a Democratic congressman in this case who also made a statement wondering whether or not this was a choice made under duress.
PLOHETSKI: That's exactly right. And many of the Democrats and opponents to these types of operations point to that set of facts and say that these
types of ICE efforts have destroyed families, they have broken families apart needlessly. And that's why they point to what they consider these
extremely heavy-handed tactics that they say are not good for public safety and, in fact, erode confidence in the federal government.
SREENIVASAN: There's a third case that I want to ask about back in July where ICE agents fatally shot a man named Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, a 52-
year-old Mexican-born husband and father who had lived in the U.S. for about 25 years, ran a construction company. What happened there?
PLOHETSKI: That is a case that has also been heavily followed and heavily scrutinized. But in that case, authorities acknowledged that the person who
was shot was not the intended target for ICE activity. It has been very litigated in the public space about what exactly happened, whether or not
the driver that's involved, a van, whether or not that driver did something that placed himself at risk for gunfire from ICE agents.
Yet, at the same time, other witnesses and family members of the man say that that is just impossible, that this was an unnecessary act of violence.
And what we know is that the local district attorney in Harris County, in Houston, has vowed an investigation and vowed to take this case to a grand
jury to seek possible criminal charges against the ICE agent who opened fire, criminal charges possibly including murder charges.
[13:50:00]
I do think that that really does open the conversation to, and it's now unfolding here in Austin, about the role of local law enforcement and the
role of local prosecutors in situations like this.
SREENIVASAN: You know, at that time in Houston, there was a similar shooting in Maine. And after that, DHS told ICE to pause most vehicle
stops. And the reason that that comes back into memory is that the president overturned that pause at the time, saying ICE, quote, "cannot
give up one of ICE's most important and effective crime-fighting tools, the traffic stop."
What's different on the ground today? Because at different points, ICE has said that not only are they going to pause these traffic stops, that
they're going to give body cameras to everybody. And in the case, the first case that we started talking about in Austin, shouldn't there be body
camera footage from anybody that was involved in this stop?
PLOHETSKI: Well, and to your point, the incident in Austin underscores and highlights that those types of traffic stops are exactly continuing. And
what we're told is that the ICE agent and a supervisor who was involved in that incident very much targeted the man who they stopped.
We're told that they were using some sort of potential license plate reader to confirm the identity of the car. And again, looking at the video that
was taken by the off-duty local law enforcement officer, it's clear that they were conducting a traffic stop. Had you been passing that and not
known that it was ICE, you would simply have believed that someone was on the side of the road, for example, receiving a speeding ticket. That
appeared to be how this looked.
So, we know that those types of traffic stops are very much continuing as part of these ICE operations. With regard to the body camera video, we are
told, and for reasons that have not yet been fully explained, but the preliminary information is that there is no body camera video in this
incident. There is some degree of bystander video, though what we have seen, what has been publicly released is not entirely clear.
SREENIVASAN: There's obviously the federal, the DHS, and the ICE authorities. There's actually a state layer of police in Texas. And of
course, there is the local police. Are they all cooperating with ICE in trying to make these stops? Do they have kind of different priorities? I
mean, how do they feel about this starting to on their streets?
PLOHETSKI: I can speak very specifically to that in the city where I live, which is Austin. What we know is that the state policing agency, the Texas
Department of Public Safety, which is, of course, ultimately run by the Republican governor of Texas, Greg Abbott, has been very involved in
collaborating and partnering with ICE.
Many of the higher profile ICE operations that we have seen in Austin and in Central Texas have included the involvement of the Texas Department of
Public Safety. So, their collaboration, their cooperation is strong. And we also know that when this particular incident was unfolding, that ICE agents
actually summoned the assistance of the Texas Department of Public Safety. That stands in stark contrast to how local police in Austin have handled
this.
What local police have said is they in no way, shape, or form are engaged in working with ICE and enforcing any sort of immigration law, that the
work of the local police department is to respond to emergencies in the city and to deal with and respond to local incidents as a municipal law
enforcement agency would.
SREENIVASAN: You know, Texas has an estimated 2 million or so undocumented immigrants. So, when these different raids and enforcement activities are
taking place in communities in Texas, what should people outside of the state understand?
PLOHETSKI: That these operations we know are continuing, that they are continuing at different scales. Yet at the same time, in terms of what
exactly is happening, I do want to say that that has been very difficult to pinpoint and to follow over these many months that they have been carried
out during the Trump administration. ICE says very little about their efforts, their operations, so much of this is shielded in secrecy and
remains opaque.
And again, to that end, we're seeing that even play out in this shooting. This is shielded in secrecy and remains opaque. And again, to that end,
we're seeing that even play out in this shooting that occurred in Austin.
[13:55:00]
Here we are days later, and ICE officials have released very scant information. For example, we don't even know the name of the ICE agent who
was involved. And that is juxtaposed with the fact that if a local municipal police officer were involved in an incident like that, we would
know pretty quickly who that officer or agent was, their history with the department. So, there continues to be so much of this that is shielded from
public view and is operating in this very hidden way.
SREENIVASAN: Investigative reporter for the Austin American-Statesman, Tony Plohetski, thanks so much for joining us.
PLOHETSKI: Thanks for having me.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
AMANPOUR: -- is making a big comeback for the first time in 170 years, leopards are roaming South Africa's Westcoast. Seven of them, including two
cubs were spotted there, walking through a landscape that has greatly transformed since they were last seen there nearly two centuries ago.
Conservationists are calling this a landmark event. We love that.
That's it for now. Goodbye from London.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:00:00]
END
