Return to Transcripts main page

The Amanpour Hour

Interview With Former U.S. Ambassador To The E.U.; Interview With Finnish President Alexander Stubb; Interview With Biden's Former China Adviser Rush Doshi; Interview With Ukraine's Former Defense Minister Andriy Zagorodnyuk; 35 Years Since Berlin Wall Fell: Democracy Under Siege; Humanitarian Organization: Gaza Is Destroyed. Aired 11a-12p ET

Aired November 09, 2024 - 11:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:00:34]

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Hello and welcome to THE AMANPOUR HOUR.

Here is where we are headed this week.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

AMANPOUR: After a stunning political comeback, what will Donald Trump 2.0 mean for the world and for America's own global standing?

We ask Gordon Sondland, Trump's former E.U. ambassador.

GORDON SONDLAND, FORMER E.U. AMBASSADOR: I think you can see a Trump administration 2.0 hitting the ground running.

AMANPOUR: And the newest member of NATO, Finland's President Alexander Stubb.

ALEXANDER STUBB, FINLAND'S PRESIDENT: This time around, everyone knows what Donald Trump stands for. His own foreign-policy has been very clear.

AMANPOUR: Plus.

RUSH DOSHI, FORMER BIDEN ADVISER FOR CHINA AND TAIWAN: This is the decisive decade in the competition with China.

AMANPOUR: A new pivot in Asia? Biden's former China adviser Rush Doshi on why Beijing is banking on Trump speeding up America's decline.

Then, a closer look at Putin's war in Europe, with the former defense minister of beleaguered Ukraine. Which side will benefit from Trump's idea of peace through strength?

Then from the archives -- the fall of the Berlin Wall exactly 35 years ago was meant to settle the Cold War in America's favor. Three decades on, the backlash is reaching a crescendo. (END VIDEOTAPE)

AMANPOUR: Welcome to the program, everyone. I'm Christiane AMANPOUR in London.

In the end, it wasn't even close, as we all now know. Donald Trump's Republican Party will control the United States government with the endorsement of the popular vote.

They have taken back the White House and the Senate, while Republican- appointed conservatives dominate the Supreme Court. Analysts and party stalwarts in the United States say Trump can now govern unconstrained.

His agenda as stated includes mass deportations and deregulation at home, massive new tariffs on all foreign-made goods and a broad, increasingly isolationist foreign policy that Trump touts as peace through strength.

Gordon Sondland is Trump's former ambassador to the European Union and a supporter of his reelection bid. He joined me from Washington with the view that Trump has now a mandate for all of this.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

AMANPOUR: Ambassador Sondland, welcome back to the program. We spoke to you a little bit before the election. And I just want to start by asking you, were you surprised by this sweeping result?

SONDLAND: Well, I was surprised, primarily because the pollsters were all talking about a neck and neck race. So I think there are a lot of pollsters that are going to be out of business today.

AMANPOUR: Let us ask you now what this all means. First and foremost, as he said at his election, he said "America has given us an unprecedented and powerful mandate. We have taken back control of the Senate, et cetera, et cetera.

Now, will he -- how will he rule, do you think?

SONDLAND: Well, first of all, he will view the next four years in terms of a stopwatch. They will be hell-bent on getting as much done as quickly as possible. And because he was in the White House previously, he remembers every mistake he made in terms of personnel, in terms of legislation.

And so I think you can see a Trump administration 2.0 hitting the ground running, with executive orders, with the toughest legislation passed very quickly up front in order to codify it.

And you are going to see an incredible, incredible amount of forward movement in a very short period of time.

AMANPOUR: Ok. Let me ask you this then. When Democrats, which has been pointed out in the newspaper, had full control of government, they enacted the Affordable Care act, the Dodd/frank, the CHIPS Act, saved the auto industry, spent billions on renewable energy, infrastructure and more.

Trump has said and his people have said that even the CHIPS Act may be at risk. I mean all of these things, the Affordable Care Act which is Obamacare, et cetera. Do you think that he's going to do that kind of stuff?

In other words, reverse stuff that a previous administration put in and add to it what he has already talked about, which is mass deportations and a whole new raft of the deregulations on everything from climate to business to everything?

[11:04:52]

SONDLAND: I don't think Trump is stupid. I think he is a very, very smart man and I think he's going to look very thoughtfully and very carefully at each and every piece of legislation, executive order, et cetera and decide what comports with his agenda, what is good for the country.

And in the case where it doesn't, I think he's going to reverse or introduce his own.

Remember elections have consequences.

AMANPOUR: They do indeed. As you know, elections have been won and lost over the Affordable Care Act, the American people support it by a vast majority. And the CHIPS Act, I think, it did precisely what Trump wants to do, which is to protect American-made, you know products.

Let me ask you about this then. What about Ukraine? He has also said he will fix that.

You know, that President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has welcomed, you know, congratulated Trump, like many foreign leaders have, hoping for actual peace through strength and believing that should mean, you know, forcing Vladimir Putin to recognize the need to come to the negotiating table and not just have Ukraine bend over and surrender. What do you think?

SONDLAND: Well, I know quite a few potential members of Trump's going forward national security team. And I think Trump had the right instincts during term one, which is that most of these regimes, whether it be the Iranian regime, whether it be the Russian federation are cancers on an orderly world. And the way you eradicate a cancer is you strangle them financially first so that they don't have the funding in order to create mischief.

And I think that is the first thing you are going to see. I think these regimes, Christiane are going to need to buckle up becomes they are going to lose a tremendous amount of their cash flow in order to bring their behavior back in line and reorganize the world order again.

AMANPOUR: Nevertheless, he has spoken, you know, pretty kindly about President Vladimir Putin, President Xi Jinping. And you know the whole fear about how he likes the idea of strongmen and they are men around the world.

So I want to ask you finally, look, are you surprised, as much of the world is, that you know, Donald Trump, as everybody has said, appeared to be finished and J.D. Vance last night called it "the greatest comeback" in American political history.

But he was not disqualified by January 6th, which you also opposed, the criminal indictments, the overturning of Roe versus Wade, by his Supreme Court. None of this disqualified him? You know, the civil suit he had to pay for, y k, sexual predation, et cetera. Are you surprised again, that the American people voted for this person?

SONDLAND: The American people are pretty smart at the end of the day. I know Hillary Clinton called them a basket of deplorables but they are far from that.

I think the American people have incredible wisdom. They have taken in all of the information, including all of the prosecutions for the sexual misconduct issues. Basically they have taken in Trump as a package and have made a decision that none of these are disqualifying.

And I think the Trump comeback is a lesson to young people, which is resilience and persistence. Never ever, ever give up.

I think that is something that the U.S. stands for and I think Donald Trump personifies that.

AMANPOUR: Ambassador Gordon Sondland, thank you very much indeed.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

AMANPOUR: The American people certainly have made a historic decision. Just look at the latest cover of "Vanity Fair Magazine". It is the first time ever, for instance, a convicted felon has been elected American president. And while Sondland says resilience and persistence are Trump's lesson to young people, Vice President Kamala Harris also appealed to young supporters with a different message.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAMALA HARRIS, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: To the young people who are watching, it is ok to feel sad and disappointed. But please know it is going to be ok.

On the campaign, I would often say when we fight, we win. But here is the thing -- here is the thing, sometimes the fight takes a while. That doesn't mean we won't win. That doesn't mean we won't win.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: Coming up later on the show, the view from overseas and how the western alliance is coming to terms with Trump's reelection. One of NATOs newest members, Finland's president joins the show.

Also ahead, the China conundrum. Biden adviser Rush Doshi on how the Trump's second term will affect competition with Beijing. [11:09:35]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

AMANPOUR: Welcome back to the program.

European leaders have congratulated Donald Trump on his reelection this week. But a former U.K. ambassador to Washington says while this isn't the result they would have wanted, they must quote, "work with what we have and try to moderate the most extreme instincts".

NATO allies are anxiously bracing for a change in anticipation of what America's support might look like from a president who has consistently criticized NATO and who frames a successful alliance as a transactional deal.

[11:14:50]

AMANPOUR: So, will the United States pull back on its commitment to Europe and what does his reelection mean for Ukraine?

We turn to the leader of one of NATO's newest member countries, the Finnish President Alexander Stubb.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

AMANPOUR: President Alexander Stubb now joins me from Helsinki. Welcome back to the program.

I just want to ask you a general question to begin with. You all were there. I know you were, you know, doing your stint in government as a minister. Now, you're president during the first Trump term.

Do you remember what it was like? I mean, people called him the chaos agent. There was sort of a sense of a collective nervous breakdown happening for four years around the world.

STUBB: Well, I think there was -- probably at that time, there was more sense of surprise because a lot of people thought, including the pollsters, that Hillary Clinton would win the election. And I think Europe was then trying to come to terms with the new president called Donald Trump.

But now, this time around, everyone knows what Donald Trump stands for, I think, on foreign policy has been very clear. So, in many ways, you could say that a lot of European leaders are much better prepared and probably, therefore, much more willing and able to cooperate.

AMANPOUR: So, let me just ask you from your perspective, since you are a new NATO member and public opinion shifted in your country to allow you to join because of the Russian invasion of -- full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

There is a huge debate in Washington as to what President Trump will do to resolve or to continue this certainly American help for Ukraine. What do you think? What do you expect? And can you pick up any slack? STUBB: Well, I think the starting point is to say that we need to work together with Ukraine. And you also have to, I think, take President Trump at face value. When he says something, he does it.

And of course, he's talked a lot about getting peace done both in Ukraine and in the Middle East. And I think the window of opportunity that we have right now is from when the election result came to probably inauguration day. And then we'll see what happens.

You know, my starting point is that Zelenskyy will probably need four things. One is territory. Two is security and security guarantees. Number three is justice. So, Russian war criminals indicted. And then number four is reconstruction.

And I'm sure that President Donald Trump elect and his administration are already working with the Ukrainians on that.

AMANPOUR: And what about the notion of Trump proofing? And this is, what I mean by this, is if Trump decides to change the terms of NATO protection and all the things that he said before?

We've heard President Macron, who was in Budapest, as you know, there was a big meeting of European leaders. Zelenskyy was there as well. He has said, Europe must stop outsourcing its security and write its own destiny.

You know, there's an idea that, you know, banding together with Germany, the two big powers in Europe, but both are very, very, very grievously wounded. Macron kind of shot himself in the foot with that election that he basically lost. He's got a massive budget hole. Scholz's coalition has fallen apart.

Where do you think Europe stands in terms of being self-sufficient?

STUBB: Well, two points on this. First, Europe needs the United States, and the United States needs Europe. Because the U.S. wants to be a superpower, and in order for it to be able to compete with China it needs allies.

Those closest allies come from Europe. There are about 40 of us who have both the same values and interest that the United States have.

Now, one thing that I tell my European colleagues is it's time to start taking care of our own security a little bit more than what we will see with a new Trump administration.

I think, correctly so, he's going to force or at least persuade European states to increase their defense budgets. And remember, that in 2014, there were only three countries in NATO that hit that 2 percent margin. Now, there are 23.

So, the movement is already there, but I would argue that we are probably going to have to increase our defense expenditure. And then the way in which it happens is a different story.

I think we do it for two reasons. One, because the United States wants it; and two, because it's in our self interest in the current security political situation.

AMANPOUR: I just want to play this soundbite because I know it's kind of repeating what you just said, but this is also the view of the new NATO secretary general, Mark Rutte.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARK RUTTE, NATO SECRETARY GENERAL: When he was president, he was the one in NATO who stimulated us to move over the 2 percent. And now, also thanks to him, NATO, if you take out the numbers of the U.S. for a moment, is above the 2 percent.

[11:19:49]

RUTTE: And I think very much that is his doing, his success. And we need to do more. We know this.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: So, I just wanted to put that out there, which you commented on, but you know, you talked about alliances. Trump is notoriously skeptical of alliances. And it was considered when Biden became president that he did a lot to restore the strength of the transatlantic alliance.

So, on one issue, if Donald Trump decides that America will no longer pay that amount to Ukraine, deliver that amount of weapons to Ukraine, can Europe, does Europe have the wherewithal to fill the necessary gap?

STUBB: Well, Europe has already filled the necessary gap. I think there's this narrative that the U.S. has done more than Europe. That's not the case. It's about 50/50.

If you then start looking at, say, GDP per capita, Finland is the fifth biggest donor. If you, of course, look at raw donations, then it comes from the U.S.

And I do think that Europe needs to take more responsibility. But this is probably one of the incentives also to start ending the war or trying to find some kind of a peace settlement.

I think the money funnels, at the end of the day, are going to be a little bit more in a win-win situation, because, of course, when the war is over it's going to be all about reconstruction.

And suddenly, we're going to start seeing a lot of companies, European, American and others, who want to come and do the reconstruction of Ukraine.

But I do think that Europeans understand that we have to take more responsibility. But we will survive and we will survive together with the United States.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

AMANPOUR: Coming up, my next guest, Rush Doshi, on how China views the United States hurtling toward decline.

[11:21:31]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

AMANPOUR: Welcome back.

The world now knows that Donald Trump will again lead the world's most powerful nation. But there is another one vying for that very title, China.

It was barely mentioned during the campaign but many analysts and experts say the U.S.-China rivalry will dominate this century, and perhaps, even be decided by the end of this decade.

So, what are the possible scenarios ahead in a fundamentally-changed world?

Rush Doshi is a former deputy senior director for China and Taiwan on the National Security Council. He is also the author of "The Long Game: China's Grand Strategy to Displace American Order. And he joined me from Washington.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

AMANPOUR: Rush Doshi, welcome to the program.

DOSHI: Thank you, it is great to be here.

AMANPOUR: First, let's hear the stakes. What are the stakes of Beijing's efforts to dispatch the U.S. as the superpower?

DOSHI: Yes. It is a great question. And I think many of the folks in the Biden administration, and also on both ends, both political parties, understood that this is the decisive decade in a competition with China.

In many ways, if the United States doesn't take sort of urgent action, they could fall behind China technologically. They could become dependent on China economically. They might even be defeated by China militarily in the Taiwan Strait or in the South China Sea. So this decade really counts.

And the stakes are high too because in sector after sector in the economic and tech side, China is making major gains. It's an innovative country. And there is a real question about what the United States will do if sector after sector, it falls behind. So automotives is the most recent example.

So the stakes are pretty enormous for Washington but also for the average American citizen. The stakes are -- you know, can the U.S. basically maintain its position as China puts pressure on every sort of foundational element of American power.

AMANPOUR: So you credit Donald Trump with having been, I guess, the first president to really put competition on the table. And yet, you say that yes, it was a great idea, or it was a positive thing but --- but what is the "but"?

DOSHI: Well yes. I think that President Trump in his campaign in 2015 helped articulate this critique, this idea that maybe the international trading system or some of the terms (ph) of trade with China weren't serving American interests, that we were seeing de- industrialization across the board.

But the question was then what do we do next? Now, President Trump's approach was to raise tariffs on China, an approach that I think you see that the Biden administration continued elements of.

There was an additional tariff increase on China in the Biden administration but it's much more narrowly-tailored than President Trump's.

But the point of the tariff increase in the Trump administration was to get a deal, a deal that would allow America to do something members of both parties want to do -- reindustrialize, rebuild its manufacturing sector.

I think the problem in part, and I kind of hate to put it this way, is that President Trump was so eager for a trade deal he took a bad deal. He wanted a deal ahead of his reelection campaign, and the deal he took was one that essentially led the United States to keep importing Chinese manufactured goods.

China wouldn't change its unfair practices and America would just export commodities to China. That was the phase one trade deal and that trade, commodities for manufactured goods, is a time-tested recipe for industrial decline.

So the diagnosis was right. I think his staff did not want that deal but ultimately he thought that deal was in his own interest and that is the one that he pursued.

And you see that kind of pattern across a lot of key issues where there is bipartisan consensus on China. So President Trump takes his own approach that's outside that norm.

AMANPOUR: So again, bipartisan consensus, I guess that's also ineffective (ph) but what would have been the right way not to squander what Trump started off by doing, the tariffs? What would have been the right deal or the right next step?

[11:29:55]

DOSHI: Well, there's a few things that could have been a part of a different approach here. I think one, you wanted a -- maybe a more tailored set of tariffs. Because it's not every single manufactured product in China that is a concern to American workers, American industry. You know, putting tariffs on everything can be inflationary.

So there is an element of calibration that could have been there. More fundamentally than that, I mean the focus of negotiations for a long time was on getting China to change its industrial policy approaches. And that really should have been the focus of the phase one trade deal rather than saying all right, we will accept this deal if you buy our commodities.

Once we accepted the deal with them, even if it was an interim we could have lost the ability to sustain the case on industrial policy.

Now, all of this was five or six years ago. But the point is, now in a second Trump term, will there be a desire to strike a quick deal again or will he stay the course and push harder for the kind of changes on industrial policy that the United States wants to see that give our manufacturers a better chance to compete?

AMANPOUR: How interesting. Rush Doshi, thank you so much for this analysis. Thank you.

DOSHI: Thanks very much.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

AMANPOUR: When we come back, Trump says he will end Russia's war in Ukraine on day one but he hasn't said who he wants to win. The country's former defense minister joins us next.

[11:31:06]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

AMANPOUR: Welcome back to the program.

While Israel's government might be comforted by Donald Trump's return, America's other ally at war, Ukraine, is undoubtedly feeling more uncertain about America's promise to defend it.

Trump's affinity for Putin and his insistence that he could end the war in a day has raised fears that his administration could mean serious setbacks for the delivery of aid and weapons or push Ukraine toward a bad peace deal.

His vice president, J.D. Vance has described a peace plan favorable to the Russians, in which they would keep the land they've taken, and a demilitarized zone would be erected along the border.

So, I asked the former Defense minister Andriy Zagorodnyuk whether President Zelenskyy could bank on Trump's stated policy of peace through strength.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

AMANPOUR: Welcome back to our program. And we really want to get your perspective in the wake of a new direction in American leadership.

So, peace through strength of what -- you know, what Trump is saying. How do you interpret that?

ANDRIY ZAGORODNYUK, UKRAINE FORMER DEFENSE MINISTER: Well, the situation is that President Putin is clearly adamant to keep on war on Ukraine. And the only thing which can stop him is that we construct the perspective that he loses. So, that's the only way. If he clearly sees the perspective of losing, if he sees the

perspective of some disaster at home, either economic or military or both, then he will consider the ideas of somehow stopping the war, and that's what we need to construct.

All other options are not going to work with him and that's been tried for the last at least 10 years and that never worked.

So, that's a person who understands only the strengths -- strengths of the other side. And if he sees the strength, if he sees the opportunity that his position may be extremely vulnerable, extremely difficult, then he would consider some sort of negotiations or some sort of way out and stopping the war.

So far, he doesn't see that.

AMANPOUR: Putin has said that Donald Trump's claim to be able to end this war in one day, which is what he said throughout the campaign is, quote, "an over exaggeration".

And you say -- what many analysts say -- that yes, strength is the only thing that Putin understands.

Let me just play what J. D. Vance has said about it and the fact that they believe you should essentially sue for peace. Here's what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

J.D. VANCE, VICE PRESIDENT-ELECT OF THE UNITED STATES: I think what this looks like is Trump sits down, he says to the Russians, the Ukrainians, the Europeans, you guys need to figure out what does a peaceful settlement look like?

And what it probably looks like is something like the current line of demarcation between Russia and Ukraine, that becomes like a demilitarized zone. It's heavily fortified so, the Russians don't invade again.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: Does that sound like it makes sense to you?

ZAGORODNYUK: This is not the war about territory. This is the war about existence of Ukraine. It's existential war for Ukraine. And this is a war about the world order, international law, et cetera. So, this is not about some regions or some villages or some towns.

So, the -- we have seen quite a lot of ideas coming from all kinds of politicians and policymakers and analysts saying that, oh, in order to get peace, Ukraine needs to cede some territories and so on. This is complete deviation from actually the actual situation.

Putin is not waging this war to get some a little bit more territory. His goals are much more strategic and much more serious and much bigger than that. So, we shouldn't be talking about the territories. We should be

talking about the principle matters of the war. And Putin needs to see that his endeavor, his adventure failed.

AMANPOUR: So, let me ask you on the on -- the on the ground. We have heard your defense chief of -- chief of the military, General Syrskyi and other senior leaders, including soldiers defending on the ground.

[11:39:56]

AMANPOUR: I mean things are very, very tough, they say. Very, very tough. Even in Kursk, which you all did as a surprise and as a show of strength, and you know, easily, you know, occupied that part of Russian territory.

They're pushing you back. Apparently, they've got North Korean soldiers.

It's really bad on the frontline. How do you assess that? And what is the number one thing you need?

ZAGORODNYUK: Well, clearly, we should always remember that things were always tough and there's been all tough world all the way through for the last three years.

And also, we've been always fighting it with the one hand tied back, because we always have some limitations. We have limitations of using the firepower. We have constant shortage of the weapons. And we have a shortage of some classes of weapons, for example air power.

So yes, things are very extremely difficult. And we certainly need that all these issues resolved. To be honest, there's nothing new which appeared over the last week or months of our requests and our sort of pledges to the allies.

We still need the shells. We still need weapons. We still need ground- based air defense. We still need to protect our cities, but we do need to bump up the long-range firepower capabilities such as airpower and missiles.

And all these restrictions such as like don't shoot at Russians or don't shoot at Russian land, I mean, they just don't make militarily any sense to be honest. I mean --

AMANPOUR: And do you think --

ZAGORODNYUK: -- like if --

AMANPOUR: Do you think you're going to get --

ZAGORODNYUK: Sorry?

AMANPOUR: Do you think that's going to change under a President Trump?

ZAGORODNYUK: Well, we don't know, of course, because this is a new administration and there will be a new policy and we'll have to see what happens.

All we hear from Donald Trump, which is -- I have to say, encouraging, is that he wants to stop the war. So, we also want to stop the war. We want the war to end, because nobody in Ukraine enjoys that at all. And we obviously all want to -- this to be -- to be over.

The only thing is that concessions are not going to stop the war. The only thing which can stop the war is strength. So, if he wants to stop the war, really, like -- then he will have to face the reality that Putin -- the nature of Putin's regime. And we need to show him strength and we need to show him a perspective of losing. And that gives us a chance to stop it.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

AMANPOUR: And coming up on the program, 35 years since the fall of the Berlin Wall, how that era of hope and democracy is all but over across the former Soviet Union.

[11:42:23]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

AMANPOUR: Welcome back to the program.

Now, exactly 35 years ago, with hammer and chisel in hand, German crowds began to tear down the Berlin Wall. Until that day, November 9th, 1989, it stood as the greatest symbol of the Cold War division of Europe and its fall promised to usher in a new era of liberal democracy.

That vision was triggered by the Soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev, and his policies of openness, and more freedom, glasnost and perestroika.

But, that era feels further away than ever now with Donald Trump's reelection in America and his praise for Russia's authoritarian President Vladimir Putin, who once called the fall of the Soviet Union, the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century.

On this 35th anniversary, we go back to my archives and my interview with Gorbachev, taped a decade after the fall of the Wall and his words that sound so prescient today.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

AMANPOUR: 10 years ago, the Berlin Wall came down. Piece by small concrete piece, East and west Germans chiseling in a frenzy of newfound freedom.

Today, some observers say a statue should stand in every east European capital, a statue to Mikhail Gorbachev for it was he who allowed their independence, he who changed history. For the West, it was a moment of triumph over tyranny.

But Gorbachev had been a committed communist. So how did he feel when he saw everyone tear down that wall? MIKHAIL GORBACHEV, FORMER SOVIET UNION PRESIDENT (through translator):

By that time, I had changed my mind about many things. And in 1988, I came to the conclusion that the system could not be improved. We needed political reform and more freedom. Freedom of choice, political parties, give people some oxygen.

AMANPOUR: How did you feel yourself, watching that wall come down?

GORBACHEV: You know, there is a lot of talk about the wall. But for me as a politician, it is just a moment, it is a sign, a symbolic event. The wall had been built when confrontation reached a very acute stage.

AMANPOUR: Now, confrontation was ending and mostly peaceful revolutions swept across Europe that year. First Poland, then Hungary, East Germany, Czechoslovakia, and Romania.

[11:49:46]

AMANPOUR: In the midst of all of this, Gorbachev met the U.S. President George Bush, on a warship off the island of Malta to declare the Cold War over.

GORBACHEV: You know, the model that had been implemented in the Soviet Union and forced on East and Middle European countries after the Second World War lost. But I'm still devoted to socialism. If you think of socialism as freedom, social justice, democracy, where individuals play a significant role.

Look at western Europe. Most of them are run by social democrats and there is nothing bad about it.

AMANPOUR: Indeed, 10 years later, many are saying the unbridled capitalism that followed communism has unleashed misery on citizens who had had all their social needs taken care of, especially in the former Soviet Union.

Mr. President, you were regarded by many people in this world as a hero for causing the end of tyranny and the collapse of communism. But you were also criticized heavily by those who say you opened a Pandora's box and they say look at the strife now, look at the economic chaos, look at the Mafia structure, look at the corruption.

They say that you opened and started a plan that you did not know how to finish.

GORBACHEV: That is in accusation of pygmies (ph). I do not accept it. I can give you the following answer. First, there are no lucky (ph) reformers. We had a concept. Give up totalitarianism, lead society to freedom, political, ideological, and religious pluralism, economic freedom, too.

So I didn't know where we were heading but when such developments get underway, no one can predict specifically what it will lead to.

Look at how the West was teaching Russia market reforms. Just that one thing and see how they got mixed up and look what we have in Russia as a result today.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

AMANPOUR: Just a note about a warning from the esteemed American historian Arthur Schlezinger (ph), who wrote around that very time that Western triumphalism over quote, "winning the Cold War" would mask major challenges that the United States and other democracies would also soon confront.

This is what he wrote as the 20th century drew to a close. "The political, economic, and moral failures of democracy had handed the initiative to totalitarianism. Something like this could happen again.

If democracy failed to construct a humane, prosperous, and peaceful world, it will invite the rise of alternative creeds apt to be based, like fascism and communism, on flight from freedom and surrender to authority."

When we come back the view from Israel's destruction of Gaza, a year after it's invaded and viciously attacked by Hamas.

Jan Egeland on the humanitarian toll that we cannot ignore.

[11:52:52]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

AMANPOUR: And finally, to Israel and the major headline that you might have missed amid all the election coverage this week. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has fired his defense minister, Yoav Gallant, who had complained that there was no evident political strategy to their war on Gaza and no ceasefire deal to return the Israeli hostages.

Netanyahu has warmly praised Trump's reelection.

Meantime, Gaza continues to face a daily pounding, especially in the north, which many fear will lead to the permanent displacement of Palestinian residents.

I have been speaking with Jan Egeland, secretary general of the Norwegian Refugee Council, which constantly has tried to get desperately needed humanitarian aid into Gaza. He joined me from inside via a dodgy Skype connection to tell me what he's seeing there.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAN EGELAND, SECRETARY GENERAL, NORWEGIAN REFUGEE COUNCIL: Gaza is destroyed. There is no other way to describe it. It is a densely populated urban area, filled to the brim with refugees, to start with, and it is destroyed.

There are tens of thousands of dead people, and most of the families I meet, including my own Gaza Palestinian colleagues, they have been chased around the map here 10 times.

They have lost their home, the home of their relatives, the home of their aunt, their uncle, et cetera. They are really on the bottom of the pit. This senseless war has to end.

We have some humanitarian help from the Biden administration but they were incapable, incapable of doing anything to end the violence. And, also, the (INAUDIBLE) of the population here.

Donald Trump has said I will end this war, I will bring peace. He says he is a forceful politician.

[11:59:39]

EGELAND: I think he can exert pressure on the strongest party, which is Israel, and maybe can work with Arab and other nations to make the Palestinian side come together, be coherent, recognize Israel, release the hostages, so that not more thousands of more children are killed.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: That is all we have time for. And don't forget, you can find all of our shows online as podcasts at cnn.com/audio and on all other major platforms.

I'm Christiane Amanpour in London, thank you for watching. And I'll see you again next week.