Return to Transcripts main page

The Amanpour Hour

Interview With Former Ambassador To NATO Julianne Smith; Interview With The Smithsonian Institution Secretary Lonnie Bunch; China Appears To Build Full Scale Mock-Up Of U.S. Warship; Interview With Former British Prime Minister Theresa May About The Salisbury Poisonings; A Cycle Of Destruction And Rebirth; Running With The Bulls. Aired 11a-12p ET

Aired July 11, 2026 - 11:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:00:41]

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

Here's where we're headed this week.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: There was tremendous unity in that room.

AMANPOUR: Fewer than usual surprises and setbacks at the latest NATO summit. There was high praise, increased defense spending and support for Ukraine.

What next? I asked former U.S. Representative to NATO Julianne Smith.

Then Trump calls him a radical. But what does he say? My conversation with the Secretary of the Smithsonian, Lonnie Bunch.

LONNIE G. BUNCH III, SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION SECRETARY: It scares me when people aren't brave enough to face their history.

AMANPOUR: And --

WILL RIPLEY, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: The details suggest a carefully built, full scale replica of one of America's main guided missile destroyers.

AMANPOUR: The warship in the middle of a desert. How China is mocking up American naval vessels to prepare for possible confrontation.

Also ahead --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There was enough poisoning that bottle to kill 10,000 people.

AMANPOUR: "THE SPY NEXT DOOR": a new documentary about the Russian poisonings in England that shocked the world.

In a rare interview, I speak to former British prime minister, Theresa May, about facing that crisis.

And today -- a city rising from the ashes only to be destroyed time and time again. From my archives, how Lebanon's capital, Beirut, symbolizes a region under constant bombardment.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

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

The transatlantic alliance descended on Ankara, Turkey this week for a crucial NATO summit. President Trump had threatened to boycott but he did go and afterwards reported a thaw in the usual frosty bust ups with allies.

After insulting them all on day one, Trump declared they had a great meeting with a lot of love and unity in the room.

For their part, NATO allies indicated they're done with Trump's bullying and have upped their defense spending for their own security.

Even his old sparring partner, the Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, seemed to impress Trump with his recent counterattacks on Russia.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: We've actually developed a good relationship, it's hard to believe, right. From the Oval Office to now, we've developed -- I think we've developed a very good relationship. And --

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT: And this is not the end.

TRUMP: No, this is -- this is going to be the beginning maybe.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: Then again, on Iran, Trump says the truce is off and there were more strikes this week. He also said he didn't want to go back to full-on war. So how does it all shake out?

I asked Julianne Smith, former U.S. Ambassador to NATO.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

AMANPOUR: Ambassador Smith, welcome to the program.

JULIANNE SMITH, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO NATO: Thank you. Good to be back.

AMANPOUR: Good to have you with us.

I just want to ask you, of course, the big story, really, the hot war seems to have been rekindled between the United States and Iran. What do you make of that fact?

And where do you think it could actually end up, or is it just going to be a constant sort of low-level war?

SMITH: Well, this is the problem. We could be entering a phase where this is just the status quo. There's tremendous uncertainty, tremendous instability in the Strait.

Companies do not feel secure shipping their goods, shipping oil through the Strait. And our economies will react to that uncertainty.

We were just getting to the point where the markets were feeling stable. We were seeing positive reactions around the globe.

But now I think the question is, are we just entering a period where this is going to be part of our daily lives, that we will not be able anytime soon to reach some sort of lasting ceasefire in the region that will allow those ships finally to safely transit the Strait of Hormuz?

AMANPOUR: And then, of course, all the other issues, like the nuclear issue and the like, which is also at stake. So, do you think this issue -- or how do you think it affects the alliance? You saw, I'm sure, President Trump's, you know, handling of the NATO summit, his farewell press conference.

[11:04:447]

AMANPOUR: Do you agree with him that it ended with unity and, as he said, much love? In other words, do you think at least the alliance is together?

SMITH: Well, it was a very short summit. It was a social dinner on the first evening and one session the next morning. But what transpired between day one and day two was notably different.

Day one was very scratchy. The president arrived expressing tremendous anger, frustration with specific allies over the Iran war.

He's been frustrated with Spain, that the U.S. was not able to use Spanish airspace to operationalize the intervention, the war that was begun with Israel.

And then there were complaints about the fact that all of NATO had, quote, "let the United States down", that NATO hadn't shown up for the United States.

So, going into the summit, I think the allies felt uncertain about what the outcome would be, whether or not the U.S. would be announcing any changes to its force posture in Europe.

But we got to day two. The president was in a different mood. He was upbeat. He felt good about the numbers that the secretary-general had given him about increases in defense spending and left claiming that NATO is more united than ever. But we've seen this movie before. This is what happened last year in

The Hague. And the question is, what comes next? Should we all breathe a sigh of relief that we were able to get through, or is this just another up-and-down chapter where he likes Europe on one day and dislikes them another?

AMANPOUR: So, that brings me to this really interesting, deeply reported "Wall Street Journal" article about, over the past six months, how Europe has tried to figure out how, in fact, to deal with this situation.

Now, according to this, one leader from Southern Europe is reported to have told the group, "you are not dealing with an administration that has processes. You're dealing with a single, volatile individual."

Obviously, they mean President Trump, because this is all about how to deal with President Trump and keep NATO on track. Do you agree with that assessment?

SMITH: I do agree with the assessment. NATO summits are normally, for decades, they've been about allies coming together to talk about shared threats and challenges. They're there to announce new policies, new initiatives to deal with Russia, threats in the Middle East, threats in the Arctic, challenges elsewhere.

What's changed is NATO summits now are about managing one person and one country, and that is the United States. And so, it becomes a balancing act that's more about one person than about the collective strength of the alliance as a whole.

So, of course, I'm personally relieved to see that we came out of the other side of the summit with a united message and some sense of resolve and support for Ukraine. That's a good thing.

But I worry that if we continue to get into this cycle where it's just about managing the United States, that NATO is distracted and unable to focus collectively as allies on those shared challenges and threats.

AMANPOUR: So, interestingly, the reporting after this summit suggested, and actually they quoted certain European leaders there, saying, yes, you know, perhaps before it was about, you know, trying to figure out Trump, et cetera.

But now they say, after this whole year and a half of the second administration, this is no longer -- we've had enough of the bullying, we are doing this because of our own security.

SMITH: Well, allies are stepping up, let's not deny that. And we should applaud all of those efforts. I mean, by the best calculations, Europe will spend upwards of a trillion euros on their own defense over the next decade.

We have to applaud all of those efforts and celebrate them. This is something that the United States has been asking for a very long time. And it is important that they do it for their own security, not just because the United States and President Trump is bullying them into it.

They really need to do it to provide for their own security. So, this is a good thing.

I question whether or not those efforts in Europe are well-coordinated and whether or not they're leading to some potential fragmentation across the continent. But all in all, this is a positive development for the NATO alliance, full stop.

AMANPOUR: Obviously, there's a debate as to whether to go with Secretary General Rutte's, let's keep him on side, let's keep giving Trump wins, and the potential Macron version of let's do our own thing and let's, you know, mitigate for this, what he called a security risk.

But imagine the picture of Danish and French soldiers in Greenland ready to attack American troops if they invaded.

SMITH: No one should underestimate the impact of the Greenland chapter on the state of the transatlantic relationship.

[11:09:50]

SMITH: We may have forgotten here in the United States what President Trump said late last year or early this year on getting or taking Greenland. We may consider it to be in the rear-view mirror, although he did mention Greenland when he got to Turkey for the NATO summit.

But in Europe, they have not forgotten Greenland. They have not forgotten that the strongest and most powerful member of the NATO alliance once threatened to take the territory of another NATO ally.

That has shaken this alliance to its core. It has undermined trust with our allies and led many of them to conclude that there is no going back. They are now turning the page on 80 years of history of working hand in glove with the United States.

This does not mean that the transatlantic relationship is over. I'm not here to issue rites, last rites on that relationship. But what it does mean is that the trust that once sat at the foundation of this relationship now has been lost.

And that will have consequences for U.S. industry. It will have consequences for the United States government. And it will have consequences for this incredible global network of partners and allies that the United States has held on to for decades.

AMANPOUR: Ambassador Julianne Smith, thank you so much for being with us.

SMITH: Thank you.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

AMANPOUR: Coming up later on the show, Britain's former prime minister, Theresa May, joins me on the Russia threat and poisonings that gripped the world.

But right ahead, the White House says radicals are running the Smithsonian. We'll hear from the head of that institution next.

[11:11:34]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

AMANPOUR: Welcome back to the program.

"Radical activists are running Americas Smithsonian Institution," the White House says in a scathing new report it dropped on Independence Day, no less.

Trump has repeatedly lashed out at the prestigious museum group and its leader, Lonnie Bunch, as his administration downplays America's origin story of slavery and wages a wider ideological battle over how best to remember U.S. history.

Just to note, his administration just won court approval to replace educational panels at George Washington's Philadelphia home about the first president's slaves.

An early Trump executive order had said federally-owned or controlled historic sites must not, quote, "disparage" Americans past or living, and should focus on, quote, "the greatness of the achievements and progress of the American people".

Well, I got Secretary Bunch's reactions to Trump's broadsides when we spoke just before July 4th.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BUNCH III: I think it's really important that we have a commitment to telling the complete story of America, to tell a story that really is a story of many peoples who have shaped this nation, some that people want to not talk about.

But I think our job is to say, how do we tell an accurate history driven by scholarship that's nonpartisan, that challenges America to live up to its ideals, that celebrates America, but also celebrates that the great strength of America is that people have voted, debated, pushed to help America live up to those ideals.

So, it's our job to tell an accurate, complex, and truthful history.

AMANPOUR: You tell a story in your memoir about a -- you know, as a young historian, you met Princy Jenkins. At the time, he was a man in his 90s, grandson of enslaved people at a plantation in South Carolina.

And he told you, as a historian, your job better be to help people remember not just what they want to remember, but what they need to remember. How did those words first, you know, hit you, and how do you think about them now at this time? BUNCH III: You know, when he said that, I realized that those words were going to shape the rest of my career, that it really was important to understand what people knew, so that you can sort of celebrate those stories, but to also say, but it's also important to understand stories that you may not want to know, because they're all part of shaping who we are.

And so, for me, Princy Jenkins' words are really my North Star. Every day, I think about the fact that he challenged me to make sure I help people become better by understanding the complexity of the past.

AMANPOUR: Let me now bring up some of the invectives, if I could, I don't know, use that term, from the president himself. Quote, "The Smithsonian is out of control," in caps, "where everything discussed is how horrible our country is, how bad slavery was." Respond.

BUNCH III: Well, I think that, first of all, if you go through the Smithsonian, as I do almost every day, and you look at the stories we tell, it is a complex story, but it's a story that celebrates America in many ways, but also argues that there's nothing wrong with helping a nation realize that it's a work in progress, that people have struggled to end slavery, struggled to make sure there was fairness in terms of issues of gender.

[11:19:46]

BUNCH III: So, for me it really is not saying we're trying to criticize America or say what a horrible place, we're just simply saying you celebrate America because in some ways America has grappled with some of the greatest challenges it's faced.

And that for me what's important is I believe that Americans are this amazingly brave people who, you know, defeated Nazism and the like, and it scares me when people aren't brave enough to face their history.

And in some ways, you have to face it anyway. You know, there's no way of running away from the impact of immigration or the impact of labor issues.

So, for me it's really an opportunity to basically say, let us understand America. We celebrate, we commemorate, but the goal is to understand. And you can only understand it when you grapple with the complexity of who we once were. It shapes who we are today and hopefully can point us towards a better future.

AMANPOUR: And it's hard. It's a challenge for you. I mean, you have been in the crosshairs -- the Smithsonian has been in the crosshairs of this administration.

There was an executive order by President Trump accusing the Smithsonian of promoting, quote, "narratives that portray American and Western values as inherently harmful and oppressive". And it's called for an end to your spending on programs and exhibitions that, quote, "degrade shared American values, divide Americans by race, or promote ideologies inconsistent with federal law". Is that what you do, Secretary Lonnie Bunch?

BUNCH III: You know what we do? We try to tell a complicated story that is driven by the best nonpartisan scholarship we have. And that candidly, I learn when everybody offers criticism, I listen. I say, are we doing the best we can? How do we convey the stories in a way that the public will understand?

But the reality is the North Star for us is the notion of how our scholarship helps America understand the complexity, the nuance, the subtlety.

It's a hard thing to do. Many people want simple answers to complex questions. Our job is to sometimes do that, but more importantly, give you questions and answers that will make you understand the complexity of who we are as a nation.

And I take great pride in what the Smithsonian has done. It is not a place that attacks America. It is a place that celebrates America by helping people understand the complexity of who we are.

AMANPOUR: You know, I was struck by some of the research I read, and you spoke about a meeting with President Trump, and I believe you showed him around the Smithsonian.

And you had a different experience with him than some of these posts would suggest on Truth Social, or some of the executive order writings, or some of the things that some of his lieutenants, for instance, write, like Russell Vought, who, you know, is basically saying, "We wish to be assured that none of the leadership of the Smithsonian Museums is confused about the fact that the United States has been among the greatest forces for good in the history of the world."

Tell me how your actual meeting with Trump at the Smithsonian went.

BUNCH III: Well, you know, that was a tour I gave him of the National Museum of African-American History and Culture, where I was the founding director. And candidly, it was a tour where we grappled with the challenges, and he came out saying it was a good experience.

And so, in many ways, I felt that part of the job of the Smithsonian is to give everybody an opportunity to educate, to be educated, to learn something new. And I think he learned something new as he walked through the museum.

You know, I think that it's important that I am not trying to say the Smithsonian versus the administration. All I'm trying to do is to say that we want to help America, and we're doing the best we can by being nonpartisan and really being driven by the best scholarship.

AMANPOUR: Lonnie Bunch, thank you so much.

BUNCH III: My great pleasure. Thank you.

(END VIDEOTAPE) AMANPOUR: And Lonnie Bunch reiterates that promise, that mission to tell the whole American story in response to Trump's latest broadsides.

Now, up ahead, a glimpse into how China might be preparing for war with a massive military mock up you need to see to believe.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RIPLEY: At first, it looks like any American warship at sea. Then you notice the sand.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[11:24:11]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

AMANPOUR: Welcome back.

China is telling the world not to, quote, "overinterpret" the missile it test-fired from a nuclear-powered submarine into the Pacific this week.

But that's not calming its neighbors' nerves. Australia says it comes in the context of a rapid and secretive military buildup by Beijing. While Taiwan, a possible Chinese target, called it an attempt to intimidate the international community.

There's no doubt that China is readying for any military scenario.

Our Will Ripley brings us this fascinating discovery about the lengths Beijing is going to.

Here's his report from a watchful Taiwan.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

WILL RIPLEY, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: At first, it looks like any American warship at sea. Then you notice the sand.

More than a thousand miles from the nearest coastline, hundreds of miles from any major city, deep inside the western Chinese desert, what appears to be a full-scale mockup of a U.S. Navy Arleigh Burke- class destroyer.

[11:29:52]

RIPLEY: Look at it side-by-side with the USS Fitzgerald. The resemblance is striking. Both are around 510 feet long.

At the back, the helicopter flight deck used to launch and recover naval helicopters.

Next are the vertical launch systems, cells used to fire guided munitions like the Tomahawk cruise missile, heavily-used in the conflict with Iran.

This is the bridge and command area where navigation, communications, and combat operations are controlled. At the front is the deck gun used for surface targets, air threats, and shore bombardment.

Together, the details suggest a carefully-built, full-scale replica of one of America's main guided missile destroyers, workhorses of the U.S. Navy fleet, more than 70 sailing in oceans around the world.

If conflict ever erupts over Taiwan, these destroyers would likely be among the first U.S. warships deployed.

Hans Su analyzes China's military for Taiwan's top defense research institute.

Why would China go through all the effort and expense to build this?

HANS SU, DIRECTOR, INSTITUTE FOR NATIONAL DEFENSE AND SECURITY RESEARCH: The Chinese they try to prepare everything from A to Z.

SU (through translator): The Chinese military has ballistic missiles that can attack from high angles and cruise missiles that can attack horizontally.

So, they're trying to combine both and enhance their anti-access and area denial capability.

RIPLEY: He says they're trying to improve the accuracy of China's newest hypersonic anti-ship missiles displayed at Beijing's military parade last year.

This 3D replica is covered with antennas designed to simulate the radar signature of an American warship, helping China detect, identify, and perhaps target the real thing.

It's located in Xinjiang, the same area where the People's Liberation Army built 2D flat mock-ups of U.S. aircraft carriers and destroyers several years ago, even putting them on tracks, analysts say, to move at the speed of actual ships.

Have they ever built a 3D mock-up before?

JOSEPH WEN, OSINT RESEARCHER, TAIWAN INSPIRATION ASSOCIATION: It's first time.

RIPLEY: Open-source intelligence analyst Joseph Wen first spotted the mock-up when it was still under construction about a month ago.

WEN (through translator): I do think this is quite surprising. The scale of the construction is really massive.

RIPLEY: What message are they trying to send by building this?

WEN: The message that they are sending is China is always preparing for war. RIPLEY: Under leader Xi Jinping, China has poured billions into modernizing its military, from aircraft carriers and nuclear weapons to artificial intelligence.

The PLA has also long trained using mock-ups of everything from U.S. military assets to Taiwan's presidential office.

On China's tightly-controlled social media, censors are allowing comments like these.

"The U.S. military's premier escort warships, long regarded as a source of pride, have now become designated targets for Chinese missiles."

"They are nothing more than targets sitting in the desert, waiting to be hit."

Will Ripley, CNN, Taipei.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

AMANPOUR: Now Will Ripley reached out to the Pentagon, to the U.S. Pacific Fleet, and to China's defense ministry and got no response.

Coming up next -- it was one of Russia's most egregious assassination attempts on foreign soil. I talked to the former British prime minister, Theresa May, about the Salisbury poisonings.

[11:33:13]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

AMANPOUR: Welcome back to the program.

It was the Russian attack on a small English town that shocked the world in 2018, an assassination attempt against the double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia. Their would-be killers had enough nerve agent Novichok to kill thousands.

Now that extraordinary story is being unpacked in the new CNN documentary "THE SALISBURY POISONINGS: A SPY NEXT DOOR".

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Salisbury is a small city. What happened doesn't sound like it's something that happens in your town.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Two people were having a medical episode.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Immediately, this didn't look right. They had very unusual symptoms. Somebody said, you're not going to believe what I've just found out. Something has poisoned these people.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Turns out that he was a Russian spy.

(END VIDEO CLIP) AMANPOUR: Featured in that documentary is the former British prime minister Theresa May, who oversaw the British response and rallied the world to action against Russia.

She spoke to me about that time and what she thinks of the challenges the West faces today.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

AMANPOUR: Prime Minister May, welcome to the program.

THERESA MAY, FORMER BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: Thank you.

AMANPOUR: You have taken part with other people in this new documentary which is airing on CNN about the Skripal poisonings. That obviously happened during your prime ministership.

Take us back to that moment when you heard about it and what went through your mind.

MAY: When I first heard about it, it was presented to me as two people who'd been found on a park bench who were obviously ill. But at that stage, it wasn't entirely clear what the problem was.

And there was a hope that actually this was something that was explicable, a drug issue or something like that, rather than being what it turned out to be, obviously the chemical weapon, the nerve agent.

[11:39:50]

MAY: So, at that point in time, there's a sort of, you hope for the best, but then you have to start thinking and preparing for the worst.

AMANPOUR: And the worst was that, I think, one way or another, essentially it was an act of war by a hostile state on the United Kingdom.

MAY: Yes. I mean, the fact that initially there were sort of two people on a park bench, ok, well, this may be more than just something that would naturally be explicable.

And then, of course, you're told that Sergei Skripal had worked for Russian intelligence.

AMANPOUR: You couldn't let this stand. If you knew that this was Russia and it went to the highest levels, i.e., Putin.

Were you satisfied with how your allies reacted to this? And how did you see Sergey Lavrov react?

MAY: Impassively, I think is probably the best description. I mean, in terms of the response from allies, what was critical was that we were able to bring about the largest-ever expulsion of Russian intelligence officers across the world in history. Over 25 countries came together with the United Kingdom, NATO as well, and expelled Russian intelligence officers. Over 150 were expelled around the world.

And that gave a very clear signal to Russia. First of all, we've been watching you and we knew where these people were, and we are disrupting your networks.

Russia has used a chemical weapon, which is unlawful to use a chemical weapon and they've used it on the streets of a British city.

The audacity of that, the recklessness of that was absolutely clear to me. And I think that came across to allies around the world.

AMANPOUR: So, obviously they deny it, and Putin has not been humbled at all by any of this. He's been outed in every which way by this -- by your investigations, by the revelation of who the two agents were who brought this and committed this crime.

Subsequently, doing the full-scale invasion of Ukraine and continuing these very reckless, bold, I mean, thumbing his nose is an understatement, but just not taking NATO, the United States, Europe seriously at all, it seems.

MAY: So, yes, they carried on in that sense. And we saw that further invasion of Ukraine some years ago now. We've seen Ukrainians fight back, Ukrainians clearly wanting to maintain their independence, their sovereignty.

And the U.K., the United States and other allies across Europe supporting Ukraine and continuing to support Ukraine, which is absolutely essential.

AMANPOUR: Do you think -- because we've seen it all, we've seen President Trump go back and forth, and maybe President Trump 2.0 is different than the President Trump you knew and worked alongside in his first administration when you were prime minister.

Can you talk to that?

MARTIN: Well, the United States -- I was the first world leader to visit President Trump in his first term, and one of the reasons for doing that was to ensure that he would support NATO. And he did, and he came out supporting NATO.

But what he said at NATO was what the U.K. actually agreed with, which was that the countries sitting around that NATO table had to up their defense spending.

And, of course, what Putin achieved by his further invasion of Ukraine, which is something that he did not expect to achieve, was a NATO that has been strengthened by Sweden and Finland joining it.

What he got was Germany increasing defense spending, with NATO commitments to increase defense spending around the table. AMANPOUR: What does this next prime minister have to do -- we've just had a NATO summit, and Trump is again complaining about lack of, you know, correct spending by NATO allies.

What actually does a U.K. prime minister have to do, knowing that there's so much domestic that needs to be dealt with as well?

MAY: Obviously, there's been a lot of to-ing and fro-ing from this current Labour government about the defense investment plan. And as you say, the Secretary of State for Defense, John Healey, resigned because he didn't feel enough money was coming forward.

I have to say there is a simple way in which some money can be released in terms of U.K. government terms, which is by the U.K. government getting on top of welfare reform and ensuring that we are spending less on welfare.

AMANPOUR: And finally, is this world, to your satisfaction as a former prime minister, is it in safe hands? Do you think democracy and the rules of the road, the post-World War II rules of the road and the international order can survive?

MAY: Well, democracy can survive, certainly. But those of us who believe in it have to stand up and share those values and explain why we believe democracy is so important.

[11:44:45]

MAY: The world, post the Second World War, we created these multilateral institutions, which I would argue have helped to maintain peace, security -- relative peace, security and stability for us.

Those are breaking down. And we need to think about whether we should reshape those for the future.

But I would say that those of us who believe in democracy, in the importance of people having the freedom to choose who is governing them, in the importance of the rule of law, importance of a free press, all of those issues that underpin our democracy, we need to be willing to go out and argue for those and show a new generation, because I do worry about the polls that show young people who don't see democracy as the way forward.

We need to show that new generation why their freedoms matter and it is democracy that deliver those freedoms.

AMANPOUR: Prime Minister Theresa May, thank you very much for being with us.

MAY: Thank you.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

AMANPOUR: And "THE SALISBURY POISONINGS: THE SPY NEXT DOOR" features tomorrow night at 8:00 p.m. on CNN. That's Eastern time. After a break, a city trapped in a cycle of destruction and rebirth.

From my archive, how Lebanon's capital, Beirut, is a symbol for a country and a region constantly having to rebuild itself.

[11:46:03]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

AMANPOUR: Welcome back to the program.

When is a ceasefire not a ceasefire? Well, this week the answer seems to be when you're in the Middle East. Iran and the United States trading strikes despite their 60-day Memorandum of Understanding to try to end that war, and Israel bombing southern Lebanon despite a ceasefire there.

For Lebanon, the destruction has become a tragic norm for generations. Its capital, Beirut, has become a symbol of what it means to be trapped in a cycle of destruction and attempts to rebuild.

Right now, its southern suburbs lie in ruins after Israel's bombing campaign they say were targeting Hezbollah. And when I was there for the first time in 1993, a 15-year civil war had torn the country to shreds.

We found this report from my archive that could, frankly, be a present-day reality check.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

AMANPOUR: The scale of the destruction in Beirut can still take your breath away two years after the 15-year civil war ended. So awesome, it's on the list of tourist attractions these days.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Don't go to the sites because we are still afraid of mines.

AMANPOUR: To some U.N. soldiers on leave, a young boy hawks postcards showing gracious old Martyrs Square as it used to be.

This is what it looks like today. Gone are the palm trees, just overgrown weeds flourish between the cracks in the rubble, and the only people who hang out here are soldiers manning checkpoints or snatching some sleep on the broken ledges.

But like a phoenix rising from the ashes, Beirut is on the road back.

A shiny office is the cornerstone of a brand-new development project that will replace many of the historic old buildings with a modern mass of glass and steel.

It will take a lot of time and a lot of money to rebuild Beirut. The government estimates it will cost $13 billion over the next ten years, and so far it's raised just $1 billion in loans and grants from Arab countries and the Europeans and the World Bank. U.S. products are making their way back to Beirut. And such is the

confidence these days that the Lebanese pound has risen 20 percent against the dollar in the last year.

The main shopping drag is bustling, and businessmen dare to hope.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Nowadays, it's good. But for the future its more better. I think.

AMANPOUR: And look who's here again. The rich and the powerful who took themselves and their expertise out of harm's way during the war are back to help put their country on its feet.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So, of course, we are very optimistic.

AMANPOUR: There's plenty of construction. Beirut's port and airport are being expanded, and its shattered infrastructure is being rebuilt.

This is the state of today's power supply, a jumble of wires connected to generators provided electricity during and since the war. And only those with cellular links have regular phone service.

There are still no traffic lights in Beirut, former militiamen turned policemen try to make do, and law and order is a welcome change from 15 years of anarchy.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Everything is under control, I think. No problem at all.

AMANPOUR: But of course there are problems. Not too far away from the tree lined coast road, not far away from where the young and the restless cruise through the Mediterranean. The less well-off squat in the bombed-out buildings and wonder whether they'll ever share in the new prosperity.

Wonder how much will really change in a country that, not so long ago, was being written off as a hopeless case.

Christiane Amanpour, CNN -- Beirut.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

AMANPOUR: Pictures that could actually be from today. The beleaguered civilians of Lebanon once again trying to rise from the ashes of the current conflict.

When we come back, the annual Running of the Bulls starts in Spain, and the Hemingway novel that put that sport on the map turns 100 years old.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Coming to Pamplona is completely unreal. Being involved in that opening ceremony is pretty fantastic.

(END VIDEO CLIP) [11:54:49]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

AMANPOUR: And finally, one of Spain's most famous and controversial festivals is reaching its peak today. Yes, it is the Running of the Bulls.

Every year, revelers from all around the world descend on Pamplona to catch a glimpse or run the gauntlet, even as critics say it amounts to animal cruelty.

[11:59:52]

AMANPOUR: The spectacle has become a global symbol of Spanish culture, no doubt due in part to Ernest Hemingway's novel "The Sun Also Rises", which was published exactly 100 years ago. That would have been 1926.

In it, Hemingway wrote the unforgettable line, "At noon of Sunday, the 6th of July, the fiesta exploded. There is no other way to describe it."

He was the wordsmith.

That is all we have time for. Don't forget, you can find all 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.

[12:00:32]