Return to Transcripts main page

Connect the World

Kremlin Notes "Mixed Signals" after Macron-Zelensky Meeting; Interview with Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas on Eastern European Tensions; CNN Investigation into Kabul Airport Bombing; U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson Responds after Another Party Photo Emerges; USA Skiing Star Mikaela Shiffrin Crashes Out Again. Aired 10-11a ET

Aired February 09, 2022 - 10:00   ET

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

[10:00:00]

(MUSIC PLAYING)

BECKY ANDERSON, CNN HOST (voice-over): A threat to Ukraine's security is a threat to Europe. Words of warning from Ukraine foreign minister.

A horrifying terror attack at the Kabul attack last August left more than 180 people dead. Now a months-long CNN investigation raises questions about

whether some may have been hit by gunfire.

And dreams turned into disappointment: the slalom favorite leaves empty- handed again. All of the day's top Winter Olympic news is coming up for you.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ANDERSON: I'm Becky Anderson. Hello and welcome to CONNECT THE WORLD. This hour the Kremlin warns of unprecedented threats faced by Russia and Belarus

as both nations prepare to scaled up joint military drills in Ukraine.

Words of caution from the foreign minister, who says the threat of Ukraine's security is a threat to the whole of Europe. He calls the

situation on the border "tense but controlled."

Back in Moscow, a furious few days of diplomacy drawing a mixed reaction from the Kremlin. Let's bring in international diplomatic editor Nic

Robertson, who is connecting us from Moscow with all of the very latest.

The Kremlin spokesman reacting to Emmanuel Macron's meeting with his Ukrainian counterpart in Kyiv in Tuesday. He was with Vladimir Putin ahead

of that meeting.

What are we hearing from the Kremlin at this point?

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: The Kremlin's read on the meet yesterday is that it was a bit positive and bit, to quote them,

less positive. They say it's positive that Macron seems to be pushing things toward resolving tensions in Ukraine, inside Ukraine through the

Minsk agreement; not positive with Moscow's read because they say that Kyiv isn't doing anything it should be doing in terms of the Minsk agreement.

Of course the U.S. view and others' view, it has -- Kyiv is, in fact, doing what it's supposed to be doing and Moscow is the one that's falling behind.

There is a difference of opinion there.

We just heard from the ministry of foreign affairs. He says, yes, situation in Ukraine around it can be deescalated if all NATO and Western military

advisers and trainers leave Ukraine, if all the weapons they've shipped in leave with them.

So that's a very big threshold. But while the Kremlin characterizes the tone of the conversation between Macron and Zelensky, there's no doubt the

tone of it emanating from Moscow has been somewhat abrasive.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ROBERTSON (voice-over): Close to Ukraine, Russian troops, a clear and present threat overshadowing President' Emmanuel Macron's high stakes

diplomacy. Following a five-hour meeting, President Vladimir Putin's innuendo-laden language dampening hopes further.

VLADIMIR PUTIN, PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA (through translator): Like it or don't like it, it's your duty, my beauty.

ROBERTSON (voice-over): Barely 16 hours later, as Macron met Zelensky, the Ukrainian president responded to Putin's insult.

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKY, UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT (through translator): Ukraine is indeed a beauty. As far as him saying "my Ukraine," it's a slight

overstatement. As far as "take it" is concerned, I think Ukraine is very patient because that's wisdom.

ROBERTSON (voice-over): Even so, Macron claiming small victories.

EMMANUEL MACRON, PRESIDENT OF FRANCE (through translator): I was able to obtain a clear and explicit commitment from Presidents Putin and Zelensky

to the strict basis of the Minsk agreement and partifleur (ph) to strict compliance.

ROBERTSON (voice-over): And appearing to think Putin agreeing to a military de-escalation, later scotched by the Kremlin. Reality is, Putin is

giving up no ground.

[10:05:00]

ROBERTSON (voice-over): Nor is he making clear what his next move will be, all the while keeping up his demands.

PUTIN (through translator): We are categorically against the expansion of NATO.

ROBERTSON (voice-over): The Russian leader seemingly waiting while diplomacy plays out.

JOE BIDEN (D), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: There will be no longer a Nord Stream 2.

ROBERTSON (voice-over): President Biden's insistence Germany in lockstep with U.S. sanctions under scrutiny.

OLAF SCHOLZ, GERMAN CHANCELLOR: The transatlantic partnership is key for peace in Europe. And this is what Putin also has to understand, that he

will not be able to split European Union or to split NATO. We will act together.

ROBERTSON (voice-over): Round three of Macron's diplomacy made Tuesday, meeting Scholz on his return from D.C. along with Poland's president,

Andrzej Duda, whose NATO nation just received 1,700 troops from the U.S. 82nd Airborne.

ANDRZEJ DUDA, POLISH PRESIDENT (through translator): We must find a solution to avoid war. This is our primary task. I believe we will do it.

Today the most important thing is unity and solidarity.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ROBERTSON: So the next diplomat to arrive here in Russia today, British foreign secretary Liz Truss, on her way from Moscow. Undoubtedly, she will

hear what the foreign ministry considers necessary to get that de- escalation.

And to run through them again, in Ukraine, it's for all NATO and Western partner trainers and military advisers to leave; for all Western military

shipments from NATO, Western allies to stop; for all the military equipment that's already been delivered to be removed from the country.

That's while Russia says that the reason that their Belarus joint military exercises is so big because of the unprecedented threat caused by NATO. You

can see how this is all linking up from the Russian perspective.

ANDERSON: The specifics of this conversation with Vladimir Putin are not clear. But the French president during his meeting and afterwards at a news

conference hinting at shifts in NATO's outlook.

He said, and I quote him, "There is no security for Europeans if there is no security for Russia."

That will have gone down well I'm sure with the Kremlin and indeed with Vladimir Putin himself, who holds a lot of these cards very close to his

chest. And it is unclear what his intentions are.

He also -- and I'm talking about the French president -- denies he used the term "Finlandization" of Ukraine, referring there to the former neutrality.

Can you just explain what the concerns some hold about what Emmanuel Macron's role and conversation with Vladimir Putin might have been and

whether there was a sense that the French got a bit unilateral here when it comes to their diplomacy?

ROBERTSON: Well, President Macron, as France has a rotating presidency of European presidency council right now, he feels that he has a space to

speak on behalf of the -- representing that as well as representing France and being part of NATO.

But President Macron views the fact that Angela Merkel is no longer the big political powerhouse, the chief diplomat for the European Union. And this

is a role he feels that perhaps he can step into and pick up some of the slack that is left by Angela Merkel's absence.

Specifically, he wants for there to be a stronger foreign and domestic policy. I think the concerns are simply he may put things on the table that

other members of NATO would not.

To accept that Russia has concerns here would imply there's something he's offering Russia to allay those concerns shared by Europe. So I think

there's all sort of concerns in that regard, Becky.

ANDERSON: Nic Robertson is in Moscow.

NATO has just finished drills of its own, upping its annual winter exercises in Estonia. Estonia and its Baltic neighbors, Latvia and

Lithuania, have belonged to the alliance since 2004. Estonia is near the top of this map, at one point just 100 kilometers from Russia.

[10:10:00]

ANDERSON: Its prime minister warns leaders to be careful when dealing with Vladimir Putin, saying, quote, "There's a difference between dialogue and

negotiation." Estonia prime minister Kaja Kallas joins me now via Skype.

What do you mean by that?

KAJA KALLAS, ESTONIAN PRIME MINISTER: Well, the difference is very clear. Dialogue, talking to each other, I think, is good. But the negotiating on

gunpoint is not good because the outcome can't be good.

If we look at what Russia is doing, we have to constantly keep this in mind. They are gathering troops around Ukraine and having them on gunpoint

and saying all these demands about NATO, how NATO countries could protect themselves or who can and who cannot belong to NATO.

So and all these talks or negotiations about peace conditions that they demand, I think, go to the wrong direction.

ANDERSON: As we see evidence of scaled-up military exercises by Russia and Belarus, how would you describe the threats of an invasion of Ukraine at

this point?

And if Ukraine were to fall to Russia -- if, that's a big if -- how concerned are you that Estonia could be next?

KALLAS: Well, first of all, we're very concerned what is happening around Ukraine. While we see this military buildup, we don't see any signs of

deescalation on the Russian side. Vice versa; we see more troops, we see the supporting elements to have a war there.

So this is all very convincing. When it comes to Estonia, we don't see direct military threat at our borders right now. But if something happens

in Ukraine, then it is certain that it will affect the security of Europe as a whole.

If you look at the map, Ukraine is in the middle of Europe. And it's not only about the military powers but it's also about the struggle between the

values. So Ukraine wants to be an independent country, wants to have its democratic way.

This something that Russia feels is a threat that they can decide for their own. And I think we have to prevent this. I mean, I'm speaking from the

country that lost its independence to Russia in 1940s. We were under Soviet Union for 50 years.

And we don't want the lose that independence again. That's why we totally understand the Ukrainians' fears.

ANDERSON: You've talked in the past of the possibility of war refugees, a deepening energy crisis, cyber attacks as well as wider economic and social

impact, were there to be an invasion by Russia of Ukraine.

Your country, for example, no stranger to cyberattacks and, in the past, there's been some indication those cyber attacks have been as a result of

action from Russia. NATO cybersecurity think tank now based in Talev, just how big a concern is that at this point?

KALLAS: I think the smaller conflicts are definitely a concern because we probably, even if we don't see a big conflict, we see a series of different

conflicts. As you pointed out, cyber attacks, that could be very difficult or very extremely hard on infrastructure, for example, then the energy

prices that -- or the gas prices that Russia also has a hold on.

So there are many such conflicts because, in the global world, if you're connecting to somebody, the other side of the connection might also hurt

you if it's not a friendly country. And we see this clearly now.

I mean, the gas pipeline, the different connections to Russia, if they decide to use them in a way that is not beneficial to the other side, they

have the possibility to do so.

ANDERSON: Do you see Russia as the enemy at this point?

And would you support Estonia contributing more troops to NATO at this point?

KALLAS: Well, our defense is based on two pillars. One is our own defense and we spend a lot on defense; more than 2.3 percent of our GDP goes to

defense investments. And the other pillar is the collective defense of NATO, so the armies or the allies' troops here.

[10:15:00]

KALLAS: We have the air policing mission. We have the enhanced forward presence. So we have here the British troops. So we have been talking about

strengthening the eastern flank for years.

And I'm glad to say that, in the NATO summit in June, there were decisions made. And we see that there are further decisions made to strengthen the

eastern flank, which is good. And it will act as a deterrent. I emphasize it's a defense union.

ANDERSON: You're traveling to Berlin tomorrow, later this week, to meet the German chancellor.

What will your message be in Berlin?

We are not seeing a whole united Europe at this point.

Does that worry you?

KALLAS: Our strength is unity, in both NATO and in European Union as well. And I'm glad to say we have kept this unity so far. There might be

differences in tactics and there are different dialogues held. But the overall position, that there will be no talks about the security

architecture of Europe, the main points have held.

So I think this is something we will also discuss with the German chancellor.

ANDERSON: With that, we can leave it there. We thank you very much for joining us. Extremely important and worrying times. Thank you.

Still ahead, the Pentagon says no one was shot in the August attack at Kabul's airport that killed more than 180 people. But a CNN investigation

raises questions about what really happened. That after this.

(MUSIC PLAYING)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(MUSIC PLAYING)

ANDERSON: To a CNN exclusive now. Last August, at the height of the chaotic U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, a deadly terror attack at Kabul

airport killed 13 U.S. service members and at least 170 Afghan civilians.

Now a Pentagon investigation into the attack released last Friday said everyone died as a result of the blast, the work of a lone suicide bomber.

But a four-month CNN investigation into that horrific airport attack now raises serious questions about whether that has been investigated fully.

Nick Paton Walsh has our report and a warning: it does contain graphic images that may be disturbing to some of you.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

NICK PATON WALSH, CNN INTERNATIONAL SECURITY EDITOR (voice-over): The blast tore into the dense crowd.

MORSAL HAMIDI, SURVIVOR: A very high bomb blast was found, I saw a lot of hands, legs, without their bodies.

[10:20:00]

WALSH (voice-over): At least 170 Afghans and 13 U.S. troops died after an ISIS suicide bomber struck outside Kabul airport.

The Pentagon investigation of the attack released Friday said everyone died in the blast.

GEN. KENNETH "FRANK" MCKENZIE, COMMANDER, U.S. CENTRAL COMMAND: The single explosive device killed 113 U.S. service members, my explosive directing

ball bearings to a packed crowd.

WALSH: The review unearthed this brief glimpse of the bomber.

CNN spent four months investigating the incident, reviewing medical records and analyzing video photos and audio of the scene and speaking to over 70

witnesses, family of the dead, doctors, hospital staff and survivors, who insist some of the dead and wounded were shot.

The analysis and testimonies raised hard questions as to whether the bomb can explain all the deaths.

NOORULLAH ZAKHEL, SURVIVOR: I mean, the soldier came directly and they started firing. I laid down when they started firing like this.

WALSH: CNN spoke to doctors and medical staff at five hospitals who spoke of seeing or treating what they say were gunshot wounds. An Italian-run

emergency hospital told CNN their doctors assessed quote gunshot wounds on nine victims who arrived dead in the hour after the blast. Seven were shot

in the head, they said.

But there was no autopsy done, it was rare in Afghanistan. So they assessed the appearance of the wounds.

An Afghan military hospital, a doctor recorded two other victims that were, quote, dead due to gunshot injuries and blast injuries from the airport

attack.

Then, there are the survivors. One Afghan survivor was treated in the U.S. military's own Walter Reed Hospital outside Washington. He showed us his

medical record asking to be anonymous for his safety. They recorded a gunshot wound to the left chest and blast injuries, too.

Another survivor Morsal Hamidi had a bullet injury to the left side of her face, say her record from the Italian hospital in Kabul.

HAMIDI: I realize the blood is coming from my face like a water from a tap. I was it by a bullet in my face, in my right jaw here and the blood

extracted from this part of my throat.

WALSH: We spoke to a doctor who treated patients at Wazir Akbar Khan Hospital, one of the biggest hospitals in Kabul. He said he pulled bullets

out of four injured patients at the airport that night. He said he found gunshot wounds on many dead bodies, suggesting the number of people shot

may be much higher.

He asked me to hide his identity for his safety.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There was two kind of injuries. People burned from the blast with lots of holes in their bodies. But with a gunshot, you see one

or two holes, in the mouth, the head, in the eye and the chest. I removed bullets from four or five injured.

WALSH: U.S. military investigators insist that was not the case.

BRIG. GEN. LANCE G. CURTIS, U.S. MILITARY INVESTIGATOR: There were absolutely no gunshot wound. We found no evidence that post-blast U.S.

service members killed other U.S. service members or Afghans.

WALSH: But investigators admit they did not talk to any Afghan civilians.

CURTIS: During the course of our investigation, we did not have an opportunity to speak with Afghans on the ground.

WALSH: Yet dozens of Afghans assert there was deadly gunfire after the bomb hit here at Abbey Gate.

CURTIS: We built a 3D model of the scene. Here's the canal outside the gate 45 minutes before the blast. And then just before the device

detonated, it's packed and the Marines are bunched up.

U.S. military said the device was sophisticated and could be reasonably expected to have killed all the people.

The U.S. military told CNN doctors might have mistaken wounds made by these bullet bearings for bullet wound, adding, they were-to-too similar to tell

apart without study of the internal wounds and the finding of the projectile that caused it, which the Afghan hospitals could not do in a

mass casualty event.

With a doctor who said he pulled bullets out of four patients disagreed.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: According to my 15 years of surgery in Afghanistan, bomb and bullet injuries are very different. When a ball bearing enters the

body, it makes a big hole. Different from a chard bullet. When a bullet enters, it makes a small hole with a specific border and when it leaves, it

makes a big hole.

WALSH: Other staff at his hospital told CNN, they, too, have seen bullet wounds.

[10:25:00]

WALSH (voice-over): There is no dispute, there was some shooting. Some in this video, three minutes after the blast, you can hear gunshots but not

see who is shooting. There is chaos and fear.

U.S. Marines are likely tending to injured near the gate. Children are being carried away. Some crouch for cover.

U.S. military investigators released drone video they said started just after this. It is patchy but they say their analysis of the footage showed

nobody running away and panic from gunfire or any evidence of shooting.

The U.S. and U.K. militaries have said there were three busts of gunfire both at some point just after the blast. U.S. troops noticed a suspicious

military-age male across the canal soon after the blast, U.S. investigators said, they fired four warning shots.

A U.K. defense official told CNN their troops on top of a tower, five warning shots at about the same time to prevent at crowd surge. U.S.

investigators said the British 35 to 45-round over the crowd from two positions.

Another Marine team fired again. This time at a male on a roof armed they said with an AK-47. Investigators couldn't say how many rounds they shot.

The U.S. and British military say all the shots were fired over the crowded canal but did not hit anyone.

It's important to remember that none of the dozens of eyewitnesses we've spoken to have recalled seeing any other gunman, be it ISIS or Taliban in

that scene in the aftermath.

Doubt of the Pentagon story also emerged from Afghan survivors. They also recall troops opening fire but say civilians were hit. Morsal was there

with her sister in the trench, 3 meters from the blast, she said.

HAMIDI: I heard, from, it was fired into my hand. I just put it under other dead people.

WALSH: You saw the soldiers on the wall of the trench shooting down into the trench?

HAMIDI: Yes. They were shooting in the trench.

WALSH: When the shooting started, did she see it or hear it?

SHOFOGA HAMIDI, SURVIVOR (through translator): Yes, I saw a soldier, exactly. Some came to save their own colleagues. Others stood there and

fired directly toward people.

WALSH: Noorullah Zakhel her uncle said he was also in the trench, hit in the head by the blast and tried to flee with his cousin, Sahel.

ZAKHEL: I told to my cousin, Sahel, run, we need to go with, I tried to go climb out from the tunnel, I succeeded but I think my cousin is killed. The

soldier came directly and they start firing.

WALSH: When did you find out that Sahel was dead?

ZAKHEL: In the morning time. When I come, my family, they said, is he OK?

They said, he is murdered.

WALSH: And how was his body?

What were the injuries on his body?

ZAKHEL: Shooting, two bullets, one hit in this side and taken out from this side and another one on shoulder.

WALSH: A total of 19 survivors CNN has interviewed said they saw people shot or were shot themselves. The U.S. military said the witnesses we spoke

to had, quote, jumbled memories from a concussive event and are doing their best to piece together what their brain is likely to remember clearly.

The volume of testimony from Afghan survives, though, does present questions as to how so many witnesses could make such similar claims.

[10:30:00]

WALSH (voice-over): CNN hired a forensic blast analyst, former U.N. weapons inspector and a war crimes investigator, Chris Cobb Smith, to see

what the scene can tell us about the bomb.

CHRIS COBB SMITH, FORENSIC BLAST ANALYST: It does indeed look as though the bomb was full of ball bearings.

WALSH: It was quite small, right?

SMITH: It's most certainly a small device. It's actually nothing of the concrete infrastructure in this area that has been damaged significantly by

a big blast. I do not believe that bomb was big enough to kill 180 people at all.

WALSH (voice-over): That remains under contention and there were other experts who believed the bomb could have killed all those people. The

Pentagon's investigation aims to provide answers for the families of Americans lost here.

But in Afghanistan, the survivors of the blast and its aftermath dispute the American narrative and suffer with their memories.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Every night's like a nightmare for me. I cannot sleep. It's very terrible for me. But I just try to remember all my hopes,

all my wish.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ANDERSON: Nick back in London. He joins me from there now.

The testimonies in your piece raise some very hard and very serious questions.

What, if anything, has the Pentagon said in response to your investigation?

WALSH: Well, we did spend a significant amount of time, over nearly two months discussing with the Pentagon their point of view here; 3.5 hours I

spent in the Pentagon January, listening to the investigation team give their side of the story.

I have to say, in short, they do dismiss the testimony that we received. They say the eyewitnesses may well have jumbled memories impacted by the

blast, their recollections to some degree false.

And also the medical staff we spoke to essentially have difficulty distinguishing between gunshot wounds and ball bearings. They dispute that,

the medical staff, saying in Afghanistan the worst wartorn country in the world, frankly, for the last 20 years, they have plenty of experience of

knowing the difference.

But the fundamental question is the enormous gulf between what the Afghans we spoke to, dozens of them, pretty much consistently say -- and the

version of events which we've heard from the Pentagon on Friday in a public press conference, in which they said, through their interviews solely with

American personnel, that they've come to a very separate conclusion, that the bomb killed everyone.

Fundamentally, the question now is, is there further investigation that the Pentagon feel they need to do?

Or are they satisfied they have the full picture, despite accepting they didn't speak to any Afghan civilians?

ANDERSON: Nick Paton Walsh with his investigation.

We will be back after this.

Thanks, Nick.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(MUSIC PLAYING)

[10:35:00]

ANDERSON: Welcome back. I'm Becky Anderson. You're watching CONNECT THE WORLD in Abu Dhabi, where it's just after half past 7:00 in the evening.

Another uncomfortable question for the British prime minister in the so called Partygate scandal. And this is why, another photo that seems to show

Boris Johnson gathering with others in an office setting with a bottle of champagne.

The British "Mirror" newspaper says this picture was taken when England was in a lockdown. A short time ago, it looked like Mr. Johnson was try to

change the narrative; at least that is what his detractors will say.

He told U.K. lawmakers in the House of Commons he intends to scrap all remaining COVID-19 restrictions in England a month earlier than planned.

CNN's Salma Abdelaziz is covering all of this for us from London.

Removing all COVID-19 restrictions is a big deal and a mini reshuffle of his cabinet in the wake of scandal. Then, though, comes along another

photo.

Where does Boris Johnson stand with his party and the public?

SALMA ABDELAZIZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Prime minister Boris Johnson today in Parliament for that regularly scheduled PMQs, Prime Minister's Questions

session, as you said, he would have loved to talk about anything, about COVID-19, vaccines, anything but Partygate.

Unfortunately, as he was in Parliament, that photo of prime minister Boris Johnson seemingly at this party on December 15th, during lockdown, bottle

of booze on the table there, open bag of crisps, people wearing tinsel at a time when people were told they absolutely cannot meet with anyone outside

their household.

They cannot gather for work unless it's about work. Doesn't look like that picture was about work there. And this played out live in Parliament as an

MP stood up to ask a question about the leaked photo.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FABIAN HAMILTON, BRITISH LABOUR PARTY MP: A photo has emerged with the prime minister in Downing Street on the 15th of December 2020, surrounded

by alcohol, food and people wearing tinsel. It looks a lot like one of the Christmas parties he told us never happened.

So for the sake of my constituent and the sacrifices she made, will the prime minister be referring this party to the police, as it's not one of

the ones already being investigated?

(CROSSTALK)

BORIS JOHNSON, U.K. PRIME MINISTER: He's -- I'm afraid -- first of all, first of all, I'm very sorry about his constituent and for the difficulties

that she's been through. And I understand -- I understand very much her feelings, Mr. Speaker.

But in what he's just said, I'm afraid he's completely in error.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ABDELAZIZ: "He's completely in error," the denial, the distraction, the evasion that we are used to for weeks from prime minister Boris Johnson as

he continues to cling to power, despite the fact that within his own Conservative Party, there is a very small rebellion, a handful of Tory MPs

who have turned against him.

But a growing sense of anger and frustration and helplessness as Boris Johnson continues despite this growing scandal. Remember two investigations

underway, one by the police to determine if criminal offenses were committed at the heart of government; another, the Sue Gray report, a

summary of that was released, a parsed down version last week. It found failures of government -- failures of leadership, rather, little respect

given to the British public, excessive drinking at 10 Downing Street.

Yes, the prime minister wants to escape this but, as you see, it dodges (sic) him everywhere he goes.

ANDERSON: Yes, now lifting all COVID-19 restrictions in England.

How will that be received?

ABDELAZIZ: Let's start with what restrictions are being lifted. By and large the country has returned largely to normal. Businesses are open

again; people are going to work. The tube is full, the streets are full.

One of the key restrictions still left behind is that isolation period that was driven by the Omicron variant. You have to isolate for five days if you

test positive. The prime minister says the data is good and by the end of the month, this restriction could be lifted a month earlier than expected.

It was supposed to be lifted end of March.

But his critics say the infection rates are still high. Yesterday, more than 300 people lost their lives due to COVID-19. We're seeing an increase

in the number of death rates even if we're seeing decrease in the number of infections.

We heard from the bereaved families group, whose family members died of COVID-19. They say they see this as a political move, as the prime

minister, who is looking to do something popular, something to destruct (sic) from Partygate.

ANDERSON: Salma Abdelaziz, thank you.

Coming up, a shocking exit from the Beijing slopes. We'll see who won the gold medal in the slalom and who didn't. That's in our "WORLD SPORT"

update.

(MUSIC PLAYING)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:40:00]

(MUSIC PLAYING)

ANDERSON: The Beijing Winter Olympics are for all the athletes a chance for those to dream of a medal. It doesn't matter if it's bronze, silver or

gold. But it does matter if you crash out. Here is USA skiing star, Mikaela Shiffrin, who was the favorite of many in the slalom. Amanda Davies here

with her tale.

AMANDA DAVIES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Becky, every Olympic Games has those images that live long in the memory. And you fear these images of Mikaela

Shiffrin will be just those from Beijing 2022.

It was just heartbreaking to watch. This slalom event was the event that she had openly said was her best chance for gold. But it took place just

two days after she crashed out after just five turns in the giant slalom.

This is not how it was meant to be, an athlete with such high hopes; she's a four time world champion in this event. And afterwards you could see her

processing it in real-time, in front of the world's media.

She fronted up. She did close to an hour of interviews, just trying to explain what went wrong. It was so, so tough to watch. She's meant to be

going for five medals at these games, so three events still to go. It will be very interesting to see if she can pick herself back up and go out for

those runs.

ANDERSON: We wish her the best. Amanda, thank you.

WORLD SPORT up after this break. We're back after that. Stay with us.

(WORLD SPORT)

[11:00:00]

END