Return to Transcripts main page
Connect the World
Putin and U.S. Envoy Meet, Discuss U.S. Ceasefire Plan; All G7 Foreign Ministers Agree on Proposed Ukraine Ceasefire; International Criminal Court Holds First Hearing on Duterte Charges; Trump Takes Birthright Citizenship Fight to U.S. Supreme Court; Mahmoud Khalil's Lawyer File Petition for His Release; Syria's Political Transition; U.S. Influencer Criticized After Taking Baby Wombat. Aired 10-11a ET
Aired March 14, 2025 - 10:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[10:00:30]
BECKY ANDERSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Well, hello, and welcome to the second hour of CONNECT THE WORLD live from our Middle East programing
headquarters in Abu Dhabi, where the time is 6:00 p.m. and we are waiting for images out of The Hague, where the former Philippines president Rodrigo
Duterte has made his first appearance at the International Criminal Court. We will bring you those once we get them.
Also, this hour, we dive into a series of firsts around the world and in America, led by the new U.S. president, like the U.S. and Russia, after
years of mutual hostility, now negotiating in person over the war in Ukraine. And the U.S. administration asking the Supreme Court to end
birthright citizenship, a guarantee that has been in place for over 150 years.
Well, we start with those negotiations over ending the conflict in Ukraine. There is more talk but no concrete evidence, at least for now, that Russia
may be ready to accept a 30-day ceasefire plan presented by the United States. The Kremlin says Russian president Vladimir Putin has sent, quote,
"additional signals" to U.S. president Donald Trump about the proposal through U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff.
Putin and Witkoff met on Thursday night in Moscow. In a news conference on Thursday, Putin described the plan as promising in principle, but he also
laid out tough conditions for any future Russian acceptance.
Well, Frederik Pleitgen back with us this hour from Moscow.
And last hour, Fred, you described the process as evolving. Can you further explain what you mean by that following this meeting between Witkoff and
Putin?
FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, we're actually getting new details on all this now from President Trump himself
on the meeting that apparently took place or that did take place between Steve Witkoff and Vladimir Putin for several hours, the U.S. says, last
night here in Moscow. And one of the things that President Trump literally just posted a couple of minutes ago on his Truth Social account, his social
media account, he said, we have a very good and productive discussion with President Vladimir Putin of Russia yesterday, and there's a very good
chance that this horrible, bloody war can finally come to an end.
And then he writes in all caps, I think this is very important. But at this very moment, thousands of Ukrainian troops are completely surrounded by the
Russian military and in a very bad and vulnerable position, he writes. I have strongly requested to President Putin that their lives be spared. So
it seems as though that might have been some of the information that was conveyed by the U.S., or a plea that was conveyed by the U.S. to Russian
president Vladimir Putin.
Of course, you just mentioned the Russians saying that they send signals to the U.S., although it's not clear what exactly those signals were. So for
President Trump, clearly, the situation in the Kursk region, where the Russians have indeed said that they have surrounded some Ukrainian troops
and that they are moving forward in the Kursk region and want to expel Ukrainian forces from there, that seems to have been part of the discussion
that took place yesterday between Mr. Witkoff and the Russian president, Vladimir Putin.
However, the Russians, as you noted, were also saying that there are still things that they want sorted out as far as a possible peace deal is
concerned. And essentially, we mean by evolving situation, is that right now it seems as though the Trump administration and the Ukrainians have
signed on to a ceasefire deal where they say there's going to be a ceasefire, and then they'll sort out all the issues, whereas the Russians
are saying they want all of these issues that led to the war in the first place to be sorted out before there's a ceasefire -- Becky.
ANDERSON: It's good to have you. Thank you very much indeed.
On the last day of the G7 foreign ministers' summit in Canada, Ukraine has continued to be a top priority there. The Canadian FM Melanie Joly saying
all members have agreed on a proposed ceasefire in Ukraine. Well, earlier in the week, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio missing the reception to
work on issues over ceasefire negotiations between Kyiv and Moscow.
Also on the G7 agenda discussions over a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians. A final statement detailing the results of the
meeting is expected to be released soon.
Well, let's get you up to speed on everything G7. CNN's Alex Marquardt joins us live from Canada. He was also, crucially, in Jeddah, in Saudi
Arabia, earlier this week, where those talks between the U.S. and Ukraine took place.
[10:05:00]
It's good to have you with us. Ukraine really at the top of the agenda at this summit. Where does this summit and its results fall in the larger
picture of efforts to bring peace in Ukraine?
ALEX MARQUARDT, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Well, Becky, I think in many ways Ukraine was the easy one. There are so many things that
could have divided this G7 summit, most notably the threat of tariffs and the Trump administration levying more tariffs. Of course, the Trump
administration continuing to talk about Canada becoming the 51st state.
But what's been remarkable here is essentially that the focus on what unites all of these diplomats and so certainly Ukraine is the main issue
there, not to mention an end to the war in Gaza. But the Ukraine ceasefire announcement earlier this week in Jeddah really did take so many by
surprise. I've been speaking with sources here at the summit who didn't really know that the U.S. was going to propose this.
We'd heard about a Ukrainian ceasefire proposal, but the fact that the U.S. essentially took that idea and ran with it is something that now we are
seeing Canadian and European allies coalesce around. And so this is something that they are certainly focused on right here. And it has
widespread support. So that will show the Russians that they are united behind this idea of a ceasefire and really put more pressure on them.
ANDERSON: It's good to have you. All right. I'm going to leave it there because we're just getting pictures in from The Hague. The cogs of
international justice turning there. This is the initial hearing for the former Philippines President Duterte. Let's just listen in.
IULIA ANTOANELLA MOTOC, INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT JUDGE (through translator): Thank you. You have one minute to take photographs and record
videos. Thank you very much.
Court Officer, please, could you please call the case?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (through translator): Thank you, Madam President. Your honors.
The situation in the Republic of the Philippines case, the prosecutor versus Mr. Rodrigo Roa Duterte. Case number ICC-01210125. And we are in
open session.
MOTOC (through translator): Thank you very much. I will now ask the parties to introduce themselves, starting with the office of the prosecutor. Please
pause before speaking and speak slowly to allow the interpreters to interpret appropriately.
May I ask you to introduce yourself and to confirm whether the list of your staff that I received prior to the hearing is correct, Mr. Prosecutor?
KARIM KHAN, CHIEF PROSECUTOR: President, your honor. Good morning. The list is correct. Once again, Deputy Prosecutor Mandiaye Niang to my left. Trial
lawyer Edward Jeremy behind us. Trial lawyer Robin Croft, international cooperation adviser Chantal Daniels, and our very able case manager, Grace
Go.
I'm Karim Khan, the prosecutor.
MOTOC (through translator): Thank you very much. I now turn to the counsel for the defense of Mr. Duterte. As everyone can see, Mr. Duterte is present
and is attending the hearing via video link. As Mr. Duterte made a long journey involving a considerable time difference, the chamber authorized
Mr. Duterte to follow the hearing at a distance. His counsel, however, is present with us in the courtroom.
Thank you, Counsel. Please introduce yourself.
SALVADOR C. MEDIALDEA, DEFENSE COUNSEL: Good afternoon, your honors. I am Salvador C. Medialdea, counsel for Rodrigo Roa Duterte.
MOTOC (through translator): Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Counsel.
I will now introduce the chamber. By my side we have the Judge Maria -- Judge Reine Adelaide Sophie Alapini-Gansou, the vice president of the
court, and Judge Maria del Socorro Flores Liera.
I am the presiding judge of the Pretrial Chamber One of the court, and my name is Iulia Antoanella Motoc.
Now, I would like to speak to you, Mr. Duterte. I'm speaking French, but you are receiving an interpretation of what I'm saying in English.
[10:10:02]
I understand that you are at ease in the English language and that the interview yesterday at the detention center was conducted in English, and
that you did not deem it necessary to request interpretation into any other language during this interview.
This said, I would like firstly to confirm your identity. Could you provide us with your full names, please?
RODRIGO DUTERTE, FORMER PHILIPPINE PRESIDENT: I'm Rodrigo Roa Duterte. That's my first -- middle name is Roa. Surname is Duterte.
MOTOC (through translator): Thank you very much. What is your date of birth?
DUTERTE: Again, ma'am.
MEDIALDEA: Can we request that the question be repeated? I don't think he heard it. Thank you.
MOTOC (through translator): Repetition from the English booth. What is your date of birth? Yes. Thank you very much, Counsel. I was asking quite simply
of Mr. Duterte what his full names were. And then I subsequently asked him what his date of birth was and what his place of birth is. Is that all
right, Counsel?
DUTERTE: My birth month and day is March 28th, 1945. I was born in the province of Leyte in the Philippines.
MOTOC (through translator): Thank you very much. As a preliminary point -- very well. Thank you, Mr. Duterte. As a preliminary point, it is useful to
clarify the nature and limited scope of this first appearance hearing. Today's hearing is neither the start of the trial nor it is a confirmation
of charges hearing.
During today's hearing no evidence will be collected or presented, and the issues of Mr. Duterte's guilt or innocence will therefore not be addressed.
In accordance with Article 61 of the Rome Statute, the court's founding treaty, and Rule 1211 of the rules of procedure and evidence. The main
purpose of this initial appearance is to answer three questions.
Firstly, the chamber must ensure that the person who was the subject of the arrest warrant has been informed of the crimes of which he is accused.
Second, the chamber must ensure that this person has been informed of his rights as recognized by the Rome Statute. Third, the chamber must set a
date on which it intends to hold a confirmation of charges hearing.
The chamber notes that your counsel, Mr. Duterte, filed two motions, one in relation with today's hearing, and you may be aware that these two motions
have not been accepted by the chamber because of the nature of today's hearing. No further discussion on the matter is necessary during this
hearing because, as I said at an earlier stage, the aim of this hearing today is to introduce the parties and to ascertain the charges and to set a
date for the confirmation of charges hearing at a later stage.
With regard to the first point, I recall that Mr. Duterte has received a copy of the warrant for his arrest and that a redacted version of the
prosecutor's application for the issuance of the warrant of arrest is public. I will now ask the court officer to read the charges against him.
The charges will be read in English.
Please, over to you, Madam Courtroom Officer.
[10:15:02]
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thank you, Madam President, Your Honors.
On 7th March 2025, pretrial chamber one concluded that there were reasonable grounds to believe that Mr. Duterte is criminally responsible
pursuant to Article 253a of the Rome Statute as an alleged indirect co- perpetrator for the crime against humanity of murder pursuant to Article 71a of the statute as follows. A, murder of at least 19 persons allegedly
drug pushers or thieves, killed by members of the Davao Death Squad in various locations in or around Davao City, Philippines between 2011 and
2016.
B, murder of at least 24 persons allegedly criminals such as drug pushers or thieves or drug users killed by or under the supervision of members of
the Philippines law enforcement, sometimes with the assistance of persons who were not part of the police at various locations in the Philippines
between 2016 and 2019.
MOTOC (through translator): Thank you, Madam Courtroom Officer.
Mr. Duterte, I'm not going to ask you to stand up because I know your condition. So I'm going to allow you to remain seated. You have just heard
the reading of the charges, which are in accordance with the content of the arrest warrant you received. This means that you have been informed of the
crimes of which you are accused. And this concludes the examination of the first point mentioned above.
I will now turn to the second point, which concerns your rights as a suspect before this court. I will summarize some of these rights which are
of particular importance at this stage of the proceedings. Those rights are as follows. You can benefit from the assistance free of charge of a
competent interpreter, and benefit from the necessary translations to meet the requirements of fairness.
You have the right to have the time and facilities necessary to prepare your defense and to communicate freely and confidentially with the counsel
of your choice. You have the right to remain silent, and you cannot be forced to testify against yourself or to confess guilt. You can also make
statements in your defense without taking an oath. In addition to any other disclosure provided for in the statute, the prosecutor must disclose to you
as soon as practicable evidence in his possession or at his disposal that shows or tends to show your innocence or to mitigate your guilt, or that
could undermine the credibility of the evidence against you.
At the confirmation of charges hearing, you can contest the charges. Challenge the evidence presented by the prosecutor and present evidence.
There will be no trial if the charges are not confirmed or if the proceedings against you are completed. You have the possibility to make an
application for interim release pending trial.
And finally, Mr. Duterte, you have the right to be informed as soon as possible and in detail of the nature, cause, and content of the charges in
the language that you fully understand and speak.
Counsel, have you understood?
MEDIALDEA: We're listening, Ma'am. We're listening. And before it ends, may we be allowed to present a manifestation under circumstances behind the
delivery of Mr. Duterte in this chamber.
ANDERSON: Well, the former Philippines president attending the ICC, the International Criminal Court, virtually. This is the judge explaining that
she decided to give the 79-year-old the opportunity to attend this first session remotely.
[10:20:06]
His counsel was in court and we will see him momentarily. We heard from Duterte himself to simply give his name and his date of birth, and his
place of birth. Also in attendance, of course, the ICC chief prosecutor, Karim Khan. The charges against Duterte were read out in court. The judge
also read out the defendant's rights.
The former ICC prosecutor, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, joining us now.
And sir, just give us some insight on what is happening there in The Hague as we speak.
LUIS MORENO OCAMPO, FORMER ICC PROSECUTOR: I think it's an incredible moment because three female judges explained to Mr. Duterte all his rights
and that the difference Mr. Duterte charge for killing people with no legal process. Instead he's receiving what he did not offer to the victims, a
fair trial, a legal process. That all this protocol is showing three female judges explained the rights to Mr. Duterte. He has the right to defend
himself. And that's the process starting today.
ANDERSON: What do you make of those charges against him? Just explain what they are.
OCAMPO: Well, basically he's charged with, first, with crimes committed when he was the mayor of the Davao. He organized the death squads, killing
people, and using later the local police. Then as a president, he appointed the Davao police people to the national level, where he continued the
campaign to kill people with no trial, with just they decide who should be killed.
And that's how the charges between crimes committed between 2011 to 2019. That's so killing is a charge. The judges previously refused a prosecutor
application for torture and rape. The prosecutor also tried to present these charges, the judges refused so right now the only charges are
killing, killing, illegal killing with no process.
ANDERSON: The Philippines is not a member of the court. And certainly there is some debate out there at present about the role of the ICC in dealing
with matters of national sovereignty. This isn't the first, as we know, there are outstanding warrants, of course, for Benjamin Netanyahu, for
Vladimir Putin, both of whom have not been delivered. It took Duterte's opponent, the current president, to have him delivered there. This is a
pivotal moment for the ICC, isn't it?
OCAMPO: It's their, it's their -- it's a pivotal moment for the Filipinos. That for me like the feeling. Different cases have different outcomes. But
interestingly, the arrest warrant against Duterte were issued just a week ago. So before that, the Philippines government could not arrest him. But
as soon the arrests were issued, the Philippine government, for whatever reasons, they arrest him and surrender to The Hague. That's a legal
process. And that happened in a very quick moment.
And that showed the relevance of the ICC. We can discuss later, if you like, how we can manage in the Putin or Netanyahu case. But in this case,
everything happened according with the law because Philippines, a sovereign state, ratified the treaty in 2011 so he was a member of the ICC. But the
statute allows Philippines to withdrew and they did it in 2018. Therefore, the only crime that could be mitigated are between ratification and one
year after withdrawal in 2019.
That's it. That period is a sovereign decision of the Philippines to accept the jurisdiction of the court.
ANDERSON: Yes. And his supporters, Duterte's supporters contest, and there are millions of them, contest that the court is being used as a political
tool by the current president. Does that confuse things for you, or at least does that --
OCAMPO: No.
ANDERSON: -- ensure an immense amount of controversy? Certainly in the Philippines, if not elsewhere?
OCAMPO: Well, you know, these cases have different dimensions. One dimension of the case itself at The Hague, and you heard the hearing, and
there will be discussion with Duterte.
[10:25:01]
The political ramifications will be a big debate in Philippines. Absolutely yes. So these cases polarize the situation. So that will be a big challenge
for President Marcos to manage the polarization and to ensure that his campaign against drugs are efficient and respecting the law. So the ICC has
many dimensions, including on the peace process of Netanyahu and Putin. That's another dimension.
ANDERSON: Well, that is another dimension. And we could talk for hours about that. And this is Duterte today and we're quite, quite tight. So I'm
going to leave it there. Suffice to say, what can we expect next? This is a relatively brief court session, correct?
OCAMPO: Yes. Yes. Nothing will happen today. Just presenting the charge against him. Letting him understand the process. And it's just a first
step. What we can expect now is a legal process, a fair trial to Duterte. That you should expect at The Hague. And that's something that Duterte did
not offer his victims.
ANDERSON: Yes. It's good to have you. Thank you very much indeed.
OCAMPO: Yes.
ANDERSON: Thank you for joining us. Lots of news to get to this hour. It is a really busy news cycle. Good to have Luis there to give us his analysis
and insight.
I'm going to take a very short break. Back after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[10:28:51]
ANDERSON: Welcome back. You're watching CONNECT THE WORLD with me, Becky Anderson. Here are your headlines.
And the Kremlin says Russian president Vladimir Putin has sent, quote, "additional signals" to U.S. president Donald Trump about Washington's
proposal for a 30-day ceasefire with Ukraine. Putin met with U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff in Moscow on Thursday. Well, before that meeting, the
Russian president voiced strong reservations about the plan while saying that he agreed with it in theory.
Rodrigo Duterte has just appeared via video link at his first hearing at the International Criminal Court since his arrest on Tuesday. The former
Philippine president, once known as the punisher, is facing charges of crimes against humanity. His brutal war on drugs, blamed for thousands of
deaths during his presidency.
Canada's new prime minister is set to be sworn in next hour. Mark Carney has already had strong words to say in rejecting the possibility of ever
becoming a part of the United States after President Trump floated that idea. Outgoing Prime Minister Justin Trudeau shared a goodbye video in
which he implored Canadians not to change no matter what the world throws at them.
[10:30:08]
Well, the Trump administration is now asking the U.S. Supreme Court to step in and enforce the president's executive order to end birthright
citizenship in the U.S. What is that? Well, birthright citizenship provides that any child born in the U.S. is automatically a citizen. Well, that
clearly laid out in the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. So far, every lower court that has considered Trump's plan has blocked it.
Well, in another blow to the Trump White House, a federal judge Thursday ruled that thousands of government employees laid off en masse must be at
least temporarily given their jobs back. Now, that's the second judge to rule against the cutbacks in just one day.
CNN's chief Supreme Court analyst Joan Biskupic is covering both issues for us from Washington.
Your file is a very busy one, Joan. Thank you for joining us. Let's start with the birthright citizenship fight, if you will. The U.S. Constitution
provides any child born in the U.S. is automatically a U.S. citizen, with only a few obscure exceptions, as I understand it. So what are the chances
that the Supreme Court even take this up?
JOAN BISKUPIC, CNN SUPREME COURT ANALYST: Well, it's good to see you, Becky. And you know, President Trump is moving quite fast and the courts
are moving swiftly, too. And now, as you say, birthright citizenship is up to the Supreme Court. But it's up in kind of an unusual way here.
As you said, the plain words of the 14th Amendment makes it, you know, for just about every case, automatic citizenship for someone born here. And
then in addition to that, let me just -- I think you see that on the screen here about all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject
to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.
And so, you know, Becky, then after that 14th Amendment that was ratified in 1868, in 1898, the Supreme Court read those words and repeated the
guarantee that citizenship is automatic. And every judge that has heard a challenge to Donald Trump's executive order on this has ruled against him,
at least at this preliminary stage. And now what President Trump's lawyers are asking the Supreme Court to do is to come in and say, not outright,
that assess the merits of his challenge to birthright citizenship, but to let it take effect in places that where the judges have not already ruled.
Judges have entered these sweeping orders against the implementation of Donald Trump's order and what they are claiming to the Supreme Court
justices, the Trump administration is claiming, is that those judges kind of overstepped their authority and that they should have only ruled in the
particular cases of people who were challenging it.
But what the Trump administration is effectively asking, Becky, is to, you know, essentially allow this lifting of birthright citizenship and allow
the Trump administration to start developing how it would actually implement it when this is a policy that seems, on its face,
unconstitutional, as one judge said, blatantly unconstitutional. So it's a pretty big request that the administration is asking for, even though it's
cloaked in language of, quote, "a modest request here."
So the Supreme Court has not acted at all. It's likely to ask the challengers to respond to the Trump administration's request, and we
probably won't see action until next week, Becky. But overall, on the merits of the question of whether Donald Trump can, you know, essentially
roll back a key provision of the 14th Amendment, that larger question is unlikely to be decided any time, maybe even in this calendar year or the
next, just because it's the kind of thing that would have to have a thorough briefing and oral arguments.
ANDERSON: Yes. OK. Thank you.
Let's switch gears. Two judges, same day, blocking these federal government cutbacks by the Trump administration. How big a blow is this briefly, and
both to the administration and to DOGE?
BISKUPIC: Right. Well, what those judges both said is that those temporary workers, tens of thousands of them, have to be reinstated, at least
temporarily. The judges didn't say that the Trump administration couldn't get rid of people. They just have to do it with proper procedures. And in
both cases, the judges said the Trump administration just used haphazard procedures.
They, in one case, the judge even accused the Trump administration of lying about what they did. And they essentially said, look, you've claimed that
these people have been fired because of poor performance, but that's not true.
[10:35:06]
You can't -- if you're going to do it, you have to do it through the regular procedures for reductions in force.
So for at this point, Becky, it's a real blow to the administration. But given how fast they've been working on these agenda items, I'm sure they're
going to appeal these rulings. But they'll also be back with other ways to get around these rulings, to get rid of employees -- Becky.
ANDERSON: Understood. Joan, always a pleasure. Thank you.
BISKUPIC: Thank you.
ANDERSON: Well, Jewish protesters occupying Trump Tower yesterday demanding the release of the Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil. Nearly 100 people
were arrested. Khalil's case reigniting demonstrations in support of Palestinian rights and free speech that started on college campuses in the
U.S. last year.
And this battle over free speech now, frankly, coming to a head. Yesterday, Columbia University announced it had expelled, suspended or temporarily
revoked the degrees of students who occupied Hamilton Hall at Columbia last spring. Mahmoud Khalil was a spokesperson and negotiator for the group that
led the campus protests, which is what led to the Trump administration's efforts to deport him.
His lawyers have filed a new petition for his immediate release, arguing his constitutional rights to free speech and due process are being
violated. One of his attorneys spoke to CNN just a short time ago.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONNA LIBERMAN, ATTORNEY FOR MAHMOUD KHALIL: They kidnaped this man, this young student, father-to-be in any minute now, based on an accusation that
he has the wrong political ideas and he has expressed them. And this isn't just about him. This is a shot across the bow.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANDERSON: Well, my next guest is Amy Spitalnick, the CEO for the Jewish Council of Foreign Affairs in the United States. In a recent interview, she
said, and I quote, "Any Jew who thinks this is going to start and stop with a few Palestinian activists is fooling themselves. Our community should not
be used as an excuse to upend democracy and the rule of law." And Amy joins us now live from New York.
And it's good to have you. Can you just explain further what you meant by that?
AMY SPITALNICK, CEO, JEWISH COUNCIL OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS: Sure. Thank you so much for having me. Look, multiple things are true at the same time. We
know that antisemitism is real. It's real on campus, in K through 12 schools, and more broadly. We've seen a significant increase in antisemitic
hate crimes and incidents, including, again, on college campuses.
And at the same time, we are now seeing the Trump administration exploit the very real pains and fears of Jewish students in the Jewish community
more broadly to undermine the rule of law, due process and the democratic norms that have been so inherent to the safety of the Jewish community and
all communities in our democracy for decades. And so we need to be able to actually grapple with this complexity. We need to be able to directly
confront the real antisemitism that does exist.
ANDERSON: Right.
SPITALNICK: And to be able to do so in a way that doesn't undermine our democracy, the rule of law and core civil liberties.
ANDERSON: And you've said that you don't think this is about the Trump administration combating antisemitism. So what do you think this is about?
SPITALNICK: Look, what we're seeing now is part and parcel of a broader effort to undermine our democratic norms to -- whether it's in the form of
gutting the federal government, including, for example, just this week, directly slashing in half the Department of Education and its Office of
Civil Rights, which is actually the precise office intended to protect Jewish and all students from antisemitism and other violations of their
rights on campus.
To -- and many other steps taken by this administration that have, in fact, actually further normalized antisemitism and other forms of extremism.
Whether it is the conspiracy theories rooted in antisemitic tropes that are being used to advance dehumanizing policies targeting the immigrant
communities related to immigrants, related to invasion, replacement, and other language that we know has directly fueled antisemitic violence in
America, around the world.
Whether it is empowering and platforming officials like Elon Musk, who directly traffic in these sorts of conspiracy theories or give Nazi salutes
from behind the presidential podium, as well as the new DOD press secretary, who has repeatedly engaged in Neo-Nazi conspiracy theories and
lies that stem directly from white supremacist hate sites.
ANDERSON: Right.
[10:40:02]
SPITALNICK: To a variety of other steps that have fundamentally undercut Jewish safety. So if this administration were serious about countering
antisemitism, they would stop normalizing these conspiracy theories, amplifying these dangerous voices, and actually invest in the policies that
we know are inherent to protecting Jewish students and Jewish people more broadly.
ANDERSON: Amy, this arrest of Khalil has elicited a significant response from Jewish voices for peace. Why do you think?
SPITALNICK: Well, I want to distinguish a few things. The Jewish Council for Public Affairs, my organization, and a number of other mainstream
Jewish organizations have also been outspoken about what's happening right now. And it has nothing to do with the policies or politics that Mahmoud
Khalil believes in. In a variety of ways I'm sure we have fundamental disagreements with him, and he has very well potentially engaged in direct
actions that have harmed Jewish students on campus.
And that's beside the point in many ways. What we need to make sure is that everyone, as abhorrent as we might find some of their views, are entitled
to the same due process rights and civil liberties that everyone in this country is entitled to. If he broke the law, then we need to understand
what law they're claiming he's breaking. If someone violates the university's code of conduct, then of course they should face
accountability.
But when the law is applied selectively to target people based on who they are and their political beliefs, it fundamentally makes all of us unsafe.
ANDERSON: Can I just talk about Columbia's role in all of this? I want to bring up one another of Khalil's lawyers had to say about their role in
there being the university's role in Khalil's arrest. That conversation. Let me just have a listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BAHER AZMY, ATTORNEY FOR MAHMOUD KHALIL: Columbia has created the conditions that support a level of fear and repression among Palestinian
activists and has, you know, largely been complicit with the broader, program of punishing Palestinian activists under the false flag of
antisemitism, which has produced intense doxxing, harassment, and now this, ICE agents appearing on Columbia property, entering a building.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANDERSON: That conversation happening before Columbia announced that the action against students involved in barricading Hamilton Hall. Do you see a
difference in that disciplinary action and what is now happening to Khalil and if so, where's the line, do you believe?
SPITALNICK: Absolutely. Well, look, what we do know is that nothing about how Columbia has handled this has made any student feel particularly safe.
Jewish students at Columbia have repeatedly expressed very real and legitimate concerns about their own safety on campus over the last year and
a half. Palestinian and other students have felt that their own rights are being violated.
So no one here feels as if the university is actually handling this in a way that protects students and their basic rights. Here's what we do know.
In cases where codes of conduct are actually being enforced consistently, no matter who is protesting or who is violating that code of conduct, we've
seen marked improvement on college campuses. And so no matter if a student is protesting for or against Israeli policy or on any other issue, there
needs to be consistent and uniform enforcement of codes of conduct.
And so if students did break the university's code of conduct, then they should, of course, face accountability. But -- and that is a fundamentally
different question than what we're talking about now with Mahmoud Khalil and the ways in which the federal government is, again, exploiting
legitimate concerns about antisemitism to undermine basic due process and civil liberties.
ANDERSON: It's good to have you, Amy. Thank you very much indeed for joining us. And we will be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[10:46:33]
ANDERSON: Right. Tonight, I want to take a closer look at Syria at the end of what has been a critical week for the country. Let's take a step back
for a moment. Three months ago this week, Syrians woke up to a new reality after decades of iron fisted rule. The Assad family had fled as opposition
forces marched towards the gates of the capital, Damascus.
Cue mass celebrations and the audacity of hope. A hope that Syria would finally be free of brutality after all. That word had become synonymous
with the actions of the Assads and their allies. Remove them and perhaps the hellish nightmare would finally end. Well, at least that is what many
believed. Others, urging caution, skeptical of the former Islamist insurgents turned leaders and the extremist elements backing them.
Well, fast forward and events in the past week underscoring those concerns, Syria's worst bloodshed since the fall of the former president, sectarian
in nature according to the United Nations.
Well, clashes between armed groups loyal to Assad and forces loyal to the new Syrian regime quickly spiraled. At least 800 people reportedly killed,
many of them civilians and most Alawites, a minority Shiite Muslim sect once empowered by the Assads to which they belong.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STEVEN COOK, SENIOR FELLOW FOR MIDDLE EAST AND AFRICA STUDIES, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: There was a lot of commentary after the Assad family
fled to Russia, that this was a new day in Syria and the new regime articulated a lot of things about Syria being all for Syrians. But for
those of us who spent a lot of time thinking about and -- in the Middle East and spending time in the Middle East and understanding the political
dynamics in Syria feared that the kind of violence that we saw over the last few days was inevitable.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANDERSON: Well, deadly violence that Al-Sharaa admitted impacted his effort to unite Syria with equal representation for all ethnicities. On Monday, he
had this to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
AHMAD AL-SHARAA, INTERIM SYRIAN PRESIDENT (through translator): What is happening in the country are expected challenges. We must preserve national
unity and civil peace in the country. We are capable of living together in this country as much as we can. We are able to live together as much as
possible.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANDERSON: While those words likely little comfort for survivors who described witnessing summary executions of family members, also at the
beginning of this week, a major sectarian breakthrough. An historic agreement signed between the interim president and the commander of the
Kurdish led and U.S. backed Syrian Democratic Forces, an accord which in theory at least means Syria's Kurds be recognized as an integral part of
the state.
[10:50:07]
That's millions from the northeast who were for decades denied citizenship and basic rights under the Assads. And yet another critical moment. On
Thursday, Syria's leader signing a temporary constitution that leaves the country under his group's rule for five years while promising to protect
the rights of all Syrians during the transitional period. During that time, the head of state must be a Muslim and Islamic jurisprudence prevail.
It's unclear whether a promised permanent constitution would be more inclusive of Syria's political, religious and minority ethnic groups.
So where does all this leave Syria? After 14 years of a devastating civil war, Syria needs rebuilding. According to multiple estimates, the cost of
rebuilding Syria would be at least $250 billion. Getting sanctions lifted to start that heavy lift of post-war reconstruction is the key priority for
Ahmed Al-Sharaa. Well, to date, the U.S. and Europe have been hesitant to lift those sanctions until they are convinced about his approach to
governance.
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio released a statement condemning the weekend killing of civilians by, quote, "radical Islamist terrorists,"
saying Syria's interim authorities must hold the perpetrators of these massacres against Syria's minority communities accountable."
Well, Al-Sharaa has vowed to hold those accountable and has arrested a handful of men. So far, it's unclear how this week's events will impact
Syria's transition going forward. But what is absolutely clear is that whatever happens in Syria, of course, does not say in Syria. What's clear
is a stable and inclusive Syria is important not just for Syrians, but for the wider region of the Middle East, desperate for a new and more secure
future.
And by dint of that, it is important to all of us. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ANDERSON: Right. There is outrage and disbelief in Australia after a video purportedly showing an American tourist picking up, running off with, and
then releasing a wild baby wombat. I the background, you can see the joey's distressed mother chasing after the woman and then hovering near the car.
Wombats are marsupials native to Australia and protected by law. Australia's prime minister had some choice words for Sam Jones, the woman
seen in this video.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ANTHONY ALBANESE, AUSTRALIAN PRIME MINISTER: They are gentle, lovely creatures. To take a baby wombat from its mother and clearly causing
distress from the mother is just an outrage.
[10:55:03]
And, you know, I suggest to this so-called influencer maybe she might try some other Australian animals. Take a baby crocodile from its mother and
see how you go there.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANDERSON: Well, the so-called influencer, she is clearly now known in Australia. Jones later said she did return the baby to its mother. She has
now left Australia after officials threatened to cancel her visa.
CNN reached out to her for comment. We have not yet received a response.
Well, for today's "Parting Shots," a look at how India bursts into color at this time of the year.
Well, a rainbow of colors to mark the start of spring. Today, people across India took to the streets to celebrate the Holi Festival, a festival of
love and new beginnings. But the color play is not the only way to celebrate Holi. Lighting bonfires and delicious sweets are always on the
list. Rooted in Hindu mythology, the celebration usually falls in March in the last full moon day of the calendar.
Well, here in the UAE, many Indian expats are postponing largescale Holi celebrations out of respect, of course, for Ramadan.
Well, it has been a busy news week. Thank you for joining us. That is it from me and the team here at CONNECT THE WORLD from our Middle East
programing headquarters in Abu Dhabi. "ONE WORLD" is up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
END
