Return to Transcripts main page
Connect the World
Markets Surge as Trump Signals Lower Tariffs on China; U.S. Treasury Secretary Speaks in D.C.; Bessent: "America First Does Not Mean America Alone"; UAE, Saudis Have Pledged to Invest in U.S.; U.S.-Iran Technical and Political Talks Planned for Saturday; Quake Measuring 6.2 Strikes off Coast of Turkiye. Aired 10-11a ET
Aired April 23, 2025 - 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)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (voice-over): Live from CNN Abu Dhabi, this is CONNECT THE WORLD with Becky Anderson.
BECKY ANDERSON, CNN HOST (voice-over): And welcome to the second hour of the show from our Middle East programming headquarters here in Abu Dhabi.
I'm Becky Anderson. Time just after 6 pm.
It is just after 10 am in Washington, where president Trump appears to be pivoting away from an all-out trade war with China, sending a clear message
to the public and to the markets that he will not play hardball with Beijing.
Well, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is set to reiterate that message of reassurance any moment now. And we will bring you his live
remarks.
At the Vatican right now, thousands are filing into St. Peter's Basilica to say their goodbyes to Pope Francis as his body lies in state.
And president Trump set to visit Saudi Arabia, Qatar and right here in the UAE next month, eight years after what was his memorable first presidential
trip to Riyadh. The geopolitical and geoeconomic realities here have shifted enormously since then. We will break that down for you.
ANDERSON: Well, I want to begin on Wall Street today. Investors in U.S. equities are reacting to what looks like a series of U-turns from the Trump
administration, as fears over the future health of the U.S. economy reach a tipping point. U.S. stocks surging after Trump told reporters tariffs on
China could come down substantially.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I'm not going to say, oh, I'm going to play hardball with China. I'm going to play hardball with you, President Xi.
No, no. We're going to be very nice. They're going to be very nice. And we'll see what happens. But ultimately, they have to make a deal because,
otherwise, they're not going to be able to deal in the United States.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANDERSON: Any minute now we are expecting his Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent, to give a speech in Washington to reinforce that message. He gave
a preview of his position at a private event yesterday, where he called the trade war with China unsustainable. His comments were immediately leaked to
the media.
And that is not all. Mr. Trump also walking back his threats to fire the chair of the Federal Reserve.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: No, I have no intention of firing him. I would like to see him be a little more active in terms of his idea to lower interest rates. It's a
perfect time to lower interest rates.
If he doesn't, is it the end?
No, it's not. But it would be good timing.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANDERSON: Many of you argue with whether it is, in fact, the perfect time to lower interest rates. And one of those would be Jerome Powell.
Well, CNN senior political reporter Stephen Collinson back with us this hour. And we also have Ed Luce, the U.S. national editor for the "Financial
Times," joining us from Washington, D.C.
It's good to have you on board, Ed. Thanks for joining us.
Stephen, let me start with you. CNN now learning that Trump's change of heart on Powell was in direct reaction to warnings from his advisers and
CEOs of Walmart, of Target, of Home Depot and Lowe's, also warning him his tariffs would lead to empty shelves across America.
Has Donald Trump finally had all the market turmoil that he can stomach?
STEPHEN COLLINSON, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: I guess we'll see. He seems to be able to stomach quite a lot.
I think what he's actually doing is showing why it's very important you have an independent central bank that is not subject to the momentary whims
of a volatile president, which have caused shock waves not just in relation to Powell but his tariff wars across the world.
So yes, for now, Trump appears to be seeing reality. It's rather strange that It took him this long.
[10:05:02]
Because everybody knew that, if you massively hiked tariffs on China, you're going to get supply chain disruptions. There will be shortages.
Prices will rise in the United States, months after an election which largely centered on a referendum from Americans, saying they wanted prices
to come down.
But I think this is the character of the leadership that Donald Trump shows. So while in the short term, perhaps, we're in for a period in which
he steps back, tries to get a series of face-saving deals with China and other countries, which probably don't end up having much substance.
The takeaway, I think from the start of this second Trump term is that any moment the United States is liable to become, again, a source of
instability in the world, after decades in which it was seen, especially in the financial markets, as the primary bastion of stability.
ANDERSON: Right.
Ed, stand by. I just want to get to Scott Bessent. He's started speaking. So let's just listen in.
SCOTT BESSENT, U.S. TREASURY SECRETARY: -- international counterparts to join us in working toward these goals.
On this point, I wish to be clear. America First does not mean America alone. To the contrary, it is a call for deeper collaboration and mutual
respect among trade partners. Far from stepping back, America First seeks to expand U.S. leadership and international institutions like the IMF and
the World Bank by embracing a stronger leadership role.
America First seeks to restore fairness to the international economic system. Nowhere is the imbalance I mentioned earlier more obvious than in
the world of trade. That's why the United States is taking action now to rebalance global commerce.
For decades, successive administrations relied on faulty assumptions that our trading partners would implement policies that would drive a balanced
global economy. Instead, we face the stark reality of large and persistent U.S. deficits as a result of an unfair trading system.
Intentional policy choices by other countries have hollowed out America's manufacturing sector and undermined our critical supply chains, putting our
national and economic security at risk.
President Trump has taken strong actions to address these imbalances and the negative impacts they have on Americans. The status quo of large and
persistent imbalances is not sustainable. It is not sustainable for the United States. And ultimately, it is not sustainable for other economies.
Now I know sustainability is a popular term around here. But I'm not talking about climate change or carbon footprints. I'm talking about
economic and financial stability, the kind of sustainability that raises standards of living and keeps markets afloat.
International financial institutions must be singularly focused on upholding this kind of sustainability if they are to succeed in their
missions. In response to president Trump's tariff announcements, more than 100 countries have approached us, wanting to help rebalance global trade.
These countries have responded openly and positively to the president's actions to create a more balanced international system. We are engaged in
meaningful discussions and look forward to talking with others. China, in particularly in particular, is in need of a rebalancing.
Recent data shows the Chinese economy tilting even further away from consumption toward manufacturing. China's economic system with growth
driven by manufacturing exports will continue to create even more serious imbalances with its trading partners if the status quo is allowed to
continue.
China's current economic model is built on exporting its way out of its economic troubles. It's an unsustainable model that is not only harming
China but the entire world. China needs to change. The country knows it needs to change. Everyone knows it needs to change and we want to help it
change because we need rebalancing too.
China can start by moving its economy away from export overcapacity and toward supporting its own consumers and domestic demand.
[10:10:00]
Such a shift would help with global rebalancing that the world desperately needs.
Of course, trade is not the only factor in broader global economic imbalances. The persistent overreliance on the United States for demand is
resulting in an ever more unbalanced global economy.
Some countries policies encourage excess savings, which holds back private sector-led growth. Others keep wages artificially depressed, which also
suppresses growth. These practices contribute to global dependence on U.S. demand to spur growth. They also lead to a global economy --
(TECHNICAL ISSUES)
BESSENT: -- identified several sources of stagnation and he has outlined several recommendations to get the European economy back on the right
track. European countries would do well to take his recommendations to heart.
Europe has already taken some long overdue initial steps that I applaud. These steps create a new source of global demand and also involve Europe
stepping up on the security front.
I believe global economic relationships should come to reflect security partnerships. Security partners are more likely to have compatible
economies, structurally structured for mutually beneficial trade.
If the United States continues offering security guarantees and open markets, then our allies must step up with stronger commitments to shared
defense. The initial actions from Europe on increased fiscal and defense spending are proof that the Trump administration's policies are indeed
working.
The Trump administration and the U.S. Treasury are committed to maintaining and expanding U.S. economic leadership in the world. This is especially
true at the international financial institutions.
The IMF and World Bank serve critical roles in the international system and the Trump administration is eager to work with them so long as they can
stay true to their missions. And under the status quo, they are falling short.
The Bretton Woods institutions must step back from their sprawling and unfocused agendas, which have stifled their ability to deliver on their
core mandates. Going forward, the Trump administration will leverage U.S. leadership and influence at these institutions and push them to accomplish
their very important mandates.
The United States will also demand that the management and staffs of these institutions be accountable for demonstrating real progress. I invite all
of you to join us in working to refocus these institutions on their core missions. It is in our collective interest to do so.
The IMF, first, we must make the IMF the IMF again. The IMF mission is to promote international monetary cooperation, facilitate the balanced growth
of international trade, encourage economic growth and discourage harmful policies like competitive exchange rate, depreciation.
These are crucially important functions to support the U.S. and global economies. Instead, the IMF has suffered from mission creep. The IMF was
once unwavering in its mission of promoting global monetary cooperation and financial stability.
Now it devotes disproportionate time and resources to work on climate change, gender and social issues. These issues are not the IMF mission.
And the IMF's focus in these areas is crowding out its work on critical macroeconomic issues. The IMF must be a brutal truth teller and not just to
some members.
Today, the IMF has been whistling past the graveyard. Its 2024, external sector report was entitled, imbalances receding. This Pollyannaish outlook
is symptomatic of an institution more dedicated to preserving the status quo than answering the hard questions.
Here in the United States, we know we need to get our fiscal house in order. The last administration ran up the largest peacetime deficit in our
nation's history.
[10:15:03]
The current administration is committed to fixing this. We are open to critique but we will not abide the IMF failing to critique the countries
that most need it, principally surplus countries.
In line with its core mandate, the IMF needs to call out countries, like China, that have pursued globally distorted policies and opaque currency
practices for many decades. I also expect the IMF to call out unsustainable lending practices by certain creditor countries.
The IMF should push more proactively official bilateral lenders to come to the table early to work with borrower countries to minimize periods of debt
distress. The IMF must refocus its lending on addressing balance of payment problems and its lending should be temporary.
When done responsibly, IMF lending is at the very core of its contribution to the global economy. When markets fail, the IMF steps in and makes
resources available.
In exchange, countries implement economic reforms to resolve their balance of payments, issues and support economic growth. The reforms undertaken
during these programs are some of the IMFs most important contributions to a strong, sustainable and balanced global economy.
Argentina is a fitting example. I was in Argentina earlier this month to demonstrate the United States' support for the IMF efforts to help the
country reset financially. Argentina deserves the IMF support because the country is making real progress toward meeting financial benchmarks.
But not every country is so deserving. The IMF must hold countries accountable for implementing economic reforms.
And sometimes, sometimes the IMF needs to say no. The organization has no obligation to lend to countries that fail to implement reforms. Economic
stability and growth should be the markers of the IMF's success, not how much money the institution lends out.
World Bank, like the IMF, the World Bank must be made fit for purpose again. The World Bank group helps developing countries grow their
economies, reduce poverty, increase private investment, support private sector job creation and reduce dependence on foreign aid.
It offers transparent and affordable long-term financing for countries to invest in their own development priorities.
The Bank, along with the Fund, provides extensive technical support to promote debt sustainability among low income countries, which empowers
those countries to stand up to coercive and opaque lending terms from other creditors.
These core functions of the World Bank complement the Trump administration's efforts to foster safer, stronger and more prosperous
economies in the United States and the world.
But the Bank, like the IMF, has strayed in certain respects from its initial mission. The Bank should no longer expect blank checks for vapid,
buzzword-centric marketing, accompanied by half-hearted commitments to reform.
As the Bank returns to its core mission, it must use its resources as efficiently and effectively as possible. And it must do so in ways that
demonstrate tangible values for all member countries.
The Bank can use its resources more efficiently now by focusing on increasing energy access. Business leaders the world over identify
unreliable power supply as one of the primary impediments to investment.
The World Bank and African Development Bank's joint Mission 300 initiative, to expand energy access to 300 million more people in Africa, is a welcome
effort.
But the World Bank must respond to countries' energy priorities and needs and focus on dependable technologies that can sustain economic growth
rather than seek to meet distortionary climate finance targets. We applaud the recent announcement.
[10:20:00]
That the World Bank will seek to remove prohibitions on support for nuclear energy, which could revolutionize energy supply for many emerging markets.
We encourage the Bank to go further in giving countries access to all technologies that can provide affordable baseload generation.
The World Bank must be tech-neutral and prioritize affordability in energy investment. In most cases, this means investing in gas and other fossil
fuel-based energy production. In other cases, this may mean investing in renewable energy coupled with systems to help manage the intermittency of
wind and solar.
The history of humanity teaches a simple lesson. Energy abundance sparks economic abundance. That's why the Bank should encourage an all-of-the-
above approach to energy development. Such an approach will make World Bank financing more effective.
And it will reconnect the Bank to its core mission of economic growth and poverty alleviation. In addition to increasing energy access, the World
Bank can use its resources more effectively by starting to apply its graduation policy. This would allow the Bank to focus on lending to poorer,
less creditworthy countries.
This is where World Bank support makes the biggest difference for poverty and growth. Instead, the World Bank continues to lend every year to
countries that have met the criteria to graduate from World Bank borrowing.
There is no justification for this continued lending. It siphons off resources from higher priorities and crowds out the development of private
markets. It also disincentivizes countries' effort to move away from dependency on the World Bank and toward job-rich, private sector-led
growth.
Going forward, the Bank must set firm graduation timelines for countries that have long since met the graduation criteria.
Treating China, the second largest country in the world, as a developing country is absurd. While it has been at the expense of many Western
markets, China's rise has been rapid and impressive.
If China wants to play a role in the global economy commensurate with its actual importance, then the country needs to graduate up. We welcome that.
The World Bank should also implement transparent procurement policies based on best value.
It must help countries move away from procurement approaches that prioritize only the lowest cost bids. Such procurement policies reward
distortive and subsidized industrial policies that undermine development.
They may also stifle the private sector and incentivize corruption and collusion and result in greater long-term cost. Procurement policies based
on best value or better, from both an efficiency and development perspective and their robust implementation, will benefit the Bank and its
shareholders.
Related to this subject, I wish to send a strong -- and I emphasize strong -- message about procurement policies as regards Ukraine. No one who
financed or supplied the Russian war machine will be eligible for funds earmarked for Ukraine's reconstruction. No one.
To conclude, I invite our allies to work with us as we rebalance the international financial system, refocus the IMF and World Bank on their
founding charters. America First means we are doubling down on our engagement with the international economic system, including at the IMF and
the World Bank.
A more sustainable economic system will be one that better serves the interests of the United States and all the other participants in the
system. We look forward to working with all of you in this endeavor. Thank you.
ANDERSON: Well, Scott Bessent, Trump's Treasury Secretary, speaking in Washington, a speech on the global financial system. Well, certainly, that
was how it was plugged.
And the key takeaway at the top of that speech. America First does not mean America alone. And this does feel like an attempt to explain away what his
boss, Donald Trump, has been up to over these past 90 days.
[10:25:03]
With his flip-flopping around on tariffs and to try and restore some confidence in the U.S. and U.S. assets after weeks of uncertainty in light
of this crazy noise on tariffs.
He also, by the way, laid into the IMF, describing it as needing wholesale reform to make, quote, "the IMF the IMF again" and criticizing the World
Bank as well. And that's key, because you've got to remember one of the key funders of both of those multilateral banking organizations is the United
States.
The IMF and the World Bank need the U.S. to function. Let me bring back my guest, Stephen Collinson, one of my colleagues here at CNN, and Edward
Luce, the U.S. editor for the "FT."
Ed, let me bring you in.
What did you make of Bessent's comments?
Let's leave aside the IMF and World Bank stuff to begin with. America First does not mean America alone.
What do you make of those comments?
LUCE: Well, Scott Bessent sort of set himself up as the good cop of the Trump administration, the reassurer in chief. And we saw that yesterday
with his more soothing comments about the trade war not being indefinite.
And the markets, of course, looking for anything, any piece of driftwood to cling onto, have been responding very positively whenever Bessent speaks.
And so I -- you know, I guess America First does not mean America alone.
You know, that is the more market friendly way of describing Trump's impulses, to put it mildly, on global trade and having global trade wars.
And so I suspect the speech he just gave will further reassure this market rally that he helped spark when he spoke yesterday.
It is, you know, the annual spring meetings here in Washington of the World Bank and the IMF. And a lot of people at these two institutions have
worried that Trump has them in his sights, that he wants to get rid of these globalist institutions.
And I think on that score, Bessent was also attempting to reassure that, you know, they are safe as long as they comply with the anti-climate
change, anti-gender funding and anti-China priorities of the Trump administration. So it was a reassurance speech.
ANDERSON: Yes. None of this is unfamiliar, given what we've seen over the last 90 days. So it's interesting. It was, as you say, the reassurer in
chief who sort of laid down the markers.
I do wonder -- and I'll come back to you, Stephen, momentarily.
I do wonder, though, Ed, whether to a degree, even though we are seeing, you know, Nasdaq up some 4 percent. I'm just looking at the markets now,
the S&P up 3 percent and the Dow up another 2.75 percent. And this is on top of the gains that were made yesterday.
But there's been so much sort of fallout in these markets. I do wonder whether you think sort of long-term, the damage may already have been done.
I mean, confidence in U.S. assets, be that equities, bonds or the dollar has been shaken, Ed.
LUCE: It was set to go down a thousand points on Monday and up almost that on Tuesday. I mean volatility is the sort of consistent throughline here
with Trump's approach to the global economy.
And he's been, since liberation day, on so-called liberation day on April the 2nd, you know, he's twice been forced to pause by markets, once with
the 90-day declaration on the trade war for everybody except China.
And then again yesterday when he, you know, he said he wasn't going to try and fire Jerome Powell, the Fed chair. And yet, you know, having been
through that schooling, the first thing on Monday morning that Trump did, which was what sparked that massive selloff, was say he did want to fire
Powell.
So he keeps returning to his instincts. And I think that that essential volatility, the capriciousness of Trump, has really settled in to sort of
market view of him. And the idea that any trade deal is going to be a lasting one, that negotiations with Trump will produce sustained deals,
people are very skeptical about that.
He tends to walk away from deals he himself has made and signed, as we saw with Canada and Mexico; renegotiating NAFTA with them in his first term,
now repudiating the deal he made. So I do think that the markets are now pricing in a sort of permanent Trump premium.
[10:30:05]
And I don't think Scott Bessent, reassuring, though he is, I don't think Scott Bessent is privy to Trump's decisions. And therefore there is a limit
to the degree that that reassurance is going to affect the markets over the longer term.
ANDERSON: Yes.
This speech has just been made, Stephen.
Thank you. Ed.
And we haven't yet got response to what did feel like a lesson in sort of, you know, rebalancing trade and how you might run an economy to Beijing. So
we'll wait to see how this goes down in China.
I guess the question at this stage for investors, who -- you know, this has to be described, this past two sessions, at least, you know, we're only an
hour into the session today, as a sort of, you know, sense of relief from U.S. investors.
I do wonder how quickly, you know, any deal between China and the U.S. now needs to be made to stave off what could be the worst impacts of this sense
of sort of unpredictability and uncertainty from Trump.
COLLINSON: Yes, I mean, I think the lesson, if you're China, is that Trump is going to fold.
So why would you necessarily rush to him with a deal that they might see as detrimental to China's interests, because he may shift his position again?
I think if we look at the first term, it's quite instructive. He did a trade deal with China, which he hailed as the greatest trade deal anyone
had ever done with China. It was never fully implemented. Even before the pandemic changed everything.
I think there's good reason to believe that other nations will look at that and come to the United States with deals that Trump can say are great in
terms of investment and in other areas but really don't give up on their core interests. And perhaps China will follow that playbook.
But any sense and -- of these claims that were made by Trump administration officials earlier on, that this was all about reviving American
manufacturing, completely changing the global economy, are likely to ring hollow.
And I think, you know, Bessent made perfectly reasonable arguments about the need to rebalance international trade. Some of those arguments China
has been making itself about perhaps weaning itself off being so reliant on exports.
But that was an argument you could make before Trump set the global financial markets ablaze. And there's no reason, as Ed said, I think, for
any of the U.S. interlocutors in this to believe that any deal that they make with Trump is permanent.
So why would they give away the shop in the knowledge that it could all break down, based on a Truth Social tweet at 2 in the morning?
ANDERSON: It's fascinating, isn't it?
We're looking at the Dow Jones, up 2.75 percent. The other two markets that we keep an eye on, the Nasdaq and the S&P, the Nasdaq very specifically,
you know, packed with tech stocks, which have really had a significant fallout of late, up some 4.25 percent at present.
And the S&P up 3 percent and a bit. We will continue to watch those markets. Keep an eye on the dollar for you as well. Thank you both.
Still to come, a high-stakes Middle East visit, three countries in less than a week. Why president Donald Trump says he is hoping to seal the deal
on some promised investments in the U.S. economy. More on that is after this.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[10:35:00]
(MUSIC PLAYING)
ANDERSON (voice-over): Welcome back. You're watching CONNECT THE WORLD with me, Becky Anderson. It's just after 6:30 here. These are your
headlines.
Thousands of mourners in Vatican City are paying their respects to Pope Francis. His body now lying in state at St. Peter's Basilica and will stay
there until his funeral on Saturday. Italy has declared five days of national mourning ahead of that funeral.
Well, we've been listening to U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, speaking in Washington, D.C., this hour, where he reinforced president
Donald Trump's change in tone on China. Bessent told the crowd that America First does not mean America alone.
On Tuesday, Mr. Trump said tariffs on China could come down substantially. He also walked back his threats to fire Fed chair Jerome Powell. Well U.S.
markets are very much reassured by those comments and are up significantly today on the back of those remarks.
Talks in London on ending the Ukraine war are now being scaled down after the U.S. secretary of state said he would skip the discussions. The State
Department says it is due to logistical issues. The Trump administration has recently expressed frustration over the lack of a concrete peace deal
between Russia and Ukraine.
ANDERSON: Well, U.S. president Donald Trump is set to attend the pope's funeral in Rome this weekend. That would make his visit the first foreign
trip of Mr. Trump's second term. So the second foreign trip, then, will be to this region.
The White House confirming he'll make stops in Qatar, Saudi Arabia and right here in the United Arab Emirates next month. President Trump and the
Gulf states have a long standing relationship. The UAE has pledged to invest $1.4 trillion in the U.S. over the next decade.
As for Saudi Arabia, the crown prince has said the kingdom wants to invest $600 billion in the U.S. over the next four years. And according to Mr.
Trump, the Saudis promised even more money if he traveled there.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: This time, they've gotten richer. We've all gotten older. So I said, I'll go If you pay $1 trillion, $1 trillion to American companies,
meaning the purchase over a four-year period of $1 trillion. And they've agreed to do that.
So I'm going to be going there. And I have a great relationship with them and they've been very nice. But they're going to be spending a lot of money
to American companies for buying military equipment and a lot of other things.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANDERSON: You're not going to get more transactional than that, are you?
CNN's chief national security correspondent, Alex Marquardt, is following the latest from Washington.
It did feel as if his first foreign trip, you know, ended up being a sort of auction. And the Saudis, the Saudis won it. But in the end, it's Saudi,
the kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Qatar and, of course, the UAE.
This visit is about financial deals but there is also a lot of key diplomacy here: Saudi Arabia mediating Russia-Ukraine talks, Qatar
mediating Israel-Hamas talks. Just break down the relationship dynamics here for us, if you will.
ALEX MARQUARDT, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: And Becky, of course, the UAE, a vital partner in the region as well, has been a go-
between for this administration, with the Iranians setting up the conversations that we're now seeing taking place, mediated by Oman on the
nuclear deal.
I do think a lot of this is going to be about these financial, economic defense deals.
[10:40:02]
I was speaking with one U.S. official this morning, who said that this trip is all about the dollars but certainly it is coming at a critical moment.
All these countries helping out on a number of different fronts and stand to continue helping on a number of different fronts.
I think one big question for the Saudi visit, for example, is will Vladimir Putin be there?
That's something that's been speculated and reported about. I think there will have to be progress on the Russia-Ukraine deal in order for that to
happen.
There's also been speculation whether the Saudis would bring along the Syrian president in order for him to meet Donald Trump. So those are the
kinds of pieces that we need to see fall into place.
But certainly, especially when it comes to the Emiratis and the Saudis, what Trump is essentially seeing is dollar signs. Those massive amounts
that you were talking about, investments over years, long periods, in AI, in tech, in defense, in aviation and other sectors.
I think one interesting thing to watch will be whether obviously Saudi gets up to that $1 trillion figure that Trump was talking about or even tries to
surpass the Emiratis, because, of course, they wouldn't like to take second position to the UAE.
I think for the Qataris, it's slightly different. It's a bit more reputational and it's a bit of a thank you from the Trump administration,
from the U.S., for being such a vital interlocutor on in a number of different areas, for the Gaza ceasefire talks, which, of course, are
ongoing and the U.S. is trying to resurrect.
For the negotiations with the Taliban, getting American prisoners out of Afghanistan. And it's a bit of an effort, I think, to help the Qataris mend
their PR, the vision or, rather, the impression of their country here in the U.S.
Which has taken a bit of a ding since October 7th among Republicans, who have not liked the fact that Qatar has hosted Hamas or has given payments
to Hamas over the years, although we should note, at the behest of the Israelis.
And that brings me to another point, is that this is a Middle East tour of some of the most vital Arab allies but very notable that, on this trip,
that the American president will not be visiting Netanyahu in Israel, Becky.
ANDERSON: And very briefly, before I let you go, you've talked about some of what Donald Trump's priorities are here. And clearly, you know, the
transactional side of this is hugely important.
I just wonder whether it's clear at this point what Donald Trump hopes might be achieved in the lead-up to this trip. And consequently, what he
might be able to sort of declare as job done when he gets here.
It feels to me -- and certainly by talking to sources around the region -- that there is, for example, this clear momentum for U.S.-Iran indirect
talks as they stand at present to try and sort of secure some sort of deal in the first instance.
It's important to the Trump administration ahead of this trip.
He wants to see some deals done at this point, right?
MARQUARDT: He does. And he's put his lead envoy, Steve Witkoff, who has essentially, for all intents and purposes, become his chief diplomat on all
these different areas, in charge of these various portfolios.
The U.S., we have seen their impatience growing on all of the fronts that Witkoff is now in charge of. The ceasefire in Gaza, of course; there are
still American hostages that Trump would very much like to bring home.
Trump has talked about a very short timeframe for getting a new Iranian nuclear deal. Certainly the Iranians are feeling that pressure. And now we
have Witkoff going to Moscow in the coming days, because the U.S. has made very clear that the time is running out.
But I do think that some -- that can kind of be seen separately from a lot of this trip, which I really do think, based on speaking with sources, is
based on the deals that he would like to strike.
Yes, there are going to be geopolitical elements and bilaterals, like potentially that meeting with Vladimir Putin. But in talking with U.S.
officials about the preparation for this trip, it's all in the economic channel, Becky.
We know that Scott Bessent has recently gone on a tour of the region. We know that there are meetings taking place at the Treasury about what the
deliverables are going to be. That's the word that we keep hearing, "deliverables."
What is the U.S. going to get out of this?
And so we have seen the big dollar figures. But we're starting to see the blanks getting filled in about what those actual elements will be. And we
know that those negotiations are taking place.
The Qataris were here in Washington yesterday, preparing for the trip. The Saudis have been through town as well. And so essentially, all the work is
now being done to tee up those meetings that will take place next month.
[10:45:00]
So that they can make those announcements when Trump is there in mid-May, Becky.
ANDERSON: Yes, it's fascinating, isn't it?
Well, stay with it. And we're working our sources this end around the Gulf as well to try and ensure that we are, you know, understanding exactly what
it is that the Trump administration wants to achieve, on the one hand, and what the perception from this part of the world is, as he as he makes his
way here.
Good to have you. Thank you very much indeed, Alex.
Still to come, we're going to take a closer look at the next round of high- stakes nuclear talks between Iran and the U.S., now just days away. We look at the mood on both sides. Up next.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
ANDERSON: Let's get to talks between Iran and the U.S. over Tehran's nuclear program. A source says that the technical talks that were expected
to have taken place today have now shifted to Saturday. A third round of political talks is set to take place on the same day in Oman.
Now the Trump administration has expressed optimism following round two in Rome a few days ago and Iran's foreign minister also expressed cautious
optimism. He is in China today on that country's invitation.
Let's do more on this. Ali Vaez is the director of the Iran Project at the International Crisis Group and coauthor of "How Sanctions Work: Iran and
the Impact of Economic Warfare."
And I'm going to get to the economic warfare in a moment. Let's start with the big question this hour.
What does a deal between the U.S. and Iran look like at this stage?
And how close are we in reality to getting to something that looks like an agreement anytime soon?
ALI VAEZ, IRAN PROJECT, INTERNATIONAL CRISIS GROUP: It's good to be with you, Becky.
Look, already, I think the two sides are off to a good start. It would have been hard to imagine, after a decade of not having high-level direct and
indirect interaction between Iran and the U.S., that we will be now on the verge of a third round of negotiations with the parties agreeing on what
the end game and the contours of the possible deal will be.
Now the hard part is just beginning, which is going to be the technical discussions between the two sides. These issues are too complicated. As you
know, there is a high degree of mistrust. And time is too short.
So I think it's warranted to have a note of cautiousness, in addition to optimism, that Iran-U.S. talks are always fraught and uncertain if they
would reach the finish line.
ANDERSON: At this stage, is it -- I mean, Donald Trump has made it very clear.
[10:50:00]
Iran can't have a bomb. You hear that around the region that I am in.
Is it clear that, in going into this negotiation, the U.S. has set the bar at just no bomb or no nuclear program because, at least from Tehran's point
of view, no nuclear program is a red line?
VAEZ: I think no nuclear program might have been the ceiling for the U.S. negotiators, not the floor in these negotiations. And if indeed that was an
absolute requirement, I don't think there would have been a second round or a third round of negotiations.
You know, this idea of Iran dismantling its enrichment program entirely, like what Libya did in the early 2000s, is not a new idea. And it has an
unblemished record of failure.
The only thing that has worked in the past 20 years of nuclear diplomacy with Iran is to restrict Iran's enrichment activity and putting it on the
rigorous international monitoring. And that appears to be what the U.S. is seeking in these negotiations as well.
ANDERSON: Certainly we have had, you know, words from Donald Trump, which suggest that he sees Iran as an opportunity. And often that is the first
point. That's the sort of North Star when it comes to Donald Trump's thinking about any deal. We've seen that before.
How badly does Iran need this deal at this stage?
VAEZ: Well, one of the reasons for optimism, Becky, at this moment, is that president Trump really wants a deal and Iran really needs a deal. And
one of the main reasons that Iran needs a deal is that it's in real dire economic straits. They're literally struggling to keep the lights on.
There are serious energy shortages, which often happens, as you know, in that part of the world in the summer, when they have to use air
conditioning. But Iran is already facing electricity shortages in the winter and in the spring. The currency has lost 50 percent of its value
since president Pezeshkian came to office.
Inflation and unemployment are sky-high and Iran is really desperate for cash. And that, I think, has rendered them more flexible in these
negotiations but also because the threat of use of military force is more pronounced than it has ever been with the U.S. amassing so much military
assets in the region.
And Israel also breaking the taboo of direct confrontation with Iran last year.
ANDERSON: Good to have you, sir. We will stay in touch. Thank you. And we will be right back.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
ANDERSON: Well, Turkiye has been rocked by a 6.2 magnitude earthquake that struck off the coast of Istanbul. Officials say they are yet to receive any
calls for help but people gathered in the streets as aftershocks continue.
Search and rescue teams have been mobilized across impacted areas just in case. The quake hit around 70 kilometers west of Istanbul in the Sea of
Marmara.
[10:55:00]
Well, thousands of pilgrims continue to pour in to St. Peter's Basilica at Vatican City to pay their respects to the late Pope Francis. Earlier today.
The pontiff's body was transferred from Casa Santa Marta to the basilica, where it will lie in state for three days until his funeral on Saturday.
As part of Pope Francis' push to simplify the papal funeral rites, his body is lying in an open wooden coffin, the pontiff having done away with the
tradition of having three coffins of cypress, lead and oak.
Well, I'll leave you with these pictures. That is it for CONNECT THE WORLD. CNN, of course, though, continues. "ONE WORLD" is up next.
END
