Return to Transcripts main page
Connect the World
Trump Calls on Putin to Stop; U.S. Pressures Ukraine to Accept Peace Plan; Zelenskyy Cuts South Africa Trip Short after Strikes on Kyiv; Trump's Mixed Messages on China Tariffs, Trade War; No Uranium Enrichment under Potential Iran Deal; India Downgrades Ties with Pakistan after Kashmir Attack; Call to Earth: African Penguins; How Pope Francis Helped Inspire Global Climate Action. Aired 10-11a ET
Aired April 24, 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.
ELENI GIOKOS, CNN ANCHOR AND CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Welcome to our second hour of CONNECT THE WORLD from our Middle East programming
headquarters. I'm Eleni Giokos.
"Vladimir, stop."
Donald Trump's direct message to President Putin after the deadliest Russian attack on Kyiv in months. Moscow launching more than 200 missiles
and drones at Ukraine, killing at least eight people.
The NATO secretary general is in Washington; high on his agenda, urging America to make it clear that it supports Ukraine and Europe.
And tensions escalating quickly between India and Pakistan after a deadly terrorist attack in the disputed Kashmir region.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
GIOKOS: Welcome to the show. And we start with pointed criticism from the U.S. president, directed at his Russian counterpart over Russia's latest
deadly attacks in Ukraine.
Donald Trump posting a short time ago on his social media website, "I am not happy with the Russian strikes on Kyiv. Not necessary and very bad
timing. Vladimir, stop; 5,000 soldiers a week are dying. Let's get the peace deal done."
That post coming as Ukrainian rescue teams spend the day sifting through rubble, looking for survivors and victims after the deadliest attack on
Kyiv since last summer. Russia launched more than 200 drones and missiles overnight. At least eight people are reported dead, dozens more wounded.
Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who was the target of president Trump's criticism yesterday, says the new strikes are aimed at pressuring
the United States.
So we have a lot to cover here. We've got our chief international and U.S. security correspondent, Nick Paton Walsh, who is in London; Alex Marquardt
in Washington and also in Washington CNN contributor and our former Moscow bureau chief, Jill Dougherty, joining us now.
She's also got a new book out, "My Russia," a journalist's journey of a lifetime.
Thank you so much for joining me. So much to get through.
And, Nick, I want to start with this incredible post by Donald Trump. And basically him imploring Putin to stop these strikes. I want you to give us
your analysis on these brazen Kyiv strikes in the context of this constant slow burn of diplomatic talks.
And then, of course, president Trump coming through really strong and saying, you've got to stop this.
NICK PATON WALSH, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Yes, I mean, he does seem to take as much objection to the timing as to the act in
itself. And this was a particularly brutal barrage overnight across Ukraine. Kyiv hit particularly hard.
Some of the worst casualties there; eight dead, dozens injured, possibly for about a year or so. What was different was the use of missiles here; 70
fired. That is an exceptionally large number, backed up by about 140 or so drones, some of those decoy drones.
But these missiles, I think, are designed to test Ukraine's increasingly perilous air defenses. President Zelenskyy has been appealing for more
Patriot missile interceptors.
They're the only things that can take down Russian ballistic missiles and there have been concerns that, around about now and in the months and weeks
ahead, we might see Ukraine running out of those vital elements. So we may see more of this.
But clearly I think it was designed by Moscow as a reminder to those war- weary Ukrainians that maybe a peace deal is urgently needed for them, to put pressure from that perspective on Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
And, of course, it's also provided a moment to where, as we've seen in the past, after president Trump pressures Volodymyr Zelenskyy like he did last
night, calling his rhetoric "inflammatory" because he refused to recognize Crimea.
But then also saying that, in fact, the United States doesn't seem to want Ukraine to officially recognize occupied Crimea as part of Russia. That
might, it seems, be something the U.S. would do unilaterally.
He then, a matter of hours later, turns his criticism toward Vladimir Putin, some may say, as a response to perhaps to some of the consternation
we've heard globally at his increasing focus on the conduct of Volodymyr Zelenskyy, whose country has been invaded by Russia.
So much moving here on the diplomatic front, Zelenskyy today suggesting that the meeting in London on Thursday downgraded -- sorry, on Wednesday --
downgraded from secretary of state level -- Marco Rubio didn't attend -- to merely U.S. officials.
That appears to have yielded a document, a tweaking of peace proposals by the Ukrainians and some European allies.
[10:05:00]
Zelenskyy said that is now on the desk of president Donald Trump. I'm sure that will form part of his envoy, Steve Witkoff's, discussions when he goes
to Moscow tomorrow. So an awful lot moving.
But this deadline is self-imposed by the Trump administration. They've given themselves days to fix this. A European official essentially saying
they want to get a deal in 100 days.
From their perspective, is that possible?
Really unclear. We simply don't know what they're asking the Kremlin to cede. But we do know they're asking for Ukraine to make a lot of
concessions.
GIOKOS: Absolutely. And really good points. And, of course, JD Vance says he's willing to pull out of this if they don't both come to the table.
And Alex, to Nick's point about Zelenskyy saying that he, you know, on the question of Crimea that is off the table. He was actually speaking in South
Africa today. Take a listen to what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT (through translator): After the United States' proposal, other papers appeared. And I believe that, today,
this format, this document is on president Trump's desk. Anything that contradicts our values or our constitution cannot be in any agreements.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GIOKOS: So Alex, explain where the U.S. is right now in terms of this peace deal. And I wonder in your mind if this post on social media changes
the calculus, because it does sound like Trump is infuriated.
ALEX MARQUARDT, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: It does highlight his frustration with the Russians. Certainly we know that that
that's been building.
I think it is quite remarkable because, as Nick pointed out, so much of the anger from the Trump administration has been directed at the Ukrainians as
opposed to the Russians, so much of the frustration.
And so many of the concessions that are being asked of the two sides are essentially completely weighted (ph) on the Ukrainian side. When these two
countries are being asked to give things up in order to get to a peace deal, it's really the Ukrainians who are going to have to make the biggest
concessions on that front.
And I think there really is -- there are different timelines here, where the U.S. is rushing toward a deal, really feeling that urgency. They've
talked from the beginning about getting this done within the first 100 days.
While the Ukrainians are far more reluctant to proceed at that pace, the Russians aren't showing any indication that they want to go along with that
pace, either. They're certainly fine to keep the fight going, always believing that the time has been on their side.
And so what we have here is a real difference in terms of the approach. In fact, when you look at the Trump post on Truth Social today, he's saying,
let's get this peace deal done. In the Ukrainians' minds, from what I've been told, they want to get to a ceasefire first.
They want the fighting to stop so that then there can be more formal negotiations about what perhaps these concessions would look like, where
the lines would fall, the questions over NATO membership, the questions over recognition of the different territories, of the security guarantees
while the U.S. side is barreling forward.
And so I think the Ukrainians are in a tough spot here, where from what we've seen from those meetings in London yesterday, they have made some
progress. They are coming around, we're told, to this idea that they will have to make these territorial concessions.
But they are so far behind where the Americans are, who are clearly wanting to get this done, not just soon but in a matter of days.
And so I think there's a lot of concern about this meeting tomorrow between Steve Witkoff and President Putin, because Witkoff and others in the Trump
administration, including Trump himself, have shown real sympathy to the Russian narrative, echoing those Kremlin talking points.
And so if Putin were to say, OK, we're willing to freeze this conflict, as JD Vance said yesterday, then the Americans could just say, OK, great.
That's where we are. Take it or leave it to the Ukrainians.
And so despite the progress that we have seen the Ukrainians make, it does seem that there is still a huge gap between where the Ukrainians and
Europeans are and where the Americans are. And the clock very much is ticking. Eleni.
GIOKOS: Yes. Absolutely. And you make such a good point there.
And, Jill, I want you to weigh in here to Alex's point, saying, you know, the U.S. and Trump has been very sympathetic to the Trump -- to the Putin
narrative and to the Russian narrative but making it also harder with these types of strikes.
And we didn't only see them last night, by the way, on the cusp of Steve Witkoff going to Moscow, also, Zelenskyy being in South Africa -- we'll
touch on the importance of that in just a bit but also the strikes over Easter.
And just the aggressive strikes that we've seen throughout this year. And I wonder if that's making it a lot harder for the U.S. to stay on Russia's
side, because that's the image that it has been portraying since Trump came into the presidency.
JILL DOUGHERTY, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, I mean, you could argue that it's embarrassing for president Trump because he has been saying.
[10:10:00]
In fact, just I think in the last couple of days, I think we've got a deal. I think we've got a deal with Putin.
So now he's saying, I'm not happy, stop. This is very bad timing. I agree with Nick that the way that's phrased, to me, is not very strong.
I mean, it has this tut-tut quality to it, that, you know, what are you going to do if Vladimir Putin is attacking at the very time you say, I
think we've got a deal, let's do this?
So I would look at that visit that is planned for Steve Witkoff on Friday. I mean, theoretically, the administration, the Americans could pull that
meeting and not have Steve Witkoff go as a sign of, you know, frustration.
But I presumably he will go and the Russians will, as usual -- this is, you know, my surmising -- but I think the Russians will say this was not an
attack on civilians. We are -- we never attack civilians. We were attacking military targets, aviation, et cetera.
That's probably what the Russians will say.
And so it leaves president Trump, you know, how do you stop Vladimir from doing what he has been doing?
And the only thing that really will stop President Putin is action, not just words.
Also, one last thing on the timing, with -- which both Alex and Nick have mentioned, the timing is self-imposed by the Trump administration. Nobody
is pushing other than the Americans, really, to get this done ASAP. This is all driven by the timing.
And much of it, I would have to say political, domestic U.S. timing to get a deal regardless of what kind of a deal it is by this time set by the
administration, because the president, the American president, you know, promised to do this very quickly.
GIOKOS: So Jill, let me ask you this. I mean, you're talking about timing, self-imposed deadline. You know, this is what the Trump administration
wants.
What about the timing from Vladimir Putin of the Kremlin in terms of their strikes on Ukraine?
And I find it really fascinating that this is supposed to be a time of peace talks. You've got Russia and the U.S. seem to be aligned.
But the Russian timing, does this show you that perhaps they want to derail these peace talks?
DOUGHERTY: You know, I think that's a harder thing to figure out. I mean, the Russians have said they used high-precision weapons, which is what they
often say. And they often go astray, if that's indeed what they are.
So did they deliberately set out to kill civilians or were they actually trying to hit military targets?
And they killed a lot of civilians. That is -- you know, I'm not a military person and I think we need intelligence for that. I don't think that Putin
would want to necessarily derail these talks because these talks are useful for him.
It's not only, you know, Ukraine, that specific issue; it's reestablishing the relationship between the United States and Russia. And that is one of
his primary objectives.
So if you can keep the talks going, keep them going, give a little bit, like the ceasefire for 30 hours just on Easter; keep the talks going, keep
Trump believing that there will be some type of a deal and that Putin will accept that deal. And meanwhile, work on the American administration to
give Russia what it wants.
GIOKOS: OK, Nick, I want you to jump in here in terms of President Zelenskyy and South Africa. And South Africa has had a very strong
relationship with Russia and, in fact, quite ambiguous when it came to Russian aggression in Ukraine. There was a lot of criticism toward South
Africa.
Now South Africa is head of the G20. You've got Zelenskyy visiting SA and then you have the strikes in terms of the timing.
What do you -- what's the sense of why Zelenskyy went to South Africa, a trip that he had to basically cut short?
WALSH: Yes, I think this was essentially a bid to capture South Africa's attention at the moment -- it has, since the presidency -- of the G20 to
remind them of the damage that Russia's been doing, essentially to Ukraine, but also to many of those G20 economies because of the impact of the war in
Ukraine to the global economy.
And I think to possibly drag South Africa. And part of what people refer to as the global south, which is at times seem more sympathetic toward the
Russian viewpoint, drag them closer back toward Kyiv's orbit.
The mere fact that he had to cut this short because of the strikes in Kyiv, perhaps exactly the message that Zelenskyy wanted to send down in South
Africa.
[10:15:00]
And so I think we're seeing here continually Zelenskyy on the global stage, trying to sell Ukraine's case, trying to build up the alliances against
Russia.
And a day like today, particularly fraught job, where the act of persuasion is undercut by the fact that he has to simply rush home and deal with the
impact of this particularly barbaric wave of strikes and also to probably be more in the room when it comes to the nuances of this developing peace
deal.
We really don't know the full extent of what both sides are being asked to do. We don't know quite yet what Ukraine is being asked to accept. It seems
like they'll be asked to accept a frozen front line and somebody's recognition, potentially, of Crimea as being Russian territory -- maybe
just the United States'.
And there is likely to be a minerals deal and there is likely to potentially be some kind of wording to do with security guarantees for
Ukraine. And maybe their withdrawal of a bid to join NATO, something which Ukraine's constitution in fact mandates, these are all very big asks for
Kyiv.
Zelenskyy is going to have to be home to deal with those, to ameliorate them for Ukraine and to sell them to his own electorate still, frankly, and
to an army fighting this particular war. So we're in for an exceptionally complicated week ahead of us as we deal with this self-imposed deadline of
the Trump administration.
GIOKOS: Yes.
Alex, I want to talk about U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth meeting with the NATO chief, Mark Rutte, ahead of a wider meeting with U.S. secretary of
state Marco Rubio, as well as national security advisor Mike Waltz.
How much is Rutte going to try to sway Americans toward a pro Ukraine, as well as pro-Europe position?
Does he have the agency to be able to shift the diplomatic stance?
MARQUARDT: Remember, Rutte is quite new in the job and he came into it at the same time that that Trump was taking office. And so he knew that he had
a difficult task ahead at keeping the NATO alliance intact, frankly. I mean, president Trump has talked in the past about the possibility of
pulling out of NATO.
So Rutte is really trying to keep the U.S. engaged. I think if the Europeans and the Ukrainians are taking a tougher line with the U.S. in
terms of making demands of the U.S. for security assistance, for security guarantees and really pushing them on the peace deal side of things.
If that's the bad cop role, so to speak, I think Rutte is really trying to play the good cop role, really not making too many demands of the Americans
and really going along with it.
And he will hear some sympathetic voices in Mike Waltz and Marco Rubio, who really do value the NATO alliance. I was with Rubio a couple of weeks ago
at NATO headquarters. He says that the U.S. has never been more engaged or more supportive of the NATO alliance.
The real American gripe when it comes to NATO is defense spending by the NATO allies. The Trump administration has talked about getting NATO allies
up to 5 percent of their GDP. There are a number of allies, I believe, are just shy of 10 of them, who are still in kind of the 1 percent, 1 percent
to 2 percent range.
And so that's really where the Americans are pushing NATO. I think interesting, of course, that his first meeting is with Pete Hegseth, who is
probably quite a bit distracted because he's -- there's all this reporting about chaos at the Pentagon and his Signal chats.
And in that first Signal chat that was reported, by "The Atlantic," actually, Hegseth talked about European freeloaders and how pathetic they
are. So, of course, that could provide for some awkwardness with the NATO defense chief.
But we're not expecting any kind of conflict or frustration here. I imagine this trip is going to go quite well, really. Rutte's mission here is to
keep the U.S. engaged, not just in the NATO alliance but in European security quite broadly and, of course, the Ukraine question as well. Eleni.
GIOKOS: Yes, really good point. Alex.
Jill, I'm going to give you the last word.
Final thoughts?
DOUGHERTY: Well, I think this was always going to be much more complicated than the administration maybe understood or wanted to understand. I'm not
quite sure why they thought, other than president Trump's statements himself, that this the war against Ukraine could be solved basically
overnight.
It is extremely complex. And the -- even the objective, you know, a ceasefire, a final resolution of the conflict, et cetera, those don't seem
to be worked out. Even what the administration wants -- it appears that the administration wants the end of fighting, period. Whatever it is, get
it off the table and move on to other subjects.
But Ukraine and what's happening right now is key to so much that's happening in Europe.
[10:20:00]
And even, you could say around the world in terms of, you know, we've talked about this, lessons that other autocratic governments will take, if
this is -- if Putin is allowed to establish control over an independent country, his neighboring country.
So again, it's -- it is very complex. And this, you know, sprinting, I think is not productive. That's where you get this kind of back and forth.
So that's, I think, the best way I can put it in terms right now.
GIOKOS: Yes. I mean and what the Europeans are going to think about freezing territories right now and the borders, all of that is going to be,
I think, one of the most important issues that are going to be coming up in these conversations.
Thank you so much to all of you, Nick Paton Walsh, Alex Marquardt, as well as Jill Dougherty, great to have you on the show. Thank you so much for
your insights. We'll see you soon.
All right. And coming up, more whiplash for U.S. trading partners as Donald Trump once again appears to change course. We'll be back right after the
short break. Stick with CNN.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I think what's going to happen is we're going to have great deals. And by the way, if we don't have a deal with a company or a country, we're
going to set the tariff. We just set the tariff. It's something that we think -- that will happen, I'd say, over the next couple of weeks.
Wouldn't you say?
I think so. Over the next two or three weeks, we'll be setting the number.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GIOKOS: U.S. President Donald Trump there once again reversing course, saying his reciprocal tariffs may be reimposed in just a few weeks. Earlier
this month, he had announced a 90-day pause on those tariffs.
Meantime, China is contradicting Mr. Trump's claims that the two sides are talking every day, saying no discussions regarding a trade deal are
ongoing. CNN's Matt Egan is back with us this hour.
Matt, good to have you with us. So yesterday, the narrative was that Trump has gotten the message on the dangers of his trade wars from -- we've seen
the markets reacting very aggressively. You've got gold, the gold price shooting through the roof, just showing just how much uncertainty and risk
is in the market.
You've got retail CEOs bringing in their warnings, his own advisors as well. But it appears that he's back to mixed messaging.
So what is the latest and why is there just so much flip-flopping on this trade issue?
MATT EGAN, CNN BUSINESS SENIOR WRITER: Yes, the latest is more whiplash. As you noted, there were so many significant concerns in financial markets
and really across the business world about the president's trade war.
And so that's why there was so much excitement earlier this week about these signs of de-escalation from the White House.
The fact that the president was saying that the U.S. and China were talking about trade every day, I mean, this was cheered by investors around the
world.
But now we're getting some conflicting signals, right?
Because Beijing comes out and their foreign ministry calling this idea of direct talks that are going on every day fake news.
[10:25:04]
Saying that they're not aware of anything like that. So you have a situation where the two countries, they're not even agreeing on whether or
not they're talking. That says a lot about where we are right now.
We are still in the midst of a full-blown trade war between the world's two biggest economies. And the longer it goes on, the bigger the damage to the
economy. And a lot of the economists that I'm talking to, they do remain concerned about what's going to happen to the economy because of all of
this trade war confusion and chaos.
Wendy Edelberg over at Brookings, she told my colleague, Allison Morrow, that businesses don't even know which end is up. Everyone is holding their
breath because they don't know what policy is going to be the law of the land tomorrow.
And we've also seen this play out in some of the surveys. Of course, consumer confidence has plunged, which is a major problem for the U.S. and
world economy but also the corporate sentiment has really gotten a lot more negative.
The Fed puts out a survey of businesses called the Beige Book and the word "uncertainty" came up 80 times in the latest Beige Book. That is seven
times more than the word was used in the same point last year.
And I think it goes a long way in sort of explaining what the concern is here. Because when business leaders have this much uncertainty, small
business owners or CEOs, you know, they just don't know what to do. It kind of freezes them in place. It paralyzes decision making.
And, of course, at some point that is going to do real damage to the economy.
The question is how much damage?
And the answer, I think, is going to be decided by what happens next in this trade war.
Do we get real de-escalation or do we continue to just get whiplash?
Back to you.
GIOKOS: And let me tell you, policy uncertainty paralyzes economies. It is a fact. We've seen this playing out time and time again. Good to see you,
Matt Egan. Thank you.
Now cuts in federal funding at the nation's top health agencies have put important research into Alzheimer's disease in limbo. CNN health reporter
Jacqueline Howard says it has researchers and caregivers sounding the alarm.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JACQUELINE HOWARD, CNN HEALTH CORRESPONDENT: Many researchers in the Alzheimer's space are on edge. There's a lot of uncertainty out there. Some
have not yet heard whether their funding will be renewed.
Their biggest fear is possibly having to end clinical trials early due to a lack in funding. Now what we do know is that, in March, NIH halted funding
for 14 of the 35 Alzheimer's disease research centers here in the United States. That's about $65 million in funding.
And we're being told that it's at those centers where some research is currently left in limbo. One scientist at Stanford told me that his team
had to hold off on starting any new Alzheimer's studies, because they're still waiting to see whether their funding will be renewed.
They were expecting a decision around February. Their funding completely ran out about three weeks ago.
Another scientist based in Florida told me that his team has developed an app that can assess your risk for Alzheimer's but it may never be released
to the public because he's also waiting to see whether funding will be renewed.
And separately, just this week, the National Institutes of Health put out a policy notice saying that it will pull medical research funding from
universities with diversity and inclusion programs and any boycotts of Israeli companies. That appears to be a blanket guideline.
The policy says it's doing this because doing those two things could be a violation of federal anti-discriminatory law. This also has Alzheimer's
scientists on edge, because, if their institutions are penalized under this policy, they could see their funding cut off.
Keep in mind, NIH is the largest public funder of biomedical research in the world. So any move the NIH makes will have sweeping consequences.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GIOKOS: Israel's far right national security minister was confronted by pro-Palestinian demonstrators in Connecticut Wednesday night.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GIOKOS (voice-over): Dozens of protesters shouted and chanted at Itamar Ben Gvir after he had given a speech to a society for Jewish Yale students.
His office says water bottles were thrown at the minister. He was not injured.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GIOKOS: As the U.S. and Iran prepare for a third round of nuclear talks this weekend, the U.S. secretary of state has stated one of Washington's
key demands for any prospective deal.
Marco Rubio says Tehran would have to stop enriching uranium and would only be able to import any nuclear fuel needed for a civilian program. Iran,
however, is pushing back, saying its right to enrich uranium is, quote, "non-negotiable."
[10:30:03]
Coming up, relations between Pakistan and India are deteriorating quickly after a deadly terrorist attack in the disputed Kashmir region. We'll bring
you that story right after this.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
GIOKOS (voice-over): Welcome back to CONNECT THE WORLD with me. Eleni Giokos. Here are your headlines.
President Donald Trump is criticizing Russia's president after the deadliest attacks on Ukraine's capital since last summer. In a social media
post, he called the attacks not necessary and for Vladimir Putin to stop them.
Russian missiles and drones killed at least eight Ukrainians and injured dozens more overnight.
U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has been meeting with NATO's secretary general at the Pentagon about ending the Russia-Ukraine war. This comes
amid reported chaos inside the Pentagon. Hegseth is facing growing questions about his judgment after another controversial group chat.
U.S. President Donald Trump is changing course on tariffs once again. On Wednesday, he told reporters his so-called reciprocal tariffs could be
reimposed in as little as two to three weeks. Earlier this month, he paused the import levies on most countries for 90 days.
Relations between India and Pakistan are at their lowest point in years. The deterioration has set off by another terrorist attack in the disputed
Jammu and Kashmir region, where a gunman opened fire at a popular tourist spot, killing 26 civilians.
India accused Pakistan on Wednesday of harboring terrorists in the region after a little known group called The Resistance Front claimed
responsibility for the attack. The Jammu and Kashmir region is considered one of the most dangerous flashpoints in the world. CNN's senior diplomatic
editor Nic Robertson joins us now live from London.
Nic, good to have you with us. I mean, a terrible and horrific attack has resulted in India, not only closing its borders, suspending water treaties
and so forth but Pakistan has now retaliated as well. Take us through what we're seeing.
NIC ROBERTSON, CNN SENIOR DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: Yes, the rhetoric really ratcheted -- has ratcheted up very quickly over this incident; 26 people,
as you say, killed; 25 of them Indian nationals. One Nepalese among them shot by gunmen who came out at them in quite a remote area where no
vehicles had access to and shot them at close range.
If you will, typical terrorist activities and India wasted no time saying that these terrorists were supported by Pakistan.
[10:35:00]
Which then led to an escalation of language on both sides. But the Indian government saying that they would track down these terrorists and their
backers -- and by implication, this means Pakistan.
The language has significantly escalated, as you say. Both sides now taking tit-for-tat measures. The latest, as you say, from Pakistan. Pakistan
responding by suspending trade ties, closing airspace, canceling visas for Indian nationals, expelling Indian diplomats.
The Indian side have, as you said, downgraded ties as well, shut key border crossings -- important for commerce for both countries; suspended the
crucial water sharing treaty. The Indus water sharing treaty goes back to about 1960. And also canceled visas for Pakistani nationals.
So they're very much tit-for-tat. But the water issue really gets to the core of the dispute over Kashmir in the first place. A Pakistani government
minister described India's decision to suspend this decades-old treaty as water warfare.
Why is that said?
It's because the waters that flow out of the Kashmir region go to both Pakistan and to India. But the country that would have the majority control
-- and they both claim -- they both claim the rights to it -- would have, therefore, the rights to the watershed in that area and therefore control
of the water.
It's a scarce product in both countries at certain times of the year. So hugely important. And it's worth remembering these are both nuclear armed
nations. They've come toe to toe before. They've got the highest battlefront in the world. The Siachen glacier battlefront is about 21,000
feet up in the mountains there.
And they've literally come to blows and fights across that front line in the past couple of decades. So the potential for diplomacy here to not find
an off-ramp and escalate is one that's going to cause concern if that off- ramp isn't found soon.
GIOKOS: Nick Paton -- sorry; Nic Robertson. I was talking to Nick Paton Walsh earlier. Apologies.
Nic Robertson, good to have you with us. Thank you so much.
I want to bring in my next guest now, who is Sajjan Gohel -- He's the international security director at the Asia Pacific Foundation -- for a
little bit more information on this.
And frankly it's incredible to see how quickly things have escalated. And to Nic's point around the water treaty, that being suspended and you've got
a really aggressive approach right now coming through after this terrorist attack.
So take me through what you make of these retaliatory measures and whether you think water is indeed at the crux of this.
SAJJAN GOHEL, ASIA PACIFIC FOUNDATION: Well, it's a very interesting point, Eleni, that Nic Robertson mentioned. So India suspending its
participation in the Indus water treaty, that is designed to put both political and diplomatic pressure on Pakistan.
And will probably end up having economic consequences, too, because that has been in existence since 1960. Now if you look at all the wars,
conflicts, skirmishes that India and Pakistan have fought, the one thing that always remained consistent was that treaty.
India suspending it means that they could potentially restrict water that then flows from the western rivers, especially the Indus, Jhelum and Chenab
rivers. And that could impact on Pakistan's food security. It could damage crops.
And it could also have an impact when it comes to hydroelectric power. But this move is partly done because I think India has lost its patience over
the fact that they are concerned that terrorists based in Pakistan continue to cross the border and launch these attacks.
And in particular, the fact that this recent incident was aimed at civilians and the killings were actually then caught on camera. So it's
created a lot of emotive reactions in India.
GIOKOS: Yes, it absolutely has. And frankly, it was really horrific. I mean, some of the accounts that we've been seeing, specifically from local
media and describing the attacking of men, others surviving, so that specifically could send a message to the Modi government.
And frankly, this is a big tourist hotspot, you know. For a lot of Indians, it's viewed as the Switzerland of India, which is really fascinating
because it shows the beauty and the attractiveness of this area.
What do you understand of this militant group or this group that claimed responsibility called The Resistance Front?
[10:40:00]
What evidence is there that it's linked to Pakistan?
Give me a sense of what we know right now.
GOHEL: So it's a really important question that you raise. The Resistance Front, known by the acronym of TRF, they are an offshoot of the banned
Pakistan-based terrorist group, the Lashkar-e-Taiba. The LET is proscribed in the United States, the U.K. and across many different countries.
You may remember, Eleni, that the Lashkar-e-Taiba was behind the 2008 Mumbai siege attacks, where several gunmen terrorists from the LET launched
attacks on hotels, on railway stations, on the Jewish cultural center, the Chabad house.
And even though the group has been heavily proscribed, their leadership continues to operate inside Pakistan quite freely, issuing very fiery
statements and threatening not just India but also the West as well.
And the belief is that the TRF was created so that it could operate with impunity and therefore drawing a separation from the LET. But in reality,
it's just simply an offshoot of this group.
And keep in mind that they also seemed to carry out their attack very similar to past LET operations. They seem to be well-trained. They had
military grade equipment. They were operating with stealth. And that tends to be the hallmark of the LET.
GIOKOS: The other sort of important question that comes up on all of this attack is the intelligence failure and why this wasn't intercepted. And
also the sophistication of this attack.
Could you take us through it and what it tells us?
And this is this also part of a failure of the Modi government in terms of failing to intercept this?
GOHEL: Well, I think one of the things that's very interesting about what's transpired in Jammu and Kashmir over the last couple of years is
that militancy and cross-border terrorism has actually come quite down significantly.
And in fact, terrorism has peaked, not just from local tourists across India but even from around the world. India was even able to hold a G20
event in Srinagar, the capital of Jammu and Kashmir. And it seemed to be relatively stable.
I think some warning signs and concerns have come up, especially last week, when the Pakistan chief of army staff, Asim Munir, he gave a very fiery
statement and riled up the crowd in Pakistan when he spoke about that, Kashmir will not be forgotten and that it's part of their jugular vein.
You've also got to look at the fact that, U.S. vice president JD Vance happened to be in India the same time as this attack occurred.
And it's almost as if it was staged for the timing to try and deflect from India's potential trade deal with the United States, because Pakistan tends
to get very anxious when the U.S. moves away from them, partly because of the fact of strategic imperatives.
So it is bringing back some eerie examples of past events where, as the U.S. gets closer to India, it seems to trigger a very negative reaction
from Pakistan.
GIOKOS: Sajjan Gohel, thank you so much for joining us and thank you for your insights.
You're watching CONNECT THE WORLD. There's more news ahead. Stay with CNN.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[10:45:00]
(MUSIC PLAYING)
GIOKOS: Once numbering in the millions, the African penguin is essential for sustaining coastal ecosystems. What we're really seeing is the species
is on the brink of extinction. Today on CNN's series, "Call to Earth," we visit Cape Town, where scientists and volunteers are working together to
save the unique and charismatic bird.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
ZAIN ASHER, CNN ANCHOR AND CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): On a blustery summer morning along South Africa's western cape --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You guys ready?
ASHER (voice-over): -- a celebratory offering to the sea.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: One, two, three. Go.
ASHER (voice-over): These African penguins are rejoining their colony and returning to the chilly waters of the southern Atlantic Ocean.
The reunion is a win for the scientists and volunteers at SANCCOB, the Southern African Foundation for the Conservation of Coastal Birds and a
small victory that's becoming as rare as the penguins themselves.
JADE SOOKHOO, REHABILITATION MANAGER, SANCCOB: Rehabilitation for the African penguin is very important at this stage. The numbers are dwindling.
We are struggling a lot with the population decline in the wild.
ASHER (voice-over): Dire warnings from scientists predict the African penguin could face extinction within the next 10 years.
A century ago, their numbers had reached more than a million. Today, an estimated 99 percent of them are gone.
DR. DAVID ROBERTS, CLINICAL VETERINARIAN, SANCCOB: So for the last seven years I've been working at SANCCOB, the numbers of patients every year have
actually declined And that's because there are not as many penguins in the wild anymore.
ASHER (voice-over): Dr. David Roberts says that most of his surgical work is the result of trauma injuries, which can be caused by anything from
pollution to plastic entanglement. But he says, more often than not, the injuries are the result of a predator's bite.
ROBERTS: We did a procedure on an African penguin. Our number for him here is AP 200. He's the 200th penguin that's come in this year. And he was
admitted with a wound on his toe.
We're not sure what caused it. Often we don't know what happened in the wild. But what happened was the end of the toe had a large wound on it and
the nail bed had become infected. The nail had actually come off already and he had a bit of a bone infection there as well.
ASHER (voice-over): In addition to surgeries, SANCCOB works in many other ways to safeguard the penguins. The work includes rearing baby chicks and
providing care for up to 500 wounded penguins at a time inside a world class rehabilitation center.
It's a place where many injured or struggling birds can get their sea legs back.
SOOKHOO: We are watching these birds every day coming in with quite severe trauma, with injuries, with emaciation problems. They are struggling a lot
out in the wild.
ASHER (voice-over): Gavin Petersen is a seabird ranger at the Stony Point Penguin Colony in Betty's Bay. He says his job is to ensure every penguin
has a fighting chance at surviving in the wild.
GAVIN PETERSON, STONY POINT PENGUIN COLONY: There's not a lot of fish around for them. Nowadays, you see lesser birds, you have lesser nests
occupied with birds. (INAUDIBLE) also global warming, that stuff is also playing a big role.
ASHER (voice-over): In March, conservationists and the commercial fishing industry reached a deal to create six no fishing zones around penguin
breeding colonies along the south and west coastlines.
It's a major step forward for people like rehabilitation manager Jade Sookhoo, who work every day to save these iconic and often charismatic
seabirds.
SOOKHOO: My hope for the future is that we can turn the tide and to try and help these birds as much as possible. They're such a unique species.
They've got such character. It is the only species that lives under the African sun.
A lot of people, when you say penguin, they'd picture icebergs and snow. But this penguin lives on the beach. They thrive in the heat. They thrive
in the summer.
And it would be really sad to see such a beautiful and magical species just go extinct.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GIOKOS: Well, let us know what you're doing to answer the call with the #CallToEarth. We're back after a quick break. Stay with CNN.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[10:50:00]
(MUSIC PLAYING)
GIOKOS: As Catholics around the world mourn the death of Pope Francis, his legacy is winning praise in many quarters. This hour, we're focusing on the
pontiff's influential voice in the global climate movement.
Throughout his life, he called on governments and corporations to protect our planet and wasn't afraid to call them out for accelerating the climate
crisis. The pope spoke of the disproportionate responsibility of rich countries for climate change and how they've impacted the poorest people in
the world.
For more on this, I want to bring in Greg Asner, the director of Arizona State University's Center for Global Discovery and Conservation Science.
Greg, great to have you with us. And so good to be able to have this conversation so you can share your experience with Pope Francis. In fact,
you interacted with the pope in August 2021. You discussed the relationship between science and faith in addressing the climate crisis. Tell me about
this experience and what you discussed.
GREG ASNER, DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR GLOBAL DISCOVERY AND CONSERVATION SCIENCE, ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY: Thanks for having me.
Yes, it was an incredible experience. It was part of a movie, a documentary movie, that was made called "The Letter" with Pope Francis. And there were
-- the cast was comprised of (sic) different unheard voices that the pope wanted to bring out.
And it's based on his 2015 encyclical that focuses on the environment. My wife and I were asked to participate in the project as the voice of
biodiversity.
And in that process, we had the opportunity to go to the Vatican to meet with Pope Francis, to share information, knowledge and emotions about the
state of the planet and the challenges that we face together.
GIOKOS: Well, the climate crisis, we know, is getting worse. It's growing more dire. We are in urgent scenario, code red. And we've seen a new report
finding that 84 percent of the world's coral reefs hit by worst bleaching events on record.
How hard is it to lose a champion of this cause?
And do you hope that the next pope will also advocate for the climate?
ASNER: Yes. One of the major projects that I lead is a program that monitors the world's coral reefs. And in the visit to the Vatican, I was
given the opportunity to present and explain to the pope and to share with the pope the state of our coral reefs.
And coral reefs are an important example, because they really are on the front lines of climate change and global environmental stress that our
ecosystems and biodiversity are encountering and are undergoing today.
And we think of coral reefs as the canary in the coal mine. They really are sensitive animals. And they cover the Earth's surface, you know, much of
the ocean. So these are incredibly sensitive ecosystems that have declined. In my career of 30 years, we've lost half worldwide.
And as you said, the new report just out shows that about 80 percent of our coral reefs today are under severe heat stress. And it leads to this
process known as coral bleaching, which often leads to the death of these corals. So we are at the very critical stage of this problem right now.
GIOKOS: Yes, I know. And it's devastating to see, when you go snorkeling, if you go diving and you see the extent of this. You know, the United
States withdrawing from the climate agreement. World leaders, I mean, are - - be taking sometimes a more relaxed stance, even though this is an urgent environment.
Very quickly, are you hoping for a pope that is still going to be focused on climate?
[10:55:00]
What's your sense?
ASNER: I think that the church and the leaders like the pope have a critical role to play in amplifying and extending the message that the
science community, that folks like my team are trying to connect to as many people worldwide as we can, so that we can get moving in the right
direction on these problems.
If we don't, if the next pope isn't able to help us do that, then we're going to see further decline in our coral reefs and we could see their
extinction just in the decades ahead.
GIOKOS: Yes. And, of course, Pope Francis will be remembered for having a vital voice in this space. All right, Greg Asner, great to have you with
us. Thank you so much.
And I want to leave you now this hour with a touching image from St. Peter's Basilica. Toward the middle of the screen, wearing blue is French
Argentine nun Sister Genevieve Jeanningros. And she was said to be a very close friend of the pontiff and was brought to tears as she paid her final
respects to him.
She's helped to support the LGBTQ community and her work and has reportedly said her trans and gay friends felt loved by the pope.
Well, that's it for CONNECT THE WORLD. Stay with CNN. I'm Eleni Giokos and ONE WORLD" is up next.
END
