Return to Transcripts main page
Connect the World
U.S. Economy Contracts with Trump Policy Shifts; Trump Refuses to Return Abrego Garcia; Gaza Faces Famine; Pakistan Claims "Credible Intelligence" India Will Strike Soon; Pakistan Deports Hundreds of Thousands of Afghans; Join U.K.-U.S. Strikes in Yemen Target Houthis; Consumer Spending Soars in March; Woman Accused of Killing In-Laws with Mushrooms. Aired 10-11a ET
Aired April 30, 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)
LYNDA KINKADE, CNN ANCHOR AND CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): I'm Lynda Kinkade.
There's a new and critical GDP reports out now that shows the U.S. economy is going backwards amid Trump's policy shifts.
A new CNN poll shows more than half of Americans believe president Trump's deportation moves have gone too far.
And Gaza faces famine as Israel's total blockade nears its third month.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
KINKADE: "This will take a while. Be patient."
Those are the words from U.S. president Donald Trump responding for the first time on social media to a brand new economic report that was released
a short time ago. The GDP report, a critical gut check of the state of the U.S. economy, registered an annualized rate of -0.3 percent in the first
quarter.
That's the worst quarter the U.S. has seen since 2022. And the results are much worse than anticipated. The numbers are the first major measure of Mr.
Trump's sweeping second term agenda but the president insists they're a result of what he calls the Biden overhang and that they have nothing to do
with tariffs.
Well, all of this is coming a day after Trump signed an executive order and proclamation to ease auto tariffs. The latest abrupt shift in a rapidly
changing tariff policy that has left businesses scrambling.
And today, the president will keep the focus on the economy as he meets with a group of prominent CEOs at the White House.
We have team coverage. CNN's Matt Egan is joining us live from New York. Our Anna Stewart is with us from London. Good to see you both.
I want to start with you, Matt, first and the results of that GDP report, much worse than what economists had predicted. Just break down the numbers
for us.
MATT EGAN, CNN BUSINESS SENIOR WRITER: Yes. Lynda, this is a confirmation that the U.S. economy is shrinking, GDP declining by 0.3 percent at an
annualized rate during the first three months of this year.
So you noted that was worse than the consensus, which was for slow growth. There were some whispered numbers out there that were actually worse than
the actual decline here.
But look, this was all driven by the trade war and the almost unprecedented supply shock that tariffs have set off. For consumers and businesses,
they're scrambling. They're trying to beat the clock on tariffs.
So they raced to ramp up imports at a dramatic pace. And when imports outpace exports like they did this quarter, that hurts GDP. And it did in a
very significant way.
Another factor here, though, was also DOGE federal government spending. That was also a negative in this GDP report.
Now it wasn't all bad, right?
Consumer spending slowed sharply but it did remain positive. Business spending was also positive, although a lot of that was driven by the tariff
front running. I think when you put it all together, it does show how this trade war really shocked the economy.
And a lot of the analysts and economists that I'm talking to, they say that these numbers, they don't portend good things going forward, because, at
some point, if companies really stocked up on goods to get ahead of tariffs, that means they're not going to need as many going forward.
And so you could see a reversal when it comes to not just imports but also business spending.
And, of course, the big question is, what does all of this do to consumer spending going forward?
Because we know recession fears were very high coming into this number and it's hard to see how negative GDP is going to help that.
KINKADE: Yes, exactly. Matt,
I want to go to you, Anna, because, as Matt was saying, everyone keeps playing catchup on the changing policies of Donald Trump. We know that he's
paused most tariffs until July. He's ramped up tariffs on China. And, of course, he's now offering some relief to automakers. Just take us through
this latest change.
ANNA STEWART, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes. And we have a 10 percent tariff on most of the world right now. But, of course, it could get much worse if the
pause is lifted. And you're right, the shifting ground is really quite bad for businesses just in the last few days.
You know, we've had a lot of earnings out recently. So we're seeing it in the earnings report -- General Motors, Mercedes-Benz, Stellantis, they are
all carmakers who have now pulled their guidance for this year's profits because it's so uncertain.
They need more clarity really on what all the tariffs are going to mean for them and also whether or not they're going to shift any further -- so the
latest reprieve that we've had, which is good news for some U.S. car producers.
[10:05:00]
Let's not hide behind that. It is good news but it's very time-limited. So a reimbursement for U.S. domestic car producers of 3.75 percent over the
next 12 months on the value of the car; however, that will reduce to 2.5 percent next year. And then it disappears entirely.
Now this is suggesting, of course, that U.S. car producers will be able to make a U.S. car in its entirety or more so in two years' time. It will take
four or five years to build any kind of car factory. Some raw materials currently are unavailable in the quantities needed in the United States.
And, of course, you need to redraw the entire global supply chain map. All that takes a lot of time. So these carmakers are under a huge amount of
pressure. We've heard from the CEO of Ford in the last couple of hours. He spoke to Erin Burnett and it was interesting. He's, of course, thrilled by
the latest reprieve.
It is good news, as they keep telling us. But also there are more concerns for him, not least how to make us cars more in the U.S. and make them
affordable for U.S. consumers. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JIM FARLEY, CEO, FORD MOTOR COMPANY: But to keep it competitive and affordable compared to companies that import from overseas, like Mexico or
South Korea or Japan, you know, we have to import certain parts.
And a lot of parts, like fasteners, washers, carpet, wiring looms are just not available. We can't even buy those parts here.
So for affordability and available in the supply chain, what the president did is say, OK, for 15 percent of your parts, if you make a vehicle in the
U.S. and you make 75 percent of the parts in the vehicle from the U.S., there's 15 percent exemption from the tariffs.
And also the second thing he said is compounding. We have a lot of parts that come from overseas that have multiple tariffs. We have the fentanyl
tariffs. We have the China tariffs. We have the reciprocal tariffs.
Some of our parts went from zero tariff to 140 percent tariff. So they decided to say, you get one tariff, it's 25 percent. You know, that
clarifies things. But boy, do we have a lot of work to do with the administration on exports. You know.
And these parts, affordability of parts is a really important thing for America because we got to keep the vehicles affordable.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
STEWART: I mean, don't you -- aren't you thrilled you're not a car CEO?
That sounds pretty complicated to me.
Dan Ives, an analyst at Wedbush, says they believe -- and this is today, following the reprieve -- they still believe the average auto sticker
price will go up roughly $5,000 to $10,000 once all these tariffs are actually priced into the carmaker -- the car market in the U.S.
KINKADE: Yes, I certainly wouldn't want to be running one of these car companies right now. It's very complicated. Much more work under Donald
Trump. Good to see you both. Anna Stewart in London, Mark Egan in New York. Thanks so much.
Well, it was a contentious interview with the ABC. U.S. President Donald Trump said he would not bring back a man he wrongly deported to El
Salvador.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that he must facilitate the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia. But Mr. Trump appears to have no intention of doing
so, despite saying that he could if he wanted to. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: This is not an innocent, wonderful gentleman from Maryland.
I'm not saying he's a good guy. It's about the rule of law.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The order from the Supreme Court stands, sir.
(CROSSTALK)
TRUMP: -- come into our country illegally.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You could get him back. There's a phone on this desk.
TRUMP: I could.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You could pick it up. And with all the power of the presidency, you could call up the president of El Salvador and say, send
him back.
TRUMP: And if he were the gentleman that you say he is, I would do that.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But the court has ordered you to facilitate that.
TRUMP: I'm not the one making this decision. We have lawyers. The president didn't want to do this.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But the buck stops in his office.
TRUMP: No, no, no, no, no. I follow the law.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KINKADE: "I follow the law."
CNN's Kevin Liptak at the White House.
So this contradicts, Kevin, his previous statements, that the U.S. doesn't have the ability to get Garcia back.
Is he openly defying Supreme Court orders?
KEVIN LIPTAK, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, this seems like it's the biggest indication that the administration and the president himself do
plan to defy what the court has told them to do, which is to facilitate the return of this man to the United States.
You know, up until now, the lawyers, the administration, when you were listening to officials here at the White House, their argument had been
that they did not have the power to return Abrego Garcia from El Salvador.
And in fact, when the president of El Salvador, President Bukele, was here at the White House, in the Oval Office, you heard that from the attorney
general saying that it would be up to El Salvador to make that decision.
You heard it from the president's senior adviser, Stephen Miller, who said that questions about the fate of this man needed to be directed to
President Bukele.
But now you have the president saying, yes, I could pick up the phone and call President Bukele and ask him to return this man from prison in El
Salvador. And that does, at the end of the day, defy what the court has ordered them to do, which is to facilitate his return to the United States.
[10:10:03]
And so it was quite a remarkable moment from the president. He doesn't say that he will do that. He is arguing that because, as the administration has
accused, Abrego Garcia is a member of the MS-13 gang, that he won't be doing any of that, that he will never return to the United States.
That assertation is in dispute. And in fact, in that interview, the president tried to point to Abrego Garcia's tattoos as evidence of his gang
affiliation. That has never been proven in court. And in fact, some gang experts question whether that's enough evidence to actually link him to the
MS-13 gang.
But it does show, I think, that the president is intent on carrying out this hardline deportation agenda that he once ran on as a candidate and has
been intent on carrying out now that he is in office.
But polls do show some skepticism setting in among the American public, that this is, in fact, the right thing to do. A CNN poll says that 52
percent of Americans say that the president's deportation actions so far have gone too far as president. That's a majority of Americans.
And in fact, 56 percent say that, yes, the president should do more to bring this individual back to the United States. Of course, in this
interview, the president making very clear that he has no plans to do just that.
But it will be interesting to see if his answer here is now used in court. You know, the lawyers will be back in court just today in a hearing about
this very specific case of Abrego Garcia.
The president's words, of course, carry a lot of weight. Now he is saying that, yes, he could in fact facilitate his return to the United States, as
the court has been ordering but that he just won't do it. Lynda.
KINKADE: All right. We will stay on this case and those deportation numbers. Good to have you with us. Kevin Liptak from the White House, thank
you.
And as Kevin was just mentioning that CNN polling finds that a growing number of Americans believe that the U.S. president's deportation policies
have gone too far. Take a look at some of our findings: 52 percent say deportations have gone too far in deporting undocumented immigrants.
That's up 7 percent since February; 33 percent say they're about right and 14 percent say they don't go far enough. CNN also asked if the president's
immigration policies are making the U.S. safer; 47 percent said yes; 52 percent said no.
Well, the declining support is in line with other CNN polling released this week: 45 percent say they approve of president's handling of immigration;
39 percent approve of his economic policies and overall approval ratings stand at 41 percent.
Well, CNN's Priscilla Alvarez joins us now from Washington to interpret some of that CNN polling.
Good to see you, Priscilla.
So despite the fact that these deportation numbers that we're seeing from Donald Trump are less than what we saw under Joe Biden for the same sort of
period of time, what stands out to you in this latest polling?
PRISCILLA ALVAREZ, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, as you just saw in those numbers that you mentioned, immigration is still stronger than the
president's approval rating. It is one of his top issues and it is the one where he still gets the most approval when you look at the polling.
But what has changed over time, of course, is that more time is passing where he is able to implement his immigration agenda. And what stands out
to me is how people are responding to the how he's doing it.
What does that mean?
So essentially, the administration, as we've been reporting, has sent migrants to Venezuela -- or to Venezuela, also Venezuelan migrants to El
Salvador has accidentally, according to Trump officials, sent a Salvadoran national to a Salvadoran prison.
So as these things sort of accumulate over time, we're seeing the way that public opinion is shifting now on some things. There is still broad
support. So for example, if you look into those poll numbers, you see that the U.S. military on the border is really popular, even as border crossings
are at record lows.
The revoking of visas for students, however, when you look at this same poll, there's more opposition to that. So you can see how voters are sort
of cherry-picking what they approve of and what they deem popular versus the stuff that they are sort of on the fence about.
As you just heard from Kevin, for example, 56 percent of Americans say that the president should work to bring back Abrego Garcia, the Salvadoran
national, who again was wrongfully deported to El Salvador, wrongfully deported because he had a protected order here in the United States.
Now big picture, Republicans still overwhelmingly support Trump on immigration. Democrats overwhelmingly oppose what he's doing on
immigration. But the key for the Trump administration and for the White House is the way in which they continue to roll out this agenda.
[10:15:00]
And the decisions that they make and the moves that they make and the way that that can shape public opinion over time. We saw this during the first
Trump administration.
While he similarly talked a lot about the border wall and had a lot of support for border security, that changed dramatically when he rolled out
his zero tolerance policy, which led to family separations along the U.S. southern border.
So what the administration does here is key in the way that it's going to be received. But more broadly, 30,000-foot view, immigration is still a
very popular issue for the president among voters.
KINKADE: So it's interesting. When you look particularly at the Garcia case, the Supreme Court has ruled that the administration has to facilitate
his return. We heard from Donald Trump giving that ABC interview, saying that he's not planning to do it.
So what are the next steps in that case?
ALVAREZ: Well, we're going to -- we're facing a deadline today. That deadline is for the attorneys to submit any other information that they may
have.
Of course, if you recall, the federal judge in Maryland had paused the sort of fast fact-finding that she had requested and was waiting for the
administration and Abrego Garcia attorneys to come to some resolution.
What is key about this case, however and what the Supreme Court said is that facilitating a return does not require a return. That is to say that
the Supreme Court still gave the Trump administration quite a bit of wiggle room.
For example, citing deference to foreign affairs. That is to say that they couldn't get involved in that aspect of this, which has been the key for
the Trump administration in saying that this is a matter of foreign policy with El Salvador.
So the Trump administration has been working within the confines of that, essentially saying that, well, they may try to facilitate a return but the
Supreme Court is not requiring it.
And what the federal judge in Maryland has been asking for is for them to disclose any steps that they have taken. Now what's going to be interesting
about what happens today and after today is how the federal judge interprets what the president said during that ABC interview.
Because he conceded that he could very well pick up the phone, call Bukele and get Abrego Garcia returned. So we'll be watching to see what the
federal judge says about this.
Up until this point, she has had some stern words for the Justice Department, who she says has been stonewalling and has not provided
information and has not been forthcoming.
KINKADE: Yes, interesting case to watch and certainly a lot of support amongst Americans to bring him back to the U.S.
Good to see you, Priscilla Alvarez, thanks so much.
Well, still ahead on CONNECT THE WORLD, tensions have been rising between nuclear armed neighbors, Pakistan and India, since a deadly attack last
week that killed 26 tourists. Well, now Pakistan is making a claim that could ignite flames even further.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
KINKADE: Welcome back. I'm Lynda Kinkade. I want to turn to Gaza, which is facing a life-threatening famine, entirely manmade.
[10:20:03]
For nearly two months, Israel has carried out a total blockade of the enclave, refusing to allow a single truck of humanitarian aid or commercial
goods. This is the longest period Israel has imposed such a siege.
U.N. secretary general Antonio Guterres posted on the social media platform X, saying that Israel's blockade was, quote, "depriving more than 2 million
people of lifesaving relief and that aid is non-negotiable."
Well, let's welcome in our correspondent from Jerusalem, Jeremy Diamond, for more.
So Jeremy, just talk to us about how dire the situation is for people on the ground in Gaza now that this blockade on aid has been going on for two
months.
JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN JERUSALEM CORRESPONDENT: Yes. I mean, some of the basic facts really lay out how disastrous this situation is growing inside
of Gaza. You look at the World Food Programme, which announced earlier this week that its warehouses are now entirely barren. No food is left.
The-40 plus kitchens that they support, soup kitchens that they support, will be forced to shut down now in a matter of days. Bakeries already shut
down earlier this month and now we are seeing, as parents, hundreds of thousands of parents inside of Gaza, are scrambling to try and feed their
children.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DIAMOND (voice-over): Inside her fly- infested tent, Yiman Rajab (ph) is doing her best to keep her six children alive.
Today's survival looks like this, sifting the half bag of flour she found on a garbage dumpster in Gaza City, after all of its bakeries shut down. It
is rancid, crawling with pests and clear signs of contamination.
But Rajab hopes she can salvage enough to make bread for her children.
My kids are vomiting after they eat it. It smells horrible, she says. I keep cleaning it and it won't get clean. But what else can I do?
She asks.
What will I feed my children, if not this?
Rajab is one of hundreds of thousands of parents in Gaza struggling to feed their children, an entirely man-made crisis that is rapidly spiraling.
For nearly two months now, Israel has carried out a total siege of Gaza, refusing to allow a single truck of humanitarian aid or commercial goods
into the strip.
Israel says, it is trying to pressure Hamas into releasing the hostages but it is civilians in Gaza who are paying the heaviest price.
There is no food, no nothing. Death is easier than this life, this elderly woman says.
This soup kitchen in central Gaza can now only provide one meal a day to those who are growing increasingly desperate.
This man says he has been standing in line for hours, hoping to feed his family.
These scenes an echo of last summer when hunger swept across Gaza, killing 52 Palestinians according to the Ministry of Health. The Biden
administration pushed Israel then to let in aid. There is no such public pressure from the White House now, which says it backs Israel's tactics.
Food warehouses are now barren.
YASMIN MAYDHANE, EMERGENCY COORDINATOR, WORLD FOOD PROGRAMME: We are in a position now where over 400,000 people that were receiving assistance from
our hot meal kitchens, which is the last lifeline for the population, is in itself grinding to a halt.
DIAMOND (voice-over): Cases of acute malnutrition are now spiking. United Nations said nearly 3,700 children were diagnosed in March, 85 percent more
than the previous month.
Five-year-old Osama Al-Arakab (ph) is among those most severely affected by Israel's blockade, which has exacerbated his pre-existing medical
conditions. He has lost eight pounds in the last month and now weighs just 20 pounds. His skin sticking to his bones, every movement is painful.
Because of this war, my son has reached this state, she explains. Now he can barely walk. I have to carry him everywhere.
Every day, his condition worsens. Every day, Israel prevents food from getting into Gaza, Osama's life becomes more at risk.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DIAMOND: And Israeli officials have offered no indication that they will relent as it regards to this blockade, as we hit that two month mark this
coming Friday, even as we are watching this situation rapidly spiraling.
And it's also important to understand the role that the United States is playing in all of this as well. Whereas previously, the Biden
administration had successfully pressured Israel to allow more aid trucks into the Gaza Strip, now, it's not that there isn't any pressure from the
Trump administration.
[10:25:00]
But there is actual support and diplomatic cover being offered by top officials. Just last week, we heard from the new U.S. ambassador to Israel,
Mike Huckabee, who said that when he faced a request from the World Health Organization to push back and to bring pressure to bear on Israel.
He responded by saying that we should work together to, quote, "putting the pressure where it really belongs on Hamas," saying that only when the
hostages are released should aid to Gaza get in.
KINKADE: All right. Jeremy Diamond. Thank you for bringing us that report.
Well after renewed and worrying tensions between rivals Pakistan and India, Islamabad is now claiming it has credible intelligence that India is
planning to carry out a military strike in the coming days.
It didn't elaborate further but said it was retaliation for a deadly attack on civilians in the Indian administered region of Kashmir one week ago that
India has blamed on Pakistan; 26 tourists were killed in that attack.
Islamabad has denied being involved and instead offered to carry out a neutral investigation into the incident. It sparked rising tensions between
the nuclear armed neighbors. Sophia Saifi reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SOPHIA SAIFI, CNN PRODUCER: This happened very early in the morning,
Pakistan, time 2 o'clock in the morning. Everybody was fast asleep. And then this statement was released as a video statement across all TV
channels in Pakistan.
So the concerns have now begun to rise within the country. We've been speaking to people in India and Pakistan administer Kashmir. We do know
that communities have not been moved that live close to the border but people are preparing their bunkers. As you know, we've had similar
incidents that have happened between India and Pakistan.
The most recent one being in 2019, when India responded to a militant attack that took place targeting Indian forces in Indian soldiers on the
Indian side, who then when the Indian Air Force then went and targeted positions within Pakistan, which led to a dogfight and then an eventual de-
escalation.
Now what's happened so far is that the Pakistani government has come out and said last week that they were asking all Indian citizens and diplomats
within the country to leave Pakistan by April 30 as -- and on the Indian side. Before that, India had also said that Indian citizens within Pakistan
should leave by the 29th of April.
Now that deadline is passed and what we're anticipating is, as the information administer has said, without really sharing much evidence, that
there is going to be a strike. Pakistan has been on alert. At the same time, India has also suspended the Indus Water Treaty, which had been
around since the 1960s.
And Pakistan's Defense Minister, when this happened last week, came out and said that this would be considered an act of war. There have been tensions
simmering between the borders of both Pakistan and Indian administer Kashmir, there haven't been any injuries or deaths so far.
So that's something that we're continuing to monitor. There are also concerns, as India has often blamed the militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba its
prescribed terrorist group by the U.S. government. It's based its headquarters are in Pakistani Punjab. So there are concerns here within
Pakistan that that's where a potential strike could take place.
But a lot of questions arising and we're going to have to wait and see how this plays out. There is an important press briefing with the Foreign
Minister of Pakistan, as well as the military spokesperson, that's just going to take place within about 30 minutes from now.
So we're just going to have to wait and see what they say, because that will be the first statements that they'll be making since the information
minister's incredible statement overnight.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
KINKADE: Our thanks to Sophia there.
Well, my next guest can help break down the complicated past and present tensions between these two nations. Editor in chief of "Foreign Policy"
magazine, Ravi Agrawal, joins me live from New York.
Good to have you with us, Ravi. So Pakistan has put out this interesting claim that it has credible intelligence that India will strike within 36
hours.
What detail, if any, has it provided?
RAVI AGRAWAL, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF, "FOREIGN POLICY": Nothing so far. And, you know, in some senses it's no secret that India is planning something. It
has been quite open about that, Modi said that publicly.
And India has also been making a case simultaneously. You know, in the global community here at the United Nations in New York where I am but also
on dozens of calls that Modi has had with diplomats in New Delhi from other countries.
But also other world leaders who he's been on the phone with a seeking support that India should have the right to respond in a way that it deems
necessary to take care of itself.
[10:30:00]
But B, also to make the case that it believes that the attackers may have come from across the border in Pakistan and that there may be some level of
Pakistani military or spy support for the training of these militants.
There is no evidence of that in public so far. India needs to make public that evidence. And most of what it's pointed to so far is that there is a
history in previous attacks of there being linkages to the Pakistani government.
So saying it's history is one thing; proving it as evidence in the current moment is going to be key for India to have legitimacy if it does indeed
try to attack in some form.
KINKADE: Yes, exactly.
Ravi, can you give us an understanding of the sort of pressure that the Indian prime minister might be feeling to respond?
And from those you're speaking to in India, what is the mood in the country?
AGRIWAL: So India is, you know, a country that feels more self-assured and confident than it has in a long time. This is a country that is now the
fifth biggest economy in the world. Its GDP is 10 times the size of Pakistan's. And this has changed as well.
In 2000, for example, the Indian economy was five times the size of Pakistan's. It has sort of increased that gap by 2X. So Indians feel that
they've had enough.
They feel that there's been several attacks on Indian territory over time that have linkages to Pakistan; most famously the Mumbai attacks of 2008,
which was India's deadliest civilian casualty event in decades.
And India feels that it needs to act in some way. This is broadly popular. So there is a lot of support for any sort of muscular language that Modi
uses in terms of signaling response.
Here's the other thing. India also feels quite unrestrained globally. And here's what I mean by that. India feels that, when it looks around the
world, other countries tend to respond with military force when they need to defend themselves.
They point to Israel, for example, after October 7th, India also feels that in the current moment with Trump in the White House, they feel that the
sort of so-called rules-based order is weaker than it's been in a long time. And they have leeway to act as they deem fit.
So Modi is unconstrained in, say, for example, ways that he might have been in 2019, that previous attack that Sophia mentioned.
KINKADE: Wow.
I mean, can you just give us some more background on this disputed region?
Because this escalated tension we're seeing right now, of course, comes after militants massacred 26 tourists in that mountainous town. This is the
worst attack on tourists in that region in decades.
As you've mentioned, India believes Pakistan was involved. Talk to us about this particular region and how long it's been disputed.
AGRIWAL: Gosh, it's been disputed since the founding of India and Pakistan in 1947. But to bring you up to speed in the current moment, there is, of
course, an Indian administered Kashmir. There is a Pakistan administered Kashmir. Both sides claim all of Kashmir.
There's been an uneasy sort of peace of sorts over the last several decades, where they've agreed to administer their respective portions. The
big change here came in 2019, when Indian administered Kashmir, which had a sort of independence of sorts, it was able to manage itself under Indian
law.
That was taken away by the Indian government under Modi and became a federally controlled region. And since then, one of the things that's
happened is Indian administered Kashmir has been flooded with tourists.
And Indians from other parts of India were also given the capability to buy land; in some senses to settle in Muslim majority Kashmir -- so Hindus who
could come in and settle there. There's been some resentment over this, which, of course, the attackers from last week cited by popular accounts
they said that this was a reaction to that 2019 move.
But one key thing to look at here is that, for Modi, he has bet a lot of his reputation on being able to make Indian administered Kashmir safe. And
over the last few years, he has done so. And so you've seen millions of tourists come in. This attack is a huge blow to that reputation of safety.
[10:35:00]
All the more reason for Modi to feel like he needs to respond in some way.
KINKADE: All right.
We'll continue to monitor the situation. Ravi Agrawal, good to get your analysis and perspective from New York. Thanks so much.
AGRIWAL: My pleasure.
KINKADE: Well, still to come, the U.N. is sounding the alarm on the humanitarian situation in Afghanistan, only getting worse as thousands
return back home.
Also coming up, the U.K. and the U.S. have joined forces to target the Houthi rebels, despite the U.N. warning escalating strikes are putting
civilians at risk. We'll have more on that next.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
KINKADE (voice-over): Welcome back to CONNECT THE WORLD. I'm Lynda Kinkade. Here are your headlines.
U.S. President Donald Trump is attempting to blame his predecessor after the U.S. economy posted its worst quarter since 2002, calling it "Biden
overhang" and insisting it has, quote, "nothing to do with his tariffs."
The GDP report released earlier today registered at -0.3 percent in the first quarter, much worse than economists had predicted.
New CNN polling out today shows the majority of American voters may be souring on the president's immigration agenda; 52 percent of Americans say
the administration has gone too far. While the polling was split down party lines, only 39 percent of independents said they thought his policies were
making America safer.
Pakistan claims it has credible intelligence that India will carry out a strike against it in the coming days. This escalation comes after a deadly
attack in Indian administered Kashmir claimed 26 lives. India has blamed Pakistan for the incident in the disputed region, which Islamabad denies.
Pakistan is forcibly deporting thousands of Afghans following a crackdown on immigration. The United Nations says over 250,000 people have been
returned back to Afghanistan this month alone. Humanitarian agencies are warning that this will only drive the humanitarian needs in that country
even higher.
Right now in Afghanistan, around 23 million people -- that's more than half of the population -- need life-saving assistance. And it comes at a
time when the U.N. and its partners are grappling with deep funding cuts.
Well, joining us to discuss is Tom Fletcher. He's the U.N. under-secretary- general for humanitarian affairs and emergency relief coordinator. And he comes to us live from Kabul.
Thanks so much for your time.
TOM FLETCHER, UNDER-SECRETARY-GENERAL FOR HUMANITARIAN AFFAIRS AND EMERGENCY RELIEF COORDINATOR, UNITED NATIONS: Thanks very much, Lynda.
KINKADE: So the U.N. has appealed for over $2 billion in funding this year.
[10:40:00]
So far less than 15 percent has been received.
What exactly is needed for Afghanistan right now?
FLETCHER: So that $2 billion is needed. And, of course, as you say, what we've got in so far is a drop in the ocean. And we're dealing with the
impact of those cuts.
You know, I was talking to women today, who have had to cycle to give birth three hours up a bumpy road. Some of them didn't make it all the way to the
hospital and lost their babies by the side of the road.
You know, these cutbacks are already hitting the humanitarian effort massively. And there's worse to come.
KINKADE: That's a terrible situation. And I understand you visited Kandahar's main hospital in Afghanistan. That, of course, has been severely
affected by these funding cuts. Just describe the situation for us there.
FLETCHER: Well, the hospital is packed. And you go through the wards and you've got three or four people to a bed. They haven't got enough medical
equipment. They haven't got enough medicine.
Many of the women, on whom so much of the sector depended, are having to drop out because their wages have been slashed because of the cuts. And so
the needs are mounting at a time when the money is reducing. And it's, as always, the poorest people who pay the price.
KINKADE: Yes, exactly.
And according to a new report from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, there was a total of $2.7 trillion in global military
spending in 2024. That's a 9.4 percent year on year rise, the highest since 1988, the year before the Berlin Wall fell.
There have been significant funding cuts to humanitarian aid at the same time as this huge increase in military spending.
What's your response to that?
Well, it's depressing, isn't it?
FLETCHER: I mean, this, the staggering amounts of money that we seem to be able to find, to fight wars, to sustain conflicts and, against that, these
huge cuts to our compassion, to the most vulnerable people on the planet, the people who are in greatest need.
Now I don't believe that the global public has given up on solidarity. I don't believe that we're retreating from that mission to actually help
people who are in such dire need.
But we've got to -- we've got to do a better job of convincing our governments that we want them to spend more and to care more for those who
are in such grave need across the world.
KINKADE: And speaking of that grave need, you know, there are quite a few humanitarian crises in Gaza and Sudan and Myanmar, just to name a few.
How do you make the case to up the funding to Afghanistan?
FLETCHER: So it's very difficult. And, of course, I've been to those crisis zones in the last few months -- Gaza, Myanmar. Sudan. I've been
across Syria as well. I've been to the front lines of the Ukraine-Russia war. These needs are great in all these places.
I think what you have here in Afghanistan is existing, very, very high levels of poverty. As you say, 23 million people in need. Decades of
conflict. The extra layer of the fact that so many women and girls, you know, for whom it's the worst country in the world to live, are not able to
be part of the response.
And I think the sense that, as the world, we've been so present here and suddenly we're gone. And that leaves a massive hole in the response. So
these needs aren't going away just because just because the world has moved on.
KINKADE: Yes, exactly.
Tom Fletcher from the U.N., we appreciate the work you're doing. Thanks so much for your time.
FLETCHER: Thanks, Lynda.
KINKADE: Well, the U.K. military has launched overnight strikes against Houthi targets in Yemen in a joint U.S. operation. The U.K.'s defense
ministry said the attacks targeted buildings south of the capital, Sanaa, which is used by Houthis to manufacture drones. Now these strikes are the
latest in a series of more than 800 attacks against the Houthi rebels as part of Operation Rough Rider, which was launched last month.
The U.N. has warned the strikes are a growing risk to civilians, with millions still in need of humanitarian assistance, which, of course, has
been worsened by the USAID funding cuts in Yemen.
Well, let's bring in CNN national security correspondent Natasha Bertrand, who is joining us from the Pentagon or just outside the Pentagon.
Natasha, good to have you. So this is the first joint strike under Trump between the U.K. and the U.S.
Was it considered a success?
And what more can you tell us?
NATASHA BERTRAND, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Well, we did get a readout from the U.K. about this operation. And they did say that they
targeted these buildings that were manufacturing drones.
And they also said, importantly, that they took great pains to determine that there were no civilians there or at least a minimal number of
civilians there at the time, taking this strike after dark and ensuring that no one really was around at the time, trying to destroy the
infrastructure and the drone manufacturing capability itself.
[10:45:00]
The U.S. has been a little bit more tightlipped about this. We have not heard much about this operation. But in recent days the U.S. has said that
this, the massive Rough Rider Operation that you just described earlier, has been a success and that it has hit over 1,000 Houthi targets in Yemen
in just over six weeks.
But we are learning from our sources that actually it hasn't been all that effective.
While a large number of targets have been hit across Yemen that have hit Houthi underground weapons facilities, that have killed a number of senior
Houthi leaders, we are told that the Houthis have continued, of course, to fire ballistic missiles and drones not only at the Red Sea but also at U.S.
assets that have been flying over Yemen.
As part of this operation, over half a dozen very expensive, sophisticated American drones have been shot down by the Houthis since the very start of
this operation. So just over the last month alone.
And that really signals to many people here at the Pentagon, as well as in Congress, who are scrutinizing this operation very closely, that the
Houthis are still not deterred. They are continuing to launch these attacks against Red Sea shipping.
They are continuing to launch ballistic missile attacks against Israel. And so for all of the firepower that the U.S. and its allies now are now
throwing at the Houthis, it really does not seem to have dented their will anyway to continue attacking what they see as allies of Israel, who are
continuing what they believe is a genocide in Gaza.
And they have said that they are not going to stop until a very lasting peace deal is figured out for the Israelis and the Palestinians in Gaza.
Lynda.
KINKADE: And just quickly, you know, obviously, to remind our viewers, these Iranian-backed Houthi rebels have been attacking these vessels,
especially U.S. vessels, in the Red Sea as a result of America's role in Israel's war in Gaza.
Is enough being done to protect civilians as these attacks continue?
BERTRAND: That's a great question. And it's something that the Pentagon has not really commented on, because, of course, we heard the Houthis say
just the other day that a U.S. airstrike leveled a migrant detention facility in Yemen that was holding African migrants and that were all
civilians.
The Pentagon has said that they take those reports seriously and they are looking into it but ultimately they have not disclosed much about the kinds
of steps they are taking to try to protect civilians there.
And we know that, just given the sheer volume of airstrikes, that the U.S. has been conducting, really daily, hitting them on a large scale. There are
serious questions here about whether they're taking enough precautions to protect civilians, including when they hit that port, that very important
port in Yemen that the Houthis use to import oil.
That was apparently also an incident in which the Americans are said to have killed civilians, according to the Houthis, something the Pentagon has
not weighed in on just yet. Lynda.
KINKADE: All right. Natasha Bertrand outside the Pentagon. Good to have you with us. Thanks so much.
We are going to take a quick break. I'll be right back with much more news. Stay with us. You're watching CNN.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[10:50:00]
(MUSIC PLAYING)
KINKADE: Welcome back. I'm Lynda Kinkade. I want to take a quick look at what's happening on Wall Street.
As you can see it there, all major indices in the red. The S&P 500 down 1.4 percent. The Nasdaq down almost 2 percent. Well, that's after news of that
GDP report that was out earlier today, showing that the U.S. economy shrank in the first three months of the year, posting the worst quarter since
2022.
A second key economics report, released minutes ago, shows consumer spending soared last month, up 0.7 percent from February, as Americans
rushed to buy products ahead of the bulk of president Trump's tariffs.
Well, the report also shows inflation slowed sharply in March. But the latest numbers come at a time when uncertainty is swelling about the extent
to which president Trump's massive policy changes could impact the U.S. and, of course, the global economy.
Well, let's get you up to speed on some other stories on our radar right now.
The Eurovision song contest has a new flag policy. Spectators in Basel, Switzerland, will be allowed to wave any flag which is permitted under
Swiss law, overturning a ban on banners, such as the Palestinian flag, in the audience.
But the updated policy states that performers can only show official flags of the country they representing in the contest.
A newly released image from the world's largest solar telescope shows the surface of the sun in unprecedented detail. The closeup reveals a cluster
of continent-sized dark sunspots that are areas of intense magnetic activity. Detailed images like this allow scientists to learn and predict
potentially dangerous solar weather.
Thousands of Vietnamese celebrated the 50th anniversary of the end of the Vietnam War. The country's leader described it as "a victory of faith and
justice over tyranny."
Saigon fell to the communist-run North two years after America's withdrawal. It's believed upwards of 3 million Vietnamese were killed
during the 20-year conflict.
Still to come, a beef Wellington lunch turning deadly in Australia. Its cook is now on trial. We'll explain next.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
KINKADE: Welcome back. I'm Lynda Kinkade.
A beef Wellington lunch turned deadly in Australia and its cook is now standing trial. Erin Patterson is accused of killing her estranged
husband's parents and aunt after serving them lunch cooked with death cap mushrooms back in 2023.
She's also been charged with the attempted murder of her husband's uncle, who survived. Patterson denies the charges. Estelle Griepink of 7News
reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ESTELLE GRIEPINK, 7NEWS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Erin Patterson's murder trial delivering a new bombshell revelation. A jury has been told
the accused killer invited her in-laws for lunch to tell them she had cancer, a diagnosis the prosecution and defense agree was never true.
The guests, Don and Gail Patterson; Gail's sister, Heather Wilkinson, and her husband, Ian, were served individual beef Wellingtons containing
mushrooms with a side of mashed potatoes, green beans and gravy.
While their meals were presented on large gray plates, Ms. Patterson ate from a smaller, lighter-colored plate.
Gail Patterson later noting to her son, "Erin put her food on a different plate to us. I wondered why that was."
Don Patterson, Gail Patterson and Heather Wilkinson later died in hospital.
[10:55:13]
Ian Wilkinson eventually recovered.
The jury was also told about the iNaturalist website, where users upload photos and locations of local flora and fauna. It's alleged that, after two
users posted about finding death cap mushrooms in the towns of Locke and Outtrim, Ms. Patterson's phone was tracked to the same location.
Erin Patterson has always maintained her innocence and has pleaded not guilty to all charges. Her defense told the jury, while she may have
foraged for mushrooms, she never sought out deadly ones -- Estelle Griepink, 7News.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
KINKADE: Well, that does it for this edition of CONNECT THE WORLD. I'm Lynda Kinkade. Stay with CNN. "ONE WORLD" is up next.
END
