Return to Transcripts main page
Connect the World
Russia's War on Ukraine; UAE Adviser Says Iran Nuclear Issue Must Be Addressed; Iranian President Seeks "Fair and Equitable" Talks with U.S.; At World Governments Summit, Global Leaders Gather to Chart Future of AI; Peter Mandelson Leaving House of Lords over Epstein Scandal; Trump Wants Future Elections Nationalized; UNICEF Director Declares Sudan's War "Horrific for Children"; Lindsey Vonn to Compete in Olympics Despite Injury. Aired 10-11a ET
Aired February 03, 2026 - 10:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[10:00:00]
(MUSIC PLAYING)
BECKY ANDERSON, CNN HOST (voice-over): Welcome to our second hour of the show. Live from Dubai, where Europe's dealings with Donald Trump, his
latest threats on Iran to the ongoing war in Ukraine and the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.
I've been speaking to key player here at the World Governments Summit, gathering, happening amidst the backdrop of major geopolitical tensions.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ALAR KARIS, ESTONIAN PRESIDENT: So there are so many conflicts all around the world. And these conflicts do affect us, everybody. It's not that the
war in Ukraine is only local issue. It's not.
ANWAR GARGASH, DIPLOMATIC ADVISER TO UAE PRESIDENT: I think that the region has gone through various, various calamitous confrontations. I don't
think we need another one.
CATHERINE RUSSELL, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, UNICEF: The Rafah crossing opening is great. You know, we need to have people have the ability to go back and
forth. But the truth is, we need everything open.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANDERSON: Well, those full conversations coming up for you this hour.
Plus, a member of the British royal family makes the first public comments since the latest release of Epstein files.
Well, the summit here in Dubai happening as we await the next round of trilateral talks between Ukraine, Russia and the U.S., starting tomorrow in
Abu Dhabi in the UAE, not far away from where I am here and where we normally broadcast from.
Russia's brief pause in attacking Ukraine, meantime, is over. It hit energy infrastructure and other targets in what Ukraine is calling the biggest
missile and drone attack so far this year.
Leaving tens of thousands of people without power and sending residents of Kyiv into metro stations again, trying to keep warm during what has been a
bitter cold spell.
Well, the war in Ukraine, a major topic in my talk here with Estonia's president. His country borders Russia. It's also a NATO member, of course.
Alar Karis says he doesn't fear Russian aggression but acknowledges that Europe faces challenges as it works to build up its defenses.
And we discussed Europe's response to the war and the Ukrainian president's recent withering criticism, that the continent just hasn't done enough to
help end it. Here is part of my conversation with the Estonian president.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KARIS: Europe has done a lot. But you have to realize that, to have been a bit naive, all these 30 or more years and Berlin Wall fell down. So we
thought that everything, all the wars are over and peace is present forever in Europe.
That means we are not ready to this kind of war again. So we had to build up our defense. It takes some time. Time and -- but I guess we do manage to
do so. And, of course, it's not only Europe alone, so we should work also together with U.S.
So I don't think that Europe alone is able to defend. Of course we can. But I think the deterrence is more important than actual war. So we want to
test. We don't want to test this Article V for sure.
ANDERSON: How do you respond to President Zelenskyy's, you know hypercritical speech on -- ?
KARIS: What one has to understand that Ukraine is in war for years already. So, of course, presidents are getting a bit nervous and they see
that the -- all the civilians are dying. So at the same time we have these peace talks. But at the same time we see that the missiles, they attack
schools, hospitals and civilians.
So this is a -- problem is a very weak word for that. So I have been to Ukraine several times. Actually the first time two days before it started
in 2022 and a number of times afterwards. I have seen it myself.
And, of course, Russia is ready for this war of atrocity. I mean, that means -- and this war of attrition that, it's a huge country. And you see,
now that it's 1:5, 1:7. So that means more Russians are dying on the front line. That means they -- Russia doesn't care about their own people.
ANDERSON: What worries you most at this point?
A frozen conflict, a bad deal or a loss of Western resolve?
KARIS: We are all very important, to be honest.
[10:05:00]
But I am not afraid of anything. If we do our job properly in Europe and in the Western world, this, then again, I mean, there are so many conflicts in
the world. It's not only Ukraine. I mean, there are more than 40 conflicts.
So, of course, Ukraine is closer to us. But there is also Gaza, South Sudan, Yemen. So there are so many conflicts all around the world. And
these conflicts do affect us, everybody. It's not that the war in Ukraine is only local issue. It's not. It does affect also people here in Arabic
countries and so forth.
So we have to stop before -- I think Ukraine wants most this peace. And, of course, these peace discussions are going on already more than a year. So -
- and it always said that we are very close. We are very close. But seems like Putin doesn't want this kind of peace.
So he's extending, extending, sitting behind the table. It's not a question of whether Zelenskyy or president Trump is sitting behind the table. We
need Putin and we don't see that he wants to be sat this very moment.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANDERSON: Well, that's the Estonian president, speaking to me here at the World Governments Summit, the annual get-together here in Dubai, of
leaders, world leaders, ministers and those involved, not just in geopolitics, by the way, but geoeconomics and geotech as well. Clare
Sebastian joining me now from London.
The Estonian president there saying that Putin doesn't want to appear -- he doesn't appear to want peace. The NATO secretary general in Ukraine today,
sharing a similar sentiment.
So where does that put these trilateral talks scheduled to begin here in the UAE, in Abu Dhabi on Wednesday?
CLARE SEBASTIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: I think it puts them at a crossroads and perhaps at one of the most urgent points that we've seen.
Given that Ukraine is dealing with what certainly one CEO of Ukraine's biggest private energy company told me even before this latest attack, was
the early stages of a humanitarian crisis as a result of these strikes on its grid.
And we're seeing again today many thousands, hundreds of thousands probably, of people without power and without heating as a result of this
latest attack.
So I think, look, from Ukraine's perspective -- and President Zelenskyy came out with some pretty strong words today, saying that Russia had
essentially broken its promise to the U.S. to refrain from striking energy targets for a week.
He said that it was a matter of about four days and perhaps that's how they interpret a week. And he said, we will be in contact with the American side
on this matter. I expect, he said, that our partners will not remain silent about what is happening.
So from his perspective, the onus is now on the United States. Russia is clearly trying to dial up the pressure on Ukraine.
Will the United States be prepared to do the same on Russia?
We had also the NATO secretary general in Kyiv today, even as the air raid sirens, frankly, this morning were still going on. And he really tried in
his address to the Ukrainian parliament to focus some attention on progress that has already been made.
And, of course, we know that the -- really the biggest achievement to come out of the bilateral track of talks between the U.S. and Ukraine, even
before this trilateral format started, was these security guarantees, which have been broadly finalized, though not signed off yet. Take a listen to
what Mark Rutte had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARK RUTTE, SECRETARY GENERAL, NATO: The security guarantees are solid and this is crucial because we know that getting to an agreement to end this
terrible war will require difficult choices.
You need to know that this peace will be lasting, not because papers have been signed but because there is hard power to back it up.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SEBASTIAN: Look, I think the solidarity with Ukraine, of course, welcomed today. But that hard power, until there is a real ceasefire, is
hypothetical. And for Ukraine, there are key priorities right now, two of them in particular.
One is air defense missiles. Zelenskyy talking about that today as they try to fend off these ever increasing attacks. And secondly, the call that they
have for the U.S. to get tougher on Moscow in these negotiations. Becky.
ANDERSON: I'll get to --
Good to have you, Clare. Fascinating. Thank you very much indeed.
And a reminder, those trilateral talks scheduled to begin tomorrow, Wednesday here in Abu Dhabi.
Well, in this region, a full court press to find a diplomatic outcome as the U.S. weighs potential military action against Iran. Now on Friday, U.S.
envoy Steve Witkoff is set to meet Iran's foreign minister in Istanbul.
Following talks today with Israel's prime minister, Tehran has said it is optimistic about negotiations, at least over a nuclear deal, while speaking
here at the World Governments Summit in Dubai. The diplomatic adviser to the UAE's president said that a deal would be vital for Iran's future.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GARGASH: I think that the region has gone through various, various calamitous confrontations.
[10:10:04]
I don't think we need another one but I would like to see direct Iranian- American negotiations leading to understandings, that we don't have these issues every other day.
It is extremely important that many of the key issues that have rocked the bilateral relationship and has had an impact on the region -- and foremost
amongst them is the nuclear issue -- is addressed directly and that it doesn't become a source of instability and a source of questions like
these, every, every year or two.
I think from everything that I know, Iran today needs to reach a deal. I think Iran, on the one hand, has suffered geopolitically. And at the same
time, its economy needs to rebuild itself.
And to rebuild that, they need to rebuild their relationship with the United States, I think, through reaching a deal, a political deal, a wider
geostrategic deal that will actually be beneficial to the area. The Iranians are also helping themselves and ultimately what they need, which
is rebuild their economy
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANDERSON: Well, joining me now is Jonathan Pankov. He's the director of the Middle East security initiative at The Atlantic Council.
You heard there from the UAE presidential adviser, a senior diplomatic figure in this region and of you, frankly echoed around this region, what
exactly -- what isn't clear is exactly what any deal that might be discussed between Iran and the U.S. directly, it seems, on Friday would
look like at this point.
Is it clear?
JONATHAN PANIKOFF, FORMER DEPUTY NATIONAL INTEL OFFICER, NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE COUNCIL: No, I think it's not clear at all. And that's the
fundamental problem. There's been rumors that maybe the Iranians would be willing to give up the 440 kilos of highly enriched uranium.
But I would say that was the same offer they made before snapback back in the fall. There's questions about whether there'll be two tracks, a track
on the nuclear program of Iran and a track on its ballistic missiles and terrorism program.
If that were true, that would be progress, because the Iranians have always refused to have negotiations on the latter. But it's all still quite a bit
murky.
ANDERSON: Yes, and it's that more comprehensive deal, let's call it which would include ballistic missiles, its proxies around the region, that this
region wants sorted out. That's a file this region wants sorted out.
Iran's nuclear program, you could you could argue Iran itself, is a regional issue. Back in the day in 2015, certainly the GCC, incredibly
irritated about being left out of the P5+1 negotiations for that deal back in 2015, didn't feel like it was a deal negotiated by people who were
ultimately impacted by Iran's actions.
What do you make, then, of the inclusion in these talks of the likes of Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and other regional actors?
PANIKOFF: My sense is that it's Iran's effort to try to paper over what has always been a refusal to have direct talks. So they've always said, no;
we're not going to engage with the U.S. directly. The talks last year, that happened. We're through the Omanis, right.
The Omanis were running back and forth into rooms quite unhelpfully, though they were trying very hard. Now having everybody in the room together, if
that's indeed what happened, I think is a way for Iran to say, yes, we are negotiating directly with the U.S., which is what the Trump administration
has demanded.
But it's not bilateral;; it's multilateral. The Egyptians, the Emiratis, perhaps the Qataris, all in the room.
ANDERSON: Your background is intelligence. And I just want to lean into you on what you may be hearing or what you certainly look at when what you
see, when you look at that incredible buildup of what Donald Trump describes as a huge armada.
And, you know, it's hard to argue with that.
What does that tell you, given your background about Donald Trump's intentions?
PANIKOFF: So I think it's not only what we see in the region now out at sea with the carrier group but it's also, frankly, what we know from last
year.
In fact, we saw that Donald Trump, between the 5th round and 6th round of negotiations, struck Iran, following up on the Israeli strikes to hit the
nuclear program. So this is about creating leverage, about saying, look, if we don't actually make progress, then this strike is a real possibility.
If we do make progress, then maybe I will hold off. But there's going to have to be some actual meaningful result. Otherwise, I think the chances of
a U.S. strike are going to increase quite quickly once again.
ANDERSON: That's fascinating.
Steve Witkoff has a huge week. He's been in Tel Aviv today. He'll be here in the UAE in Abu Dhabi for these Ukraine-Russia-U.S. trilateral talks
Wednesday, Thursday and then, of course, on to Istanbul on Friday.
[10:15:08]
He is Donald Trump's envoy on peace. I can't even remember what he's called these days, you know. But he has enormous files. We have seen renewed
attacks on Ukraine overnight.
What -- is it clear at this point what is actually going to push Vladimir Putin to serious negotiations?
I don't think we should be looking at a result off the back of these talks this week. But certainly there is some momentum here.
PANIKOFF: I think there certainly is momentum. But we've seen this before as well. Look, the meeting in Alaska that was supposed to be a one-, maybe
two-day conference and ended up being a few hours because nothing came out of it very, very quickly.
I think the question is whether or not we saw the NATO secretary general, Mark Rutte, whether or not those types of claims that were really willing
to use force, that there will be a hard guarantee, are somehow going to move the Ukrainians.
And that will as well allow Russia to move as well, to say, OK, if that guarantee is there, then, from a Moscow perspective, we also are ready. But
you're going to have to give us more of what we wanted because you have those guarantees.
ANDERSON: What you're saying is that Rutte's speech to the Ukrainian parliament absolutely, not coincidentally, timed just ahead of these talks?
PANIKOFF: No, I don't think so at all. I think it's quite intentional.
ANDERSON: It's always good to speak to you. Thank you very much indeed for being with us tonight. I know that you're attending the World Governments
Summit, which is here for the next couple of days. So it's good to have you in the UAE. Always good to lean into your insight and analysis, which is
very valuable. Thank you.
PANIKOFF: Thanks for having me.
ANDERSON: Well, still to come, president Trump wants to force through a dramatic overhaul in how U.S. elections are run.
Will he get his way?
Well, we are gauging reaction. That is after this.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
ANDERSON: Well, it's no surprise that the big theme here this year at the World Governments annual summit is AI. Artificial intelligence may well be
the most transformative technology force of our time, with the potential to drive unparalleled economic growth.
You don't want to take that from me, you can take it from the International Data Corporation. Investments in AI solutions and services
are expected to deliver a cumulative global impact of $22.3 trillion by 2030. That's estimated to be about 3.7 percent of global GDP.
And the impact isn't just theoretical. AI already reshaping whole sectors of activity, from health care and research to energy, finance and
government.
Earlier, the group CEO of G42, which is an Abu Dhabi-based AI giant, explained about his talked about his company.
[10:20:00]
And explained how his company in the UAE are scaling AI infrastructure at unprecedented levels.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
PENG XIAO, GROUP CEO, G42: With five gigawatts of AI capacity we're building right now in UAE, we expect to be able to output up to 100
trillion tokens on a daily basis. That is a large number of intelligence we can provide to the country, to the region, even to the rest of the world.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANDERSON: Well, with us now to discuss all of this is Omar al-Jolani, the UAE's artificial intelligence minister.
It does feel somewhat like "Groundhog Day" to a degree, when you and I have been having this conversation about AI here at the World Governments Summit
since you took the role back in 2017.
We just heard from Peng Zhao, the group CEO of G42. This is an Abu Dhabi- based AI company, which sits at the center of much of the UAE's investment in AI, both here and around the world.
To the uninitiated, can you just explain what 100 trillion tokens a day will mean, I mean, within the context of this scale of the ambition here?
OMAR AL OLAMA, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE MINISTER, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES: Well, I think, Becky, the first thing we need to understand is, when it
comes to large language models.
And when it comes to the actual agents, which is the evolution of these large language models, these agents require an incentive to do the tasks
that you want them to do.
So it's like an employee. You pay the employee a salary at the end of the month and, based on that salary, they either put in the work or they don't.
So AI agents require tokens as their incentive. The more tokens you feed them, the more work they do.
And that could be something like collecting data. It could be something like giving you insights. It could be something like actually presenting a
product and selling it for you. Any such activity requires tokens.
So the name of the game in the future is going to be who can produce the highest amount of tokens, to give it to these agents, to get these agents
to do certain tasks?
Now you're going to ask me, where do these tokens come from?
ANDERSON: Correct.
AL-OLAMA: It's actually energy. So if you build up the energy infrastructure and you have the chips that allow the inferencing for these
models to run, that is where the tokens are actually created.
So 10 trillion tokens a day is a huge number for any government to actually strive to achieve. And what we believe is this is going to be an order of
magnitude improvement for us in terms of economic gains, in terms of productivity gains as a country. And we will be able to leapfrog using
these tokens.
ANDERSON: And Peng talked here about AI needing to be the number one priority for all governments around the world. The current scope of AI is
still rather narrow and I know that you and I have talked about this.
The story in 2026, then, is how you scale it, correct?
AL-OLAMA: Yes. So this was the story of 2025 and 2024 as well.
ANDERSON: Right.
AL-OLAMA: So it isn't just this year.
ANDERSON: Yes. We've talked, you know, back in the day, of promise. Now we talk about purpose. So you're building out the UAE Stargate campus. And
we've got some pictures of this.
This is the first mover under the U.S.-UAE AI partnership. Data centers need three things -- land, energy and chips. You got the land and the
energy aplenty. What you need is the chips. And the U.S. is committed to unlocking some of what you need.
In Davos recently you said G42 expects to receive its first AI chip shipments within months.
How close are you to those shipments and what is the commitment now and going forward?
AL-OLAMA: So I wasn't in Davos.
ANDERSON: I'm sorry.
AL-OLAMA: But I'm sure that Peng or someone actually mentioned that. So we are getting the reassurances from our partners in the U.S. that we will get
access to these chips.
At the end of the day, if you think about who's using these chips, it's companies like Microsoft. It's American companies that are working with us
to also deploy these chips and to leverage them.
So our belief is that we are going to get the chips that we want. We are probably the only player in the world that can move at the speed that we're
moving, deploying the capital, getting the energy up to the level that is required.
So looking at the administration's effort to become a dominant player, making the U.S. dominant player in artificial intelligence, the
administration understands the importance of partnering with the UAE.
And we're seeing that in their actions. Hopefully, we'll get all the chips that we need and we're going to work with them to develop the solutions
that are going to serve their customers now.
ANDERSON: When you say that we need, are we talking about what, 2.5 million chips annually?
AL-OLAMA: No. So we're currently talking about batches of around 100,000 to 200,000 chips. But the thing about the UAE is we're able to scale and,
you know, to increase the number very, very quickly.
It doesn't make sense for us to buy 2 million chips, for example, because what happens is these chips become old very, very quickly. And the next
iteration of the chip is twice as good for half the price. You know, that's typically what happens because of Moore's law.
[10:25:04]
So we don't want to, you know, overorder one specific type of chip. We want to stagger our orders to ensure that we always have the most cutting-edge
chips that we're able to build on top of the best infrastructure.
ANDERSON: Work with me here. It costs $50 billion to buy, to build out one gigawatt of capacity from that, it is estimated, you can generate, what,
$10 billion of revenue. Those are the numbers that I've seen. It doesn't take a genius to do the maths.
Does it worry you that the foundational model of the AI boom just doesn't look necessarily secure at this point?
AL-OLAMA: You're absolutely right. And the thing with all of these technologies -- so I'm going to give you maybe two nuances here. The first
is, if you looked at the dotcom bubble, people were asking this exact question in 2001.
And their answer was, the internet will not be able to achieve the promised returns. So there was a run at the bank and there was that crash. In
hindsight, the internet achieved and overachieved all the numbers that people were pushing for in the past.
So would we have such a bubble?
I think that there is a sense of speculation with certain players. We're not in it for the short term, the same way that, you know, when the UAE
built Dubai internet city, a whole city dedicated to the internet, in 1998, when the dotcom bubble happened, most people shied away from the internet
and thought that we were out of our minds.
We then proved that we were actually doing the right thing. And the UAE turned out to be a leader regionally when it comes to internet based
companies. We believe the same thing is going to happen with AI. We have a long term vision. We're going to continue to invest and this is going to
prove to be economically feasible in the long term.
Now I want to give a nuance from the past. So there was the railway crash of the 19th century in the U.K. So people believe that everyone needs to
build railways and that everyone can incorporate a company and build railways.
Now that crash made people lose a lot of money but left infrastructure that today gave the U.K. what it has. What we're focused on isn't on the things
that are the hype. We're focused on energy infrastructure that will remain relevant, whether the AI bubble continues or not, because energy equals
economic productivity, right?
ANDERSON: I want to ask you one last question before I let you go. We recently saw the launch of what is known as digital embassies. Now the UAE
has always said this isn't just about what AI does for the UAE but what it can do, you know, outside of the AI for good to a degree.
And that's not necessarily, you know, part of the digital embassy story. But I just want you to explain briefly the concept of digital embassies.
AL-OLAMA: So most embassies only operate during certain working hours when the staff are on the ground. Some embassies are well staffed; others
aren't. And the quality of the product that people get, in terms of interacting with that country, getting their services done.
And, you know, the first interface that they have with the country is usually that embassy specifically.
If we're able to leverage artificial intelligence and we're able to leverage technology, to offer services 24 hours a day, to offer tailored
services for anyone who wants to explore coming to the UAE or doing business in the UAE or getting services from the UAE, then we actually
succeed. And this is what these embassies are.
It's an embassy that operates 24 hours a day, offers the best-in-class services, where the impact of the humans that work here is multiplied by a
few orders of magnitude and where the first interface that people have with the UAE is that it's an efficient country.
It's a country that's available 24/7 and it's a country that offers services that we haven't seen anywhere else in the world.
ANDERSON: It's always good to speak to you. Thank you very much indeed. Congratulations with another super World Governments Summit. It's always a
pleasure to be here and cover this. Thank you.
AL-OLAMA: Thank you.
ANDERSON: We will be right back with more news after this.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[10:30:00]
(MUSIC PLAYING)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (voice-over): This is CNN breaking news.
ANDERSON: And we are following breaking news in the fallout from the Jeffrey Epstein investigation and the release of a huge trove of Epstein
related documents just this weekend. CNN's senior international correspondent Melissa Bell live with us for that.
And, Melissa, as we understand it, the house -- the Speaker of the House of Lords says that Peter Mandelson will now step down tomorrow from the upper
chamber in the U.K. Just explain what we know and why this is significant.
MELISSA BELL, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, the pressure had been building over the course of the last few days.
You'll remember, Becky, that it was a few months ago now that Lord Mandelson, as he is for the time being, resigned from his role as the
ambassador to -- British ambassador to Washington over the already apparently deepening ties that had existed between him and Jeffrey Epstein.
This is a result of some of the data that had been released by the Department of Justice back then. What the latest release of those 3 million
documents has shown is not simply that those -- the nature of those relationships were extensive, long-lasting but also that they may have
included payments made by Jeffrey Epstein to Lord Mandelson.
Now Peter Mandelson himself has said that he has no memories of those and will be investigating.
But perhaps the most damaging claims to emerge from the latest trove released by the American Department of Justice is in relation to his role
as business secretary back in 2009, when it appears that Peter Mandelson may have passed on documents to Jeffrey Epstein in the wake of the 2008
financial crash.
And the British government's efforts to stabilize its economy thereafter. Now that, of course, extremely damaging, because you're talking about
government documents that should never have been passed on to a private party in the United States.
The fury over those revelations had been growing over the course of the last few days. Peter Mandelson had resigned from the Labour Party. He now
stands down from the House of Lords.
And we understand that Keir Starmer, the British prime minister, is looking at legislation to strip him of his peerage, which means that Peter
Mandelson, as he's been known, will become -- Lord Mandelson, rather, he will become once again Peter Mandelson.
But extremely embarrassing, not just for Peter Mandelson but, of course, the British government that has promoted him over the course of the last
few years.
Those allegations regarding his role as business secretary back then, in 2009, other allegations, Becky, into those financial payments that have
also been the source of a great deal of embarrassment for Peter Mandelson.
ANDERSON: Yes, and I think you underscore that this is -- this is not an insignificant character and not an insignificant development, as you say.
This is reflected very poorly in many people's eyes on the current labor prime minister, Keir Starmer, who, as you say, has promoted this individual
at times against a lot of people's better judgment, it has been reported, Melissa
BELL: And he's been around for such a long time in British politics. Becky. He's been called variously, the prince of darkness. Remember, he was
there at the time of Tony Blair's election victory back in 1997. He's been at the heart of the Labour machine ever since.
But his promotion over the last few years, despite a series of scandals -- this is not the first that had troubled his reputation -- does raise
questions, of course, about the judgment of the current prime minister.
And I think this is why you're seeing him act as decisively when it comes to Lord Mandelson's peerage. There have been many examples of people who've
been convicted of crimes but kept their title, kept their place in the House of Lords.
This time, the British prime minister is acting very decisively because of the political damage that this is likely to cause him. Becky.
[10:35:03]
ANDERSON: Yes, yes. Melissa, good to have you on the story. Thank you very much indeed.
Well, president Donald Trump is pushing the Republican Party to massively overhaul the election system in the United States ahead of this year's
critical midterm elections. He's calling on his party to nationalize elections and take them over from the States as he repeats his claims of
past voter fraud.
Right now, elections in the United States are run by state and local officials, with the federal government playing only a very limited role.
What president Trump is pushing for would be a huge change, requiring an act from Congress. Here's more from the U.S. president.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: The Republicans should say, we want to take over -- we should take over the voting in at least many -- 15 places. The
Republicans ought to nationalize the voting.
And then we have states that are so crooked and they're counting votes. We have states that I won that show I didn't win.
Now, you're going to see something in Georgia where they were able to get with a court order, the ballots. You're going to see some interesting
things come out. But, you know, like the 2020 election, I won that election by so much.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANDERSON: Well, senior reporter Stephen Collinson has written an analysis piece for CNN about this story.
In his article, he notes, and I quote here, "When president Donald Trump looks like he's gearing up to meddle in an election, still-raw history
suggests he should be believed."
And Stephen joins us now from Washington.
Stephen, as you point out, these comments should be nonsense, given the Constitution gives the power of running elections to the States. But we've
kind of been to this rodeo before.
We've seen this playbook before, haven't we?
STEPHEN COLLINSON, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes. And the experience of 2020, I think, shows us that, when president Trump starts talking about
this, even if he cannot steal an election, he can taint it very much so in the eyes of voters and fracture the trust that's critical in a democracy,
that citizens have in an electoral system.
In practice, there's very little chance, I think, that Republicans will get to nationalize this election. First of all, I don't believe there would be
support to get this through. Very fragile Republican majorities in the House and the Senate. Any law that tried to take control of elections away
from the States is flagrantly unconstitutional.
The first Article of the Constitution makes that quite clear. And there is no role for the president in administering elections.
That said, what Trump did in 2020, many months before voting, was to create this culture of suspicion and mistrust, that he was then able to build on,
to argue that the election was not fair and that there was fraud, even though multiple court cases, Republican officials said this was not the
case.
So in some ways, I think this is a political out that the president is building in the quite likely event that these elections are a bit of a
disaster for Republicans and cast a real shadow over the last two years of his time in the White House.
ANDERSON: There is some talk that this is Donald Trump just letting off steam.
What's been the sort of, you know, talk from the White House on the back of these comments?
COLLINSON: We don't have a comment, particularly on this particular statement by the president yesterday on a podcast. But in the past, when he
says these kind of things, they always make light of it.
They say, for instance, he was joking. He did an interview with Reuters last month, in which he said, maybe we shouldn't have an election. The
White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, then rebuked journalists for taking this too seriously and almost having a sense of humor failure.
Saying what he was really saying was that, well, we're doing so great that we don't need to have an election because we'd win it anyway.
But the problem with that approach is look at what happened in 2020. There were multiple attempts at many levels in many states by the president and
his supporters to overturn the result of Joe Biden's election win.
Six years on, Trump has built a much more formidable infrastructure inside the government, which he could use to challenge or disrupt elections before
they take place.
And in 2020, there were some Republican officials, even the administration, that pushed back against his more extreme aims on this question. Bill Barr,
the then attorney general, told the president that there was no evidence of electoral fraud, for example.
Those kind of people are not in the second administration. There's complete loyalty to Trump.
[10:40:00]
And I think events over the last year have shown that these officials will do everything that Trump wants to pursue. And, of course, he had that
Supreme Court ruling that came out of one of his election prosecutions, that argued that a president, in the course of his duties, has great
immunity.
So Trump could be in the clear for anything he does. And he has the pardon power, which he's already shown he's willing to use liberally to protect
supporters.
ANDERSON: It's good to have you, Stephen. Thank you. It is 10:40 there in Washington, 7:40 in the UAE.
Amid the most tense period in decades for U.S. relations with Colombia, Donald Trump is set to host Colombia's president, Gustavo Petro, next hour.
The White House visit on Trump's invitation comes after a year of clashes over issues, including Trump's mass deportation campaign, as well as
accusations by the U.S. that Colombia had failed to live up to its promise to combat drug trafficking.
Well, our senior U.S. national correspondent, David Culver, is following all of this from D.C.
Just remind our viewers how dire things have got and what Petro is hoping to achieve today.
DAVID CULVER, CNN SENIOR U.S. NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: I'll put it this way, Becky, if you go back a month ago, when we were on the ground in
Colombia, we were never anticipating that this meeting would happen.
Let alone happen in the U.S. with President Petro coming here to Washington in about 20 minutes, meeting with president Trump. And that's because it
seemed as though, in the aftermath of Nicolas Maduro's capture in neighboring Venezuela, that Colombia would be targeted next.
And why did we think that?
Well, president Trump himself made claims that Petro, as he saw it, was not doing enough to stop the drug flow and that perhaps he should be targeted
in similar ways to the way Maduro was.
Now here we are in the aftermath of that. And it's certainly not playing out, at least that's what it seems with this meeting taking place a short
time from now. But it's important to understand the context and the timeline that got us here. And I think we have a graphic that kind of helps
lay this out.
So if you go back just a year ago, January of 2025, president Trump coming in for his second term, a big part of that was the immigration policy and
the crackdown, the deportations.
Colombia under President Petro rejecting deportees and then starting to back down after retaliatory measures were put forward by president Trump,
including a 25 percent tariff.
But then move ahead to September. And you had Petro calling on U.S. soldiers to disobey president Trump, calling Trump an accomplice to
genocide. That did not go over well here in Washington.
As a result, the U.S. revoked President Petro's visa to the U.S. The next month, they add them to the sanctions list of the U.S. Treasury and that
puts not only Petro himself but his wife and their son on that list.
And then last month, we had those threats of military action against Colombia. The turning point in all of this, Becky, was January 7th; as we
were on the ground in Colombia, we are anticipating to cover this rally that is essentially solidarity and sovereignty of Colombia in Bogota.
And there was a phone call that same day between president Trump and President Petro, in which the two seemed to have a reversal of course and
came to this agreement that they needed to meet face to face.
And so, Becky, that's what we expected to take place here shortly. And if anything, the focus of this will be to try to lower the temperature, to try
to deescalate where these two are right now.
ANDERSON: Fascinating. We will -- we will wait to see and we will cover this.
And David is on the story for you. You are in good hands.
Thank you. David.
Coming up, a milestone in Gaza. But it's still so far to go.
As a key border crossing opens to a lucky few, what is the outlook for the enclave's kids?
My conversation with UNICEF's director is up next.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[10:45:00]
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ANDERSON (voice-over): Well, you are looking at some of the first people to leave Gaza through the newly opened -- or reopened -- Rafah border
crossing. The gates into Egypt opened to a small amount of traffic on Wednesday, nearly two years after Israel forced them shut.
But the reopening is largely symbolic. So far, only a handful of people have gone in and out. So many more are waiting. An official from the World
Health Organization told Reuters that more than 18,000 wounded or ill patients are in line to be evacuated.
Well, the U.N. Children's Agency, UNICEF, says many of those waiting to leave Gaza are children who have lived through years of war. UNICEF
executive director Catherine Russell is here in Dubai and she spoke to me about the situation of youngsters in Gaza, as well as crises elsewhere that
also have a huge impact on kids.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
RUSSELL: The Rafah crossing opening is great. You know, we need to have people have the ability to go back and forth. But the truth is we need
everything open. We need to be able to get more and more resources in there.
We have been able to get more than before for sure. But the needs are still tremendous. So I think we have to keep encouraging everyone that, yes,
there is progress and that is a glimmer of hope but it's not enough. You know, we need to keep going.
ANDERSON: I just want to get your perspective on this phase two and very specifically the board of peace, chaired by president Trump. There is no
Palestinian seat on that newly formed board of peace.
How is UNICEF coordinating reconstruction, the launch of education programs and who are your interlocutors at this stage in going forward?
RUSSELL: Well, we have many. I mean, I think that the -- for us, you know, we're quite, innovative in what we do. We'll find anyone we can talk to.
We'll work with whomever we have to.
There are -- there are a lot of people on the ground. We've been working with the Israelis.
We've been working with the Americans who are there, trying to make sure that they understand the priorities for children and have, you know, gotten
a good reception, I would have to say, about trying to make sure that children are taken into account and their needs are considered.
It is -- it's an issue where everyone can come together, which is a blessing for us to be able to work on children. But the needs are.
(CROSSTALK)
ANDERSON: Does it worry you that there's no Palestinian representation at this point?
RUSSELL: I mean, listen, I -- you know, the blessing of UNICEF is we don't really get into the politics of things. I think in general, we're happy to
see that there's Palestinian involvement in the -- in the technocratic side on the broader board of peace.
You know, I don't really have an opinion about the composition of it. I do think that, as a general principle, the Palestinian views have to be
represented here in these conversations about the future of Gaza, because it is their future.
ANDERSON: We're talking about Gaza, which is a throughline, if you will, to the potential for further peace around the Middle East region. The needs
are huge there; the needs in Sudan even greater. And you were in Sudan this past December.
The situation there has been described as one of the worst humanitarian crises.
Just tell me what you saw there.
RUSSELL: I mean, the biggest challenge in Sudan is the scale of the situation, right?
It's a -- it's a big country. It's centrally located. It's an important country. And the fact that it is completely in the throes of this fighting
is horrific for children.
We have hundreds of millions of people moving around right in the country or millions of people moving around, millions of children who are out of
school. And that's a colossal challenge for us to try to address. We have children who are malnourished.
[10:50:00]
And we see extraordinary numbers of malnutrition. So the instability makes it hard for us to get to places. You know, there are some parts of the
country where it's very difficult for us to get into. We're very worried about, you know, the Kordofans (ph) and that that part of the country where
it is the fight --
ANDERSON: -- there is still a civil war.
RUSSELL: -- exactly. The fighting is really vicious. And the stories I heard were just shocking, honestly, the scale and the nature of the
violence.
ANDERSON: You speak to the most vulnerable, that is your work, supporting kids in areas of conflict. In Port Sudan and Kassala, you met kids who had
fled al-Fashir; the atrocities there well reported, if not well documented at this point.
What did these kids share with you?
RUSSELL: Well, it's scarring for children, as you can imagine. I was at a boys' school, where the boys were telling me about how their families fled
and they were trying to make their way away from the violence and that, at every stop, every portion of the trip, they were stopped by armed guards
who tried to take money from their family.
Their family didn't have any money. They were threatening them. So these kids are just terrified. But you know, they finally got to some place where
they're safe. So I think they're happy. They're just worried about their family members who get left behind.
The really terrible stories I heard were from women and girls, who just explained the most horrific scenes of places where, you know, they were
told, you know, people went in one group and women and girls. And they were raped. And they went in another group and they were killed.
And I think it's just horrifying to imagine this. I mean, women were telling me that they were stripped of all their clothes and forced to walk
through their community, that they were raped in front of other people, including their families.
I mean, what is the purpose of that?
It's really just to terrify people. And it is terrifying.
ANDERSON: For an organization like yours, the needs have, as I understand it, have never been greater. And yet we are in an era of global aid
fatigue, massive budget cuts. I mean, your budgets are being cut by some 20 percent. You know, it's a significant chunk being cut from the funding that
you would have got from the United States.
What do you do at the beginning of 2026, when faced with such challenges?
RUSSELL: A lot of worrying, for sure. But look, what we have done at UNICEF is do everything we possibly can to become as efficient as possible,
to squeeze every penny out of every dollar that we get. And we will always continue to do that.
We look for ways to innovate. We look for new partnerships.
We try to encourage people to come to the table, even -- not even partnership partnering with us but doing their own work, to make sure that
they're thinking about children and trying to take children into account in their policy work and their -- and their thinking about how they should be
doing things.
But I mean, I have to say, it's just -- it's challenging. There's no easy answer to it. We just have to continue to do our best and keep trying to
remind the world that, with all the problems that were facing and all the cuts that were facing, there's a lot of money in the world, right?
We know there's a lot of money in the world. We see it every day. And people just need to say, OK, just a little bit will help a child survive
and maybe have a decent life, help a country be more stable. It's a great investment.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANDERSON: And we will be right back after this.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[10:55:00]
(MUSIC PLAYING)
ANDERSON: Well, just in, American skiing superstar Lindsey Vonn says that she will compete at the upcoming Winter Olympics in Italy, despite
suffering a completely ruptured ACL. Vonn crashed during a World Cup race on Friday and was airlifted to a hospital.
She says, despite her injury, she is confident that she can ski with a knee brace. The 41-year old already is the oldest woman to medal in the Olympic
downhill event and that happened eight years ago.
Wow. There is no other response to that than wow.
Well, that is it for CONNECT THE WORLD from Dubai today. We'll be back here tomorrow for another special edition from this, the annual World
Governments Summit. Next hour, we'll bring you live coverage of Colombian president Gustavo Petro meeting Donald Trump at the White House. Stay with
CNN. "ONE WORLD" is up next.
[11:00:00]
END
