Return to Transcripts main page
One World with Zain Asher
Trump Speaks With Putin About Potential Ceasefire In Ukraine; Ceasefire Shatters As Israel Pounds Gaza With Deadly Strikes; Israel: War Resumed After Hamas Refused Ceasefire Proposals. Aired 11a-12p ET
Aired March 18, 2025 - 11:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[11:00:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ERICA HILL, HOST, "ONE WORLD": President Trump speaking with Vladimir Putin today. What concessions will Russia make to end the war in Ukraine? One
World starts right now.
A high-stakes call with the future of Ukraine hanging in the balance. President Trump holding talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin over
the phone today about a potential deal to end the war. Plus, Israel shatters the ceasefire with extensive strikes on Gaza, Hamas calling it a
death sentence for hostages. We are live in Tel Aviv with a look at the hopes for peace talks. And the mission return home, the two astronauts who
have been on the ISS for more than nine months finally on their way back to Earth. I'll discuss with Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson.
Coming to you live from New York on this Tuesday, I'm Erica Hill. Zain and Bianna are off today. This is One World.
The White House insists it is now closing in on a temporary ceasefire deal in Ukraine. U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir
Putin are expected to speak by phone any moment now. The Kremlin, however, is downplaying the urgency of this call, describing it simply as one step
in a broader effort to establish dialog. Washington, for its part, seeking Moscow's support for that American-backed 30-day truce in Ukraine. Kyiv, of
course, has already accepted the terms of that agreement. Donald Trump has made it clear, he wants to broker a deal, of course, as quickly as
possible, and has already offered up some concessions, including Ukrainian land, potentially some assets. On Monday, however, Kyiv stressed Ukraine's
territorial integrity and sovereignty are non-negotiable.
CNN's Alex Marquardt is following all these developments for us and joins me now live from Washington. As we're waiting for more details on this
call, waiting for it to begin, we also know that some -- the Vice President and the Secretary of State are now at the White House.
ALEX MARQUARDT, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. I think the big question here is whether Trump can get Putin to agree to this
ceasefire. That really is the first step. They have been pushing a temporary pause in the fighting in order to give time and space to then
further negotiate a final peace deal, which is going to be a lot more complicated, Erica, because of the positions on both sides. You just
mentioned, territorial integrity. That is really at the key of this, not just this conversation today, but these ongoing negotiations. How much land
will Ukraine be able to claw back from Russia? How much land will Russia be able to hold on to after invading Ukraine some three years ago?
This ceasefire was proposed a week ago, and I was there in Jeddah when the -- when Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced this, and the Ukrainians
immediately signed on with no preconditions. But, it has taken a week to get to this point, and there has not been much progress on the Russian
side. The Russians have essentially dismissed this as a respite for the Ukrainians to re-equip and rearm. We've heard President Putin enumerate
numerous reservations and conditions that he has. Steve Witkoff, the U.S. envoy, has gone straight to Moscow to speak with him directly, made no
progress there.
So, big question, whether Putin will come around and they will be able to announce any kind of ceasefire on this call. I have my doubts that then
raises the question of whether President Trump will threaten Russia in any way, go from using a carrot approach with some concessions to more of a
stick approach, where there are threats of more sanctions and more weapons for Ukraine. That's the big question today, Erica.
HILL: Yeah, absolutely. Alex, really appreciate it. Thank you.
Also joining me now, Republican Congressman Mike Flood of Nebraska. And Congressman, I do want to let you know that CNN has just confirmed this
call has now been underway for about an hour. So, the President in discussions now with President Vladimir Putin. I know you've said that, in
your view, any deal has to include rolling back the land that Russia has occupied. You actually wrote in a recent piece for Newsweek that, quote,
"Ceding all this land to Russia in a peace deal would certainly -- would incentivize, rather, Putin to continue pursuit of an ethnic empire now or
in the future." Do you believe that Vladimir Putin, though, would agree to that?
REP. MIKE FLOOD (R-NE): Well, I think Vladimir Putin is a thug, and obviously he is going to be difficult. But, if we don't point our direction
here and basically plan a flag and say this is unacceptable, he is going to continue doing this. He wants to rebuild the Russia of the 17th century. He
is on a mission, and I think this is where we have to draw the line. President Obama failed us when he didn't do anything in 2014 with Crimea.
[11:05:00]
We're at a spot now where Putin is hurting. The sanctions need to be enforced. This is about rolling back all of that land, getting those kids
that were kidnapped, 20,000 of them back into Ukraine, keeping NATO strong is important to me, and strengthening our ties with Ukraine. But, yes, I
absolutely believe we should demand that they roll back the ground that they've taken. I think Russia is now controlling 20 percent of Ukraine.
That's unacceptable.
HILL: President Trump has said that land will be a part of the discussion. Do you believe, though, that the President shares your view that all of
that land should, in fact, go back to Ukraine, and do you believe that's what he will be calling for?
FLOOD: Well, it's certainly part of it, as you just said. Does he have as stronger view as I do? I'm not sure. But, I will say this. He is at the
table right now negotiating. If the people of Ukraine are willing to accept the deal, I guess we have to, at the end of the day, understand that that's
their prerogative. I just think that any deal that keeps Russia in Ukraine is a bad sign for all of our European allies. I've been in Poland. They're
bracing for an invasion someday because of everything that Putin has done. We need to stay strong here, expect that that land goes back to the good
people of Ukraine, and bring about a stable peace.
And when you look at President Trump, at the end of the day, he has an unconventional way about himself, but he has affected peace. We've seen it
in the Middle East with bringing the UAE to the table and building normal relations between Israel and UAE. These are things that only he can do, and
only his style gets done. And so, I'm hopeful that we'll have good news like it's been said earlier on this interview. I don't know if it'll be
today. They've been on the phone for an hour. An hour on the phone with Donald Trump, that has to be quite something, as they're talking about the
future of Ukraine. I have every reason to believe we'll have a good outcome, though.
HILL: As my colleague Alex Marquardt noted, it's been several days since this was first presented, of course, to Russia. Russia said that there were
some reservations. Vladimir Putin said he had some reservations. There is also a sense, certainly among a number of people that I've spoken with,
that Vladimir Putin will continue to drag his feet here and to drag this out. Should there be a deadline attached to this agreement, and do you
believe that's something that Donald Trump is talking about perhaps right now in that call?
FLOOD: I'm sure there will be. And I'm sure that President Trump, if he feels that Russia is not moving, we'll do things to Russia to get them
moving. We'll start by making sure that we're actually enforcing the sanctions that have been placed on Russia. We'll probably consider
everything under the Sun. President Trump, I think it's fair to say, can be unpredictable when it comes to where he is going to go in a negotiation.
He'll use whatever he has at his disposal to get compliance, and I'm hopeful that he does. I think stopping Putin is going to be a huge win for
the Trump presidency, what are we, 60 days in, and look at where we're at. So, this is a good sign.
HILL: So, you say it's a good sign. I do want to ask you one other question. There has been a lot of back and forth about what is or is not
happening in Washington at this point. As I'm sure you're aware, there are questions about the judge who said that he just wanted to take a pause,
right, while he figured out whether the administration's use of the Alien Enemies Act was legal. So, not weighing in on that at all.
There has been interesting comments raised. Tom Homan saying that I don't care what the courts say. Stephen Miller saying this is not something a
district court judge has any authority over in any way. It's raising questions about whether there is a belief among this administration that
the executive branch's actions are actually subject to judicial oversight. Again, not asking about the specifics of that particular case. But, just
specifically, are executive branch actions, in your view, still subject to judicial oversight? You're an attorney, I believe.
FLOOD: Of course. We live in a country that prides itself on the rule of law. Just last week, President Trump at the Justice Department said very
clearly that he was going to end -- that the Justice Department was going to enforce the law under the constitutional rule of law, impartial. I think
that time and again we've had this conversation. Article Two does grant the President the power, as it certainly relates to immigration and terrorism.
It also grants him powers to make some of these choices. Ultimately, our court system, as it has been doing, is going to take every one of these
cases, and whether through an appeal or all the way to the Supreme Court, there will be answers to all of this, and we will be guided by a judicial
system that works, and that I have a lot of faith in.
[11:10:00]
I also think that this idea that every single decision a President takes is subject to immediate cessation from a federal district court. How do you
govern with that? So, ultimately, we have to let the process play out. I clearly think that, and the President has said this before, his people have
said this before, we've talked about it as members of Congress, the courts have a role in our three branches of government, and they'll do their job,
and certainly the rule of law will prevail.
HILL: Are you confident that Tom Homan also respects that?
FLOOD: I don't know exactly what Tom Homan said. I don't know Tom Holman. I --
HILL: He said, I don't care what the judges think.
FLOOD: I care what judges think.
HILL: OK. Congressman Mike Flood, appreciate your time today. Thank you.
FLOOD: Thank you.
HILL: Also with me this hour is CNN's Chief International Anchor Christiane Amanpour. Christiane, always good to talk to you. So, as we know now,
turning our attention back to this discussion of the call between Putin and Trump, it's been underway for about an hour now. We know that both Vance
and Rubio have arrived at the White House. What do you anticipate we will be learning from this call?
CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Well, look, I mean, clearly, everybody is glued to it precisely because of the question you're
asking. Unclear, of course, there is no readout yet. But, the sort of the run-up, the prelude to it, was very clear that the Ukrainians have accepted
unconditional, as you know, a couple of weeks ago, ceasefire, temporary ceasefire, but Volodymyr Zelenskyy said it depends on whether Russia will
do the same. So far, Russia hasn't. So, if Russia does come out and say, we accept an unconditional, temporary ceasefire, however many days, 30 days,
or whatever, then that would be a step in a direction that the U.S. and others would like to see.
Up until now, by public statement, President Putin has indicated that a ceasefire he couldn't agree to without a whole load of conditions that he
attached to them in that press conference with his mate, the partner, President of Belarus, Lukashenko, a few days ago in the Kremlin. So, no
NATO, no peacekeeping forces, no sovereignty and sort of military for Ukraine at all, much less being in NATO, and a whole list of concerns about
land, about this, about that.
So, the sort of balancing act that Trump and Putin have to do, certainly Putin, who doesn't want to alienate Trump, right? Trump is bringing him
back into the fold, has sent U.S. diplomats, the highest U.S. diplomats to meet him. Secretary of State Rubio has met with Sergey Lavrov, and Trump's
own Middle East envoy has met with Putin in the Kremlin himself. This is unprecedented in many years since this full-scale invasion. So, he is
already bringing Putin back onto the world stage. Putin wants to stay on the world stage. And his spokesperson said today, much of the conversation
will be about future U.S.-Russian relations.
So, it's possible that Putin will try to obfuscate, try to talk filibuster, so to speak, talk a whole lot about, quote, unquote, "root causes" about
this war, actual matter at hand, which is stopping the war, which he started.
HILL: Yeah. When you talk about root causes, that's an important one, the fact that he started the war.
Christiane, appreciate it, as we all wait for that readout.
A two-month truce shattered as Israel carries out a wave of deadly strikes across Gaza overnight. One resident calling it a night of hell.
(VIDEO PLAYING)
HILL: This is Gaza's deadliest day in over 15 months. The Palestinian Health Ministry says now more than 400 people have been killed. Dozens more
are believed to be trapped under the rubble. Gaza hospitals already, of course, overwhelmed, are struggling to treat wounded victims. Among them,
there are many children. Israel is blaming Hamas for rejecting new U.S. proposals to release more hostages. Hamas says it had adhered to all the
terms of the three-phase January ceasefire agreement, and was keen to enter phase two of that deal. Arab nations, meantime, are accusing Israel of
violating the ceasefire.
Meantime, many of the families of the hostages condemned the return to war. Israel, for its part, is vowing to ramp up operations.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DANNY DANON, ISRAELI AMBASSADOR TO U.N.: The Israeli Air Force initiated a series of attacks against Hamas targets in Gaza. We will show no mercy on
our enemies. Let me be very clear, Israel will not stop until all of our hostages are back home. We will make it very clear to the Security Council
that if they want to stop the war in Gaza, they have to ensure that the hostages are coming back to Israel. We are committed to bring them back.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[11:15:00]
HILL: CNN's Jeremy Diamond joining me now live from Tel Aviv. Jeremy, we're hearing again from some of the hostage families that promise that all the
hostages will be coming home. There is concern that this complicates things again.
JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN JERUSALEM CORRESPONDENT: No doubt about it. And we have been hearing from a number of former hostages who were released during this
latest ceasefire, who have made clear their concerns, their fear for the hostages still being held in Gaza, as the Israeli military resumes its
deadly airstrikes there. We heard from Yarden Bibas, for example, who was released during the ceasefire, but whose wife and two young children were
killed in Hamas captivity. He said, quote, "The military pressure endangers the hostages, while an agreement brings them home." Several other former
hostages also reflecting on the moments when they saw Israeli airstrikes, or heard, rather, Israeli airstrikes resuming, and knew that they were once
again in a hopeless state.
But, what we are also seeing, of course, is the impact that it is already having on the people inside of Gaza right now. Overnight, more than 400
people were killed in this series of deadly airstrikes from southern to central to northern Gaza. It was the single deadliest day in Gaza in more
than 15 months since November 7th, 2023, when more than 500 people were killed in a series of airstrikes that day. And we've been seeing, of
course, as happens all too often in Gaza, that so many of the victims that have been pulled out of the rubble that have been brought to hospitals and
morgues, well, unfortunately, too many of them are children once again.
The Israeli government has said that they carried out these strikes because of Hamas' refusal to agree to new conditions to extend the ceasefire, which
would have included releasing several hostages without leading to an end of the war in Gaza. Hamas has said that it was willing to engage in further
negotiations for phase two, which Israel had agreed to negotiate as part of its agreement to this ceasefire deal.
But, what we have seen over the course of the last few weeks is that this Israeli government, led by Prime Minister Netanyahu, has made very clear
that it is not interested in negotiating an end to the war and the withdrawal of all Israeli troops in Gaza, at least not at this moment.
Instead, with the support of the Trump administration, they really sought to pare that down to securing the release of a handful of hostages from
Gaza in exchange for a month or so extension of this ceasefire.
And so, with talks at a standstill, I'm told by an Israeli official that this -- these attacks by the Israeli military in Gaza, and the way in which
they will escalate further in the coming days and weeks, are designed to try and level military pressure on Hamas to see if they can unblock those
negotiations. But, of course, as we heard from the hostages there, so many of them have expressed concerns about this use of military pressure to free
the hostages, concerns that, as it has in the past, it could lead to the deaths of more hostages held in Gaza. Erica.
HILL: Jeremy, really appreciate it. Thank you.
We will, of course, be continuing to follow the developments out of Gaza throughout the next couple of hours. Joining me next hour, an Israeli and a
Palestinian representative from the group Parents Circle-Families Forum. It's a peace organization, which brings together those who have lost
children in the conflict. Please be sure to stay with us for that.
Also ahead here on One World, a high-profile deportation case now turning into something even bigger, as the Trump administration goes up against the
American judicial system. Plus, Donald Trump says he is fulfilling a campaign promise with the release of the unredacted files on the JFK
assassination.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[11:20:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HILL: A moon showed a noon showdown, pardon me, is expected in Washington today, so, it's just about 40 minutes from now, as the U.S. President's
battle with the American judicial system heats up. Donald Trump is calling for the federal judge who blocked the deportations of suspected gang
members, while he could determine whether the act was being done or was being used legally, well, Trump is now calling for that judge to be
impeached. For his part, the U.S. District Judge James Boasberg is demanding answers from the DoJ, setting a deadline in the next hour for the
government to explain why President Trump defied the court order by flying migrants out of the United States, even after being ordered not to.
The Trump White House deporting hundreds of alleged gang members to El Salvador on Saturday, despite that court order. Again, there is also
growing controversy now over the administration's peacetime use of wartime powers. The act that they were using in those deportations is from the 18th
century, it's known as the Alien Enemies Act.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: This administration acted within the confines of the law, again, within the President's
constitutional authority and under the authority granted to him under the Alien Enemies Act. We are quite confident in that, and we are wholly
confident that we are going to win this case in court.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HILL: Looking at all of this, there are questions here, some of Berber (ph) saying, some of the most startling parts of this isn't whether officials
actually ignored that judge's order to halt the deportations, is that Trump aides don't seem to care if they did.
CNN's Katelyn Polantz joining me now live from Washington. That's a lot of what we've been hearing, because there are two parts to what we're watching
right here, right? There is the, hey, we're going to take a pause from the judge while we figure out whether what you're doing is legal, and then the
other side of, I don't care if you say it's legal or not. I actually don't care what you say. We're going to do whatever we want.
KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN SENIOR CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER: Erica, it's one of those examples where the political bluster and what is being argued in
court are not necessarily completely the same thing. So, you're hearing Donald Trump, Stephen Miller, others having strong words about the court
system. They don't want judges to be overstepping, in their belief, the President's power to deport people. That's different than what's going on
in this court case.
In the court case, there was a hearing yesterday at five. The Justice Department attorneys made a number of legal arguments to Judge Jeb Boasberg
of the Federal District Court in Washington. The judge was quite stern. He clearly was looking at the possibility that the Trump administration
intentionally was defying him in some way, or was putting people on planes and getting them out of the country before the judge could order them to
stop. What else the judge was doing at that hearing was demanding answers, and that continues into today. Specifically, the judges wanted to know how
many people may be left in the United States custody who the administration wanted to deport under this presidential proclamation.
The people on the third flight, so, there were three flights heading out of the country with migrants, the people on the third flight that took off
after the judge issued his order in a written way on Saturday were those people being removed because of other reasons. Give more explanation on
that. So, that's what the judge has been asking the administration about. There are, though, those other administration officials that are out there
describing their position.
Here is a little bit more from them, including the Attorney General.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PAM BONDI, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: Our Founding Fathers knew exactly what they were doing and it applies to a situation just like this.
[11:25:00]
Tren de Aragua, they are a foreign arm of the Venezuelan government. They are organized. They have a command structure, and they have invaded our
country.
LAWRENCE JONES, CO-HOST, FOX & FRIENDS: You're going against the judges now. What's next?
TOM HOMAN, TRUMP'S BORDER CZAR: Another flight, another flight every day. We're not stopping. I don't care what the judges think. I don't care what
the left thinks. We're coming.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
POLANTZ: So, Erica, it's a hint of the legal arguments there, but a lot of the nuance is lost, because the message that the administration is
underlining is that they are finding ways to deport migrants that they believe should not be in the country. The legal arguments, of course, may
be different. There are different ways that the administration can use the immigration legal system to try and get people out if they don't want them.
Back to you.
HILL: Yeah, an important clarification. Katelyn, appreciate it. Thank you.
Well, Donald Trump says he plans to release today the unredacted files on the assassination of U. S. President John F. Kennedy. That move would
fulfill a long-time promise made by President Trump on the campaign trail last year. He says about 80,000 pages will be released. Now, it's important
to note, 99 percent of the records on JFK's 1963 assassination have already been made public. The FBI said last month it discovered some 2,400 new
records.
My colleague, Tom Foreman, joining me now. So, 2,400 new records, a lot of pages. Do we have a sense, though, of what's actually in all those
documents, Tom?
TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, based on the 99 percent already released, we have an idea, Erica, and what it will be is a lot of minutia,
people who are looking for some great proof here. A couple years ago, Gallup surveyed the American people, and 65 percent said they did not
believe that Harvey Oswald acted alone as the Warren Commission report said. That being the case, there has never been definitive proof of
anything to the contrary. And as you read through these reams and reams and reams and reams of paper already released, there is no evidence that
anything else happened there. A lot of smoke, no real fire.
These new documents, including the ones that were discovered, basically these were paper documents or documents that were held in individual FBI
offices as they digitized them and pulled them all together. Computer searches said, well, maybe these have something to do with the case. So,
these are tangential bits of evidence out there. And it is important to note in all of this, for even this release happening right now, Erica,
Donald Trump said in his first term he is going to release last of all the documents. He did not. Joe Biden released many, many, many, many more
documents than Donald Trump did the last time and this time, but Trump is in the position of being down to the last few to release here.
So, what do we expect to find? I don't know. I've got a lot of reading to do.
HILL: Yeah.
FOREMAN: A lot of scholars will look at it, and they will find things that are important to scholars to completing the entire story. But, a lot of
what's been held back so far has been minutia about who was talking to whom, in which office, at which time, what relationships were going on,
that sort of thing, not really directly tied to the assassination.
HILL: Appreciate it, my friend. Thanks, Tom.
FOREMAN: Good talking to you.
HILL: Just ahead here, Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin speaking by phone this morning about a possible ceasefire deal in Ukraine.
The Kremlin working to temper expectations, though, ahead of that call. What we're learning? Plus, heading home, the two astronauts, whose trip to
space was decidedly a lot longer than originally expected, will be back on Earth in a matter of hours. What will that re-entry be like? Neil deGrasse
Tyson is our guest.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[11:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HILL: Welcome back to One World. I'm Erica Hill in New York. Let's get you caught up in some of the international headlines we're watching today.
Gaza's fragile ceasefire has now collapsed amid a wave of Israeli airstrikes. Palestinian officials say at least 400 people have been killed,
hundreds wounded. An Israeli official says the renewed war in Gaza could be halted if Hamas agrees to a proposal to release more hostages. Hamas says
it has adhered to all the terms of that three-phase January truce.
The family of the missing college student wants the Dominican Republic government -- the government of the Dominican Republic to officially
declare her dead. Sudiksha Konanki's parents say, after much deliberation, we request the police proceed with that legal declaration of her death so
they can move forward. Authorities have also confiscated, we've learned, the passport of the last person seen with Konanki, Joshua Riibe, who is
being kept under surveillance but is not considered to be a suspect at this time. Konanki went missing in Punta Cana nearly two weeks ago. Authorities
believe she drowned.
The German Chancellor in waiting, Friedrich Merz, has just won a vote in parliament to allow a huge increase in state borrowing, which will
supercharge the country's military spending. It is also seen as a major spending shift to revive growth in Europe's largest economy.
U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin on the phone right now. The White House says that call between the two leaders has
been underway for about 90 minutes. The conversation, of course, is one that the Trump administration hopes will lead to an agreement on that
American-backed 30-day ceasefire in Ukraine. Russia, though, may have a different timeline. Earlier, the Kremlin, tempering expectations on the
call, saying it's a one step in a broader effort to establish a dialog.
CNN's Fred Pleitgen joining me now live from Moscow with more on this. Interesting comments ahead of that call. What is the view from Russia when
it comes to this conversation between the two presidents?
FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, it certainly is pretty big news here in Russia. I can confirm to you, Erica,
that right now, as we speak, Russian state TV is in breaking news mode, of course, also having reported that the call is ongoing, but then also
delving into all the nuances about all of this, and of course, coming to the conclusion that the Russians essentially hold all of the cards, to put
it in Donald Trump's -- President Trump's words, in this entire process.
So, the two big differences it seems right now between the two sides are that the U.S. and the Ukrainians have essentially signed on to a ceasefire
that's unconditional for 30 days, where the Russians are saying that they want all the conditions, the so-called root causes of the conflict in
Ukraine to be sorted out before the weapons can be silenced, and that certainly seems like something that could be quite difficult to sort out in
just one phone call.
[11:35:00]
And I think that's one of the reasons why the Kremlin sort of tried to temper expectations about this phone call earlier today, saying that this
phone call, of course, is one that is very important, but is only one step in many to try and work towards a lasting ceasefire for Ukraine. And then,
as you mentioned, the Russians sort of are also trying to broaden all this out a little bit as well, saying that they believe that one of the things
that will also be discussed is the normalization of relations between Russia and the United States. Of course, some of the things that the
Russians are looking for is business cooperation, but then also, of course, sanctions relief in a major way as well, Erica.
HILL: And -- so, looking for those sanctions. And what about in terms of sticking points too?
PLEITGEN: Yeah. Well, I mean, sticking points, there certainly are many. And I think this is something that the Russians, of course, talked about
when they talk about the root causes, as they say, of the conflict in Ukraine. One of the things that the Russians keep saying is that they
believe that NATO, for instance, has been moving closer and closer to Russia's territory over the past couple of decades. And so, one of the
things that the Russians have said is a complete red line for them is possible foreign troops, especially NATO troops, on the ground in Ukraine,
to try and ensure that any ceasefire actually holds, that who would enforce that ceasefire and who would monitor that ceasefire.
And there, of course, several European nations have come up and essentially offered to put boots on the ground. The Russians are saying that is not
something that they want, and they certainly also don't want Ukraine to become a member of NATO in the future. The Russians have been hinting that
they sort of want assurances in that direction. It's unclear, however, how far the Trump administration is willing to go to try and even make that
part of the conversation. Of course, that would have to be a wider NATO conversation as well.
And then also, and this is probably the most important thing, it's a lot about -- is about territory. The Russians, of course, hold a considerable
amount of Ukrainian territory, little less than 20 percent, and one of the things that sort of has been floated, if you look at Russian media, Russian
officials as well, is whether or not Crimea, for instance, would get recognized in such a deal as being part of Russia. Of course, at this point
in time, it is still considered to be annexed by Russia and not recognized by the United States or any other Western nations for that matter.
And then the other areas that the Russians have already taken from the Ukrainians, how much of that are the Russians going to be able to keep all
of that? Of course, extremely complicated and difficult conversations, where the sides are still pretty far apart, especially if you look at, of
course, the Ukrainians and the Russians, Erica.
HILL: Yeah, absolutely. Fred, appreciate it. Thank you.
Well, we all know that saying time is money. Donald Trump says his tariffs will be good for American businesses. But, how long will it take for that
to happen? We'll take it.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[11:40:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HILL: Welcome back to One World. Taking a quick look at the markets, as you see there, the Dow in the red at this hour. It has been a tough several
days for U.S. markets, one of the biggest reasons, of course, at the markets, as you see there, all indices across the board in the red at this
hour. One of the reasons that things have been so difficult, of course, is Donald Trump's trade wars. We're now just two weeks and one day away from
that April 2nd start date for a sweeping round of tariffs, including stiff penalties on many products coming into the U.S. from Mexico and Canada.
Now, it's important to note, it's possible that Trump, though, decides to again delay those tariffs, and it's that uncertainty that is also
contributing to the economic jitters for businesses and investors.
CNN's Matt Egan is joining us now with more the on-again, off-again threat of tariffs and just the overall uncertainty. Those concerns are not going
away, Matt.
MATT EGAN, CNN REPORTER: Yeah, Erica. They're not. There is just so much uncertainty about the direction of this trade war. What's going to be
tariffed? How long are they going to be tariffed for? What the retaliation is going to look like?
Now, remember, one of the goals here from President Trump is to try to revitalize U.S. manufacturing, but that is something that is much easier
said than done, and would take a considerable amount of time. We're talking about more time than really the President has in office to try to regain
the millions of lost jobs from the past few decades in the manufacturing space.
RSM Chief Economist Joe Brusuelas, he told me that the sort of re- industrialization that's being talked about isn't the product of months or years. It's the product of decades. Because, remember, it takes years to
open up a factory and have it begin to start producing cars or appliances or whatever other items are coming out of there, and that's why CEOs, they
need clarity on where tariffs are going to be to see whether or not it makes sense in the first place to bring jobs and factories back to the
United States. Of course, these days, CEOs don't really have all that much confidence on where tariffs are going to be at the end of the week, let
alone the end of the decade.
And there is also just a lot of uncertainty about what would happen after the President's term in office. Would a future President keep tariffs in
place or remove them? And without knowing the answer there, it's hard to see many CEOs really signing up to spend billions of dollars on opening up
complex factories in the United States.
So, the White House points out that they know that this is going to be a step-by-step process, and that the initial focus is on trying to get
existing factories that are being underutilized to ramp up. And they're happy about the fact that some multinational companies, including Taiwan
Semiconductor, GE Aerospace, Jeep and Chrysler parent Stellantis, and Eli Lilly, that they've all made major investments since the President took
office.
But, look, manufacturing employment is down very sharply. It peaked around the 1980s in modern times, came down sharply in the 1990s, of course, then
again, during the Great Recession, and the question is whether or not voters, lawmakers, investors, really have the appetite for the kind of
long-term tariffs that would meaningfully reverse that decline in manufacturing employment. Erica.
HILL: Yeah. It's so important and so important to look at all of the factors there, right? It goes far beyond the headlines, even those
investments, right, big numbers, but it doesn't mean those big numbers actually hit the U.S. on that date.
I also want to ask you about, of course, the Federal Reserve meeting. There is a big focus on interest rates and a lot of concern on that front too,
Matt.
EGAN: Yeah. A lot of uncertainty there as well. I think we're seeing that start to play out in the market today, with U.S. stocks solidly in the red
today, after some big gains on Friday and on Monday. You see the Dow off 300 points, three quarters of a percent, more significant losses, almost
two percent for the NASDAQ. Now, the Fed began its two-day meeting today, and look, we're not expecting any change on interest rates. There is almost
no chance priced into the market, a one percent chance of an interest rate cut at the meeting tomorrow, low chance in May as well. That's the next
meeting. It's really not until June that investors have any confidence that the Fed will be cutting interest rates.
But, I talked to former New York Fed President Bill Dudley, and he told me he would not be surprised if the Fed is on hold for many, many months,
because there is just so much uncertainty about policy out of the White House at this point, right?
[11:45:00]
The Fed doesn't really know. Should they be cutting interest rates to respond to some of these yellow lights flashing in the economy, the
uncertainty around tariffs, or should they possibly be increasing interest rates? Because we've seen inflation has kind of been stuck around three
percent, above that two percent goal that the Fed has, and consumers and some business owners have started to mark up their expectations of where
prices are going, in part because of the tariffs and the threats of more tariffs to come. You can see interest rates remained very high from the
Fed, although they've come down a bit.
But, the expectation, Erica, is that the Fed is going to do nothing tomorrow, stay on the sidelines, but we are expecting new projections to
come out that could show the Fed is bracing for higher inflation and potentially slower growth due to all of this uncertainty out of Washington,
and again, concerns about the trade war. Erica.
HILL: And that, of course, will have a ripple effect as that information and that outlook is digested.
Matt, appreciate it, as always, my friend. Thank you.
EGAN: Thanks.
HILL: Well, they expected, of course, to be in space for days, not months. But, here we are. After the break, we're joined by our favorite
astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson to talk about what this re-entry will be like for Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams, as they are now just hours away
from coming back to Earth.
(VIDEO PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And undocking confirmed.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Freedom is free of its moorings. Suni Williams and Butch Wilmore began their belated trip home.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HILL: Belated trip home by just a few months. With those words, two astronauts who have attracted the world's attention are now on their way
home. Suni Williams and Butch Wilmore are expected to splash down off the coast of Florida in about six hours from now. Their eight-day mission, of
course, turned into a nine-month one, when the Boeing spacecraft they were supposed to fly home on ran into some problems. The astronauts have
repeatedly stressed, despite what we may have thought here on Earth, us mere mortals who are not astronauts.
[11:50:00]
They were not stranded. They were not abandoned up there. They say they actually relished every moment they got to spend in space.
Joining us now, Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson who, of course, is also the Director of the Hayden Planetarium here in New York City. It's been a
minute, my friend. It is nice to see you. They have enjoyed their time there. We are all anxious to get them home, just to learn a little bit
more. I'm curious, as you're watching all of this play out, what are you most excited about when they get home? What would you want to talk to them
about?
NEIL DEGRASSE TYSON, ASTROPHYSICIST: Well, so, I see this holistically. I'm old enough to remember when there was intermittently a single person in
orbit in the Mercury program, and then Gemini was two people, and then Apollo was three people, and then we built the International Space Station,
and it's been continually occupied since 2001 or 2000 to a quarter century. So, what a triumph of our access to space that the original plan to bring
them home didn't work. So, we had a backup plan. Yeah, they have to spend an extra nine months in space, but they're professional astronauts. This is
not some weird thing they had to experience, other than maybe they didn't bring enough underwear. OK?
But, otherwise, there was a half a dozen other people there to greet them. You saw in the video, there is a half a dozen for the goodbye party. This
stranded -- when I think stranded, I think alone, no food, no water, and that was not the case here.
HILL: That was certainly not the case, to your point. We've heard from them. I've spoken to so many former astronauts who tell me exactly what you
have said that this was -- first of all, this is all part of the training, right? And in many ways, this is there. I think it was Suni Williams who
said, I mean, this is really my happy place, being up in space. Sure, we miss people, but this is what we train for. This is our passion, right,
when people actually get to pursue their passion and get paid for it. Isn't that a win? What do you think, though, this has led to, in terms of any
changes? As the ISS continues with that, more than a quarter century, as you point out, having people up there, what have we learned from this
moment?
TYSON: Yeah. That's an important question. And I think the -- what we might do, given that we have multiple space-faring corporations, like I said, the
Boeing Starliner had some issues, but it still exists, and presumably those get fixed. There is SpaceX. There is Soyuz, of course, in Russia. It may be
that we just always have one on reserve, so that maybe you don't have to spend nine months extra in space, maybe just a couple of weeks. And as we
go forward and our presence in space becomes that much more ever present, right, so, maybe we're going to go to the Moon and/or Mars or beyond, then
it'd be nice to know that there is a rescue vessel ready in the waiting, rather than --
HILL: Yeah.
TYSON: -- having to wait three quarters of a year.
HILL: It doesn't hurt to know that it's ready to go at a moment's notice. We talk so much about what it's going to be like when they get back. I know
the re-entry is. I mean, that's not exactly the easiest part of the mission. It's not just like they sort of undock there and now they're
easily splashing back to Earth. What are you going to be watching for in these next couple of hours before they do splash down?
TYSON: Well, it's something important to know here that the re-entry back through the atmosphere to Earth's surface involves extreme heat, and this
is -- there is shock waves that develop between the vessel and the atmosphere itself. What's going on is the vessel is slowing down. Right
now, it's going more than 17,000 miles an hour, and when it splashes down, you hope it's going zero. Right? So, where does that energy go? So, the re-
entry through the atmosphere is a way to dissipate that energy without having to use rocket fuel. So, this re-entry procedure is a feature, not a
bug, of space exploration.
And when they -- as they're coming through, they'll feel the deceleration, and as soon as they get to the parachute stage, they'll be back in 1G, and
one of my favorite 1G stories from a long-term astronaut was he gets home and they hand him like a drink, and he drinks half of it, and they just,
let's go and blast. It falls down and breaks.
HILL: He forgot about the gravity part?
TYSON: We get so used zero-G, you can't adjust back to 1G.
HILL: It's a little bit of an adjustment period. There you go. How long overall will they need for that adjustment?
TYSON: I only know what I've been told by others who've been in particular, Scott Kelly, who is become a friend in recent months. It takes a few days.
He has been up -- he is third, I think, in the American record of 340 consecutive days.
[11:55:00]
He said, it takes a few days to get adjusted. You don't run a marathon. You don't take on -- or operate heavy machinery. You don't do any of that. And
you want to check physiologically. Did you lose much muscle mass or bone mass? There are ways to try to maintain that on the space station. There're
exercise machines that have straps that enable you to simulate possibly being on Earth with the resistance. But, there is always some issue about
this.
And I'll note here that almost every sci-fi film that shows space exploration, they have a rotating vessel that has artificial gravity on the
edge, and NASA has never done that. Nobody has ever done that. And if we did that, there'd be no physiological changes, because you're just on 1G on
Earth. You're 1G in the space station. You're 1G going to Mars, and however long that is going to take you and to come back. So, maybe in the future,
we'd start thinking more about this to protect our physiology.
HILL: Yeah. All right. Neil deGrasse Tyson, always appreciate it. Thank you.
TYSON: Thank you.
HILL: Stay with us. CNN continues with One World after this quick break, including more on that call between President Trump and President Putin
still ongoing at this hour.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
END
