Return to Transcripts main page
The Brief with Jim Sciutto
CNN International: Trump: Extension of Ceasefire with Iran "Highly Unlikely"; Tehran Vows Retaliation After U.S. Seizes Iranian Vessel; U.S. Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer to Step Down; Tim Cook to Step Down as CEO of Apple; Ukraine Strikes Russian Oil Targets; Escaping North Korea: A Journey 10 Years in the Making. Aired 6-7p ET
Aired April 20, 2026 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[18:00:00]
JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR, "THE BRIEF": Hello and welcome to our viewers joining us from all around the world. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington, and
you're watching "The Brief."
Just ahead this hour, Iran says there are currently no plans for talks with the U.S., and President Trump says a ceasefire extension is unlikely. Tim
Cook steps down as the CEO of Apple, and CNN speaks to a family who managed to escape North Korea, a journey that was 10 years in the making.
We begin here in Washington, where President Trump now says the ceasefire with Iran will expire as planned on Wednesday evening, and that an
extension is highly unlikely. The ceasefire was originally set to expire Tuesday, about 24 hours from now. Sources say Vice President J.D. Vance is
expected to depart for Pakistan tomorrow for a potential meeting with Iranian officials. Tehran, however, says there are currently no plans for
those talks.
Oil prices rose on Monday, with the Strait of Hormuz essentially still closed, and Iran is vowing to retaliate after the U.S. military seized an
Iranian-flagged cargo ship on Sunday.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Motor vessel Touska, motor vessel Touska. Vacate your engine room, vacate your engine room. We're prepared to subject you to
disabling fire.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: President Trump posted just a few hours ago, quote, "The blockade, which we will not take off until there is a deal, is absolutely
destroying Iran.
Kristen Holmes is live at the White House. And Kristen, this is language we've become familiar with, destroying, obliterating, et cetera, and yet
Iran continues to maintain power, at least, over the Strait of Hormuz. What is the White House plan now? And do White House officials you speak to
expect the president to stick to this latest deadline?
KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: It's really unclear right now, Jim. I mean, we've seen basically a series of different
interviews that the president has done with these outlets that are two to five minutes long, in which he contradicts himself, he contradicts the U.S.
officials that we're talking to, the White House officials. And just earlier today, he said that J.D. Vance, the vice president, was about to be
wheels down in Islamabad. And then 30 minutes later, he showed up, Vance showed up here at the White House.
So, it's really unclear exactly what is happening. President Trump was even asked in one of these interviews, are the Iranians going to show up? What's
going to happen if they don't show up? He said they would, but it doesn't really matter either way. Well, of course it matters, because we're trying
to figure out if there's going to be some kind of diplomatic resolution or if at the end of the ceasefire, the fighting and the war will continue.
And right now, we are still being told that behind the scenes there is a flurry of diplomatic activity, whether it be U.S. officials, Iranian
officials, Pakistani officials, who are all trying to work on these negotiations to ensure that this next round of talks happens. Of course,
we're hearing out front from President Trump, as well as from the Iranians, this kind of blustery language, talking about President Trump saying he's
going to start bombing different facilities, civilian infrastructure, the Iranians threatening not to come, threatening retaliation.
But behind the scenes, they are still hoping they can move in a direction where there is a diplomatic solution. And as you noted, President Trump
saying he doesn't plan on extending that ceasefire. We've heard that before. Of course, the ceasefire was supposed to end tomorrow night. Now,
they're saying it's going to end Wednesday night. So, there's a lot of confusion here.
There's still a lot of questions as to what's actually going to happen when this U.S. delegation arrives on the ground in Islamabad. And there was the
added impact of the president himself saying that if they do get close to a deal, he might want to go to Pakistan for these negotiations. So, there's
just a lot of questions right now. And one of the real reasons it's gotten so confusing is because of what we're hearing from the president himself.
SCIUTTO: I mean, listen, it's become a feature, not a bug, right, of this peace process and the war so far. Kristen Holmes at the White House, thank
you.
Well, joining me now is Daniel Kurtzer. He's a former U.S. ambassador to both Egypt and Israel. He's now a professor at Princeton University.
Ambassador, thanks so much for taking the time.
DANIEL KURTZER, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO ISRAEL AND EGYPT AND PROFESSOR OF MIDDLE EAST POLICY STUDIES, PRINCETON UNIVERSITY: Thank you.
SCIUTTO: So, first of all, is this like any peace negotiation you've ever taken part in? This, you know, deadlines, deadlines move, new deadlines,
vast claims of victory that don't match up with the reality. Is this like anything you've seen before?
KURTZER: Well, there's always a lot of maneuvering between the sides, sending signals and walking away from what looked like agreements.
[18:05:00]
But this is quite unusual in that you have the president tweeting or Truth Social every couple of hours with a different attitude, different outlook.
The Iranians are tending to read this and they're seeing through what he says that's accurate and what's not accurate. And so, it makes it much,
much more difficult for the actual negotiators who are probably not getting very good instructions from their leader.
SCIUTTO: The president and his allies claim, at least, and seem to believe that the world and the region respects them now. Is that your impression
from this or do they see a confused president, perhaps an indecisive one?
KURTZER: I think the danger here is that they fear him, but they also don't understand him at all. And therefore, the lack of a strategic
direction, the lack of certainty, the lack of an ability to believe what the president says in the morning, as opposed to what he says in the
evening, makes it very hard for allies, let alone for adversaries who have to deal with him.
SCIUTTO: OK. Let's go to the big picture claims, because President Trump has claimed, he's claimed regime change has already happened. He's claimed
that Iran is obliterated in claims that are easily debunked just by what we're seeing before our eyes here. In terms of the initial goals of this
war, and there were several, as you know, and sometimes they change. Has this war been a victory for the U.S. and for Israel?
KURTZER: No, not at all for either Israel or the United States. So, look, for Israel, the success is that Iran's military has been debilitated. Its
leadership was decapitated and it'll be hard for them to recover. For the United States, though, we now have allowed Iran to assert control over the
Strait of Hormuz.
We don't know where that enriched uranium is located. They've been able to threaten and hurt our allies in the region. And they're in a much stronger
position while they have a much more ideologically radical leadership.
SCIUTTO: The -- you co-authored a piece with Aaron David Miller in The New York Times, and there's a line that stood out to me in there. History has
not been kind to the transformation peddlers in the Middle East. You have far more experience of this, but having covered the Iraq war and claims as
to how that was going to be transformative, the Afghanistan war and 1,000 failed efforts at Mideast peace, I can certainly relate to that.
For the president, who is conscious of those endless wars, right, and the failure of those endless wars, might he find himself in yet another
quagmire of sorts and failure of lofty expectations?
KURTZER: Well, he is in a quagmire now, but I think with this president, he's going to find a way to put this in his rearview mirror sooner rather
than later. Even if it means that his declaration of victory will be hollow. Whatever emerges here is going to look a lot like the Obama nuclear
agreement. We're going to be stuck with Iran's assertion of control over the Strait of Hormuz, and with a very belligerent Iran that will keep
threatening its neighbors.
SCIUTTO: I mean, there are some similarities which you and Miller have cited here, and others, too. This idea of releasing some frozen assets,
right? Even a sunset on the deal, which was one of the chief criticisms that President Trump had when he dumped the Obama deal.
I mean, where would that leave us? Negotiate in 2015. Trump, of course, takes the U.S. out of it. Iran vastly expands its stockpile of highly
enriched uranium. And then there's a war. Well, two wars, I suppose you could say, with the 12-year war last year. Would that decision have been
proven a strategic failure?
KURTZER: I think in the short-term, for sure, it's a strategic failure. But if you take a longer view, Iran was in very deep economic and social
trouble on the eve of the June war. And in a sense, these two wars have delayed what could be an implosion within Iran, the opposition marshalling
its forces and really hurting the regime. Now, that's going to take a long time, though, because the regime will crack down as hard as possible to
make sure that it survives.
But once this war is, quote/unquote, "over" and there is some agreement, then you're going to see an Iranian internal situation that will start to
boil again.
SCIUTTO: But you say delay, delay the downfall. Why? Why delay?
KURTZER: Well, in a sense, the war is marshaled Iranian nationalism and patriotism. And so, you do have some people out on the streets opposed to
the regime. But, you know, they're waving the flag as well. Their homes are being bombed and their livelihood is being hurt. So, there is an element
here of nationalism that we shouldn't ignore.
SCIUTTO: Ambassador Kurtzer, thanks so much for sharing your expertise.
KURTZER: Thanks so much.
SCIUTTO: Well, in news here in Washington, U.S. Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer will be stepping down from the Trump administration. She's
the third cabinet member to depart just since early March. The White House says Chavez-DeRemer is leaving for a job in the private sector. In the
interim, she'll be replaced by Keith Sonderling.
[18:10:00]
Congressman Kylie joins me now. Congressman, thanks so much for taking the time. It's good to have you back on the program.
REP. KEVIN KILEY (I-CA): You bet. Thanks for having me.
SCIUTTO: First, your reaction to the departure. This is the third cabinet departure. Is it a good thing for the Trump administration?
KILEY: Well, I think it's pretty natural that as the term goes on, you know, you see some more turnover. You know, I think three at this point is
maybe not necessarily that far outside the norm. I will say that when it came to the Homeland Security Secretary, Kristi Noem, that came a day after
I had some, you know, pretty harsh questions for her at a hearing of the Judiciary Committee based upon just the total non-responsiveness to my
district when it came to grants that we really needed and everything we could get that were getting held up.
So, certainly, you know, I think that in some cases, yes, getting some new folks in, some new leadership is the right thing.
SCIUTTO: Congressman, of course, I didn't mention in the lead-in, but you recently left the Republican Party, became an independent, though you still
caucus with Republicans. You've explained this as being largely in response to redistricting in California that made it more difficult for you to win
your district running as Republican. But is it just about redistricting or to some degree did the current GOP leave you?
KILEY: Well, it's about, first and foremost, just the hyper-partisanship that has gotten so out of control in Congress where, you know, Congress now
has an 11 percent approval rating. We can't even get the Homeland Security Department funded when we face a heightened threat environment right now.
We had the longest government shutdown in U.S. history last year. And yes, the gerrymandering war is part and parcel of that where now suddenly you
have states redrawing their map in the middle of the decade, elevating partisanship above everything else in our politics.
And so, yes, for me, I think that the right response to that is to say, let's just take partisanship out of the equation. And by the way, that's
how it is in most elected offices, like your mayor, your city counselor, your school board member, your sheriff, your district attorney. They don't
run with a party label attached. They just, you know, do their jobs in terms of just coming together to solve problems. And I think we could use a
little more of that approach here in Congress.
SCIUTTO: True. Unusual, though, as you know, for Congress. And I wonder, an observer might look and look at the polls for House seats in November
with Republicans' chances not looking so good and say, well, this congressman here sees the writing on the wall. I mean, was this a political
decision as well?
KILEY: No, I think it just reflects the way I've always approached my job. I mean, when I have when I first ran, I said that, you know, I'm going to
be an independent voice for my district. And so, I think this is a reflection of that. And I think, honestly, I've gotten a really good
response from people on all sides, people who are Democrats, people who are Republicans, people who are themselves no party preference or independents
or third parties.
I think people like the idea of someone who is going to answer directly to their constituents, who isn't going to answer to party leaders in
Washington, D.C. or in Sacramento. And frankly, if you look at trends throughout the country, the number of people who don't identify with one of
the two parties is at an all-time high. According to the latest Gallup poll, it's almost 50 percent of voters in the United States or of adults in
the United States now identify as independent.
SCIUTTO: Early on in the Trump decision to go to war in Iran, you were supportive of the strikes. You said that it was time, in effect. More
recently, you're calling for increased congressional oversight. Tell us why. In your view, has this war gotten out of hand?
KILEY: Well, I think all of us here want to know what the plan is going forward. And certainly, there have been some very positive things that have
been achieved in terms of completely decimating Iran's conventional weapons abilities. It's Navy, it's Air Force, it's anti-aircraft. And, you know,
hopefully further decimating its nuclear capabilities or its ability to acquire nuclear capabilities.
So, those are all very important things. Those are things that have a bipartisan underpinning that presidents of both parties, members of
Congress in both parties have said consistently Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. But at the same time, yes, Congress does need to be more centrally
involved in this going forward. There's a lot of good reasons for that, one of which is our constitutional role.
But another is which is that in order to have an agreement here that is going to be enforceable and durable moving forward, that it needs to have
buy in from Congress. It needs to have buy in from the International Community as well. And, you know, the way that we can achieve that is if we
have more voices heard as part of the process here. I think that'll put it on a much more solid footing going forward.
[18:15:00]
SCIUTTO: I get that Iran's military capabilities have been decimated, but they haven't been eliminated. I spent three weeks in Iran and they're still
able to get to fire missiles multiple times a day at Israel. And many of them get through as well as at Gulf allies. It still has hundreds of
kilograms of highly enriched uranium. And it has, you know, a lot of nuclear weapons.
Iran has an apparent ability to open and close the Strait of Hormuz, and there has been no regime change. I mean, top level, but, you know, still
quite a, as you know, hardline regime. None of the goals that President Trump set have been achieved clearly, right? At least on his terms. Has the
war been won? Because he says the U.S. has already won the war.
KILEY: Well, I don't know about won or lost at this stage. I think what matters is what the ultimate outcome is here. And, of course, that is being
negotiated right now. Things are a little bit up in the air at this moment with the ceasefire about to expire, with the talks in Pakistan perhaps
moving forward.
But I do think, again, that whatever the outcome of these negotiations are, we'll be on a lot better footing moving forward with the involvement of
Congress. And we'll have a lot better opportunity to assure that the goals that were there at the outset are achieved at least to a considerable
degree.
I mean, I think that if we end -- you know, if we can have significantly eroded Iran's ability to threaten the region and the world, both by
conventional or nuclear means, that's actually a very important thing for the region and for America's national security. It's become, you know, this
idea that Iran cannot get a nuclear weapon. That's not just a slogan. We need to actually think about what it would mean if one of the most evil and
dangerous regimes in history gets its hand on the most dangerous weapon in history. It cannot be allowed to happen.
So, at the same time, we need to bring this conflict to an expedition end. It's not something where we want to see this become something protracted.
SCIUTTO: And I should say I was three weeks in Israel, not three weeks in Iran. Before we go, as you know, President Trump and Republicans taking
both houses in 2024 were driven in large part by voters' concerns with affordability. But by a heck of a lot of measures, as you know, top-line
inflation, but even the price of gas, Americans don't feel. That their country, that their lives are more affordable. Has the Republican Party,
has the president failed to deliver on that promise?
KILEY: I think there has been some progress, but we have a lot more work we need to do. And I say this coming from California, where we have the
highest cost of living in the entire country. My constituents really feel that. In fact, the county that has the highest gas prices in America right
now, Mono County, is in my district. California, we're looking at upwards of $6 per gallon, almost $2 per gallon more than the rest of the country.
We also have the highest electricity rates. We have pretty much the highest housing prices, water bills. So, that's a huge issue in California.
But you're right, it's an issue throughout the rest of the country as well. And I think one of the things that is a benefit of being an independent is
that I can challenge both parties and both in California and Washington, D.C. in order to find solutions to lower the cost of living. So, I voted
against the extension of tariffs here in Washington, D.C. I've also encouraged leaders in Sacramento to reverse the policies that continue to
raise the price of gas there.
I think that we need to have that approach more, where we can not only hold leaders of both parties at all levels accountable, but also find ways to
come together on a bipartisan basis to find common-sense solutions, because you're absolutely right, life is too unaffordable for too many people right
now, and we need to do everything we can to change that.
SCIUTTO: Congressman Kevin Kiley, pleasure to have you back on the show.
KILEY: Thanks so much.
SCIUTTO: Still ahead, a surprise announcement from Apple. The company says that CEO Tim Cook is stepping down. We'll see why Apple is shaking up its
top management. Coming up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:20:00]
SCIUTTO: Welcome back. In today's Business Breakout, U.S. stocks fell from record highs amid the uncertainty over the U.S.-Iran ceasefire. The NASDAQ
broke a 13- session winning streak. Oil prices jumped again with Brent crude settling above $95 a gallon. All this as the average price of a
gallon of gas here in the U.S. remains above $4 a gallon.
Energy Secretary Chris Wright said on CNN over the weekend that it will take a while for gas to fall back below $3 again.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRIS WRIGHT, U.S. ENERGY SECRETARY: I don't know. That could happen later this year. That might not happen until next year. But prices have likely
peaked and they'll start going down. Certainly, with a resolution of this conflict, you'll see prices go down.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: President Trump didn't like that answer. He said in an interview with The Hill that Wright is, quote, "totally wrong" and the prices will
fall as soon as the war is resolved. Reuters reports the CEO's major low- cost airlines will meet with U.S. officials Tuesday to make their case for temporary tax relief due to the sharp rise in jet fuel prices.
Well, Apple announced just after the closing bell today that CEO Tim Cook will be stepping down in September. Cook, who took over for founder Steve
Jobs back in 2011, will now become Apple's executive chairman. Under Cook's tenure, Apple reached a market cap of more than $4 trillion. That's a
thousand billions. The new CEO will be John Ternus, Apple's senior vice president of hardware engineering. He was widely expected to succeed, Cook.
He played a major role in developing products such as the iPad and AirPods. Apple shares are down less than 1 percent in after-hours trading. Less than
half a percent, in fact.
Joining me now, Paul La Monica, senior markets analyst for Barron's. Good to have you back, Paul. So, why now? What led to the decision now?
PAUL R. LA MONICA, SENIOR MARKETS ANALYSIS WRITER, BARRON'S: Yes, this is very interesting timing, Jim. I think that when you look at the fact that
Tim Cook has had a 15-year run as Apple's CEO, and as you mentioned, when a company that was worth about $350 billion at the time, he took over now to
$4 trillion, he has accomplished a lot and is widely credited with the pivot, in some respects, to really push Apple into high-margin, lucrative,
monthly subscriptions and services, things like Apple Music and Apple TV. And that is one of the big reasons why Apple's revenue and profits have
grown so dramatically.
But I think we're now in an age where everyone is talking about A.I. and whether or not Apple's iPhones are going to be successful enough in an A.I.
world. So, these are times where maybe you need to have another leader in place that is more of a hardware guru.
SCIUTTO: But is Ternus an A.I. guru? Because I know that the markets seem to be so focused on AI. We see that every day. Is -- do they have
confidence that he is the man for that generation of Apple's growth?
LA MONICA: Clearly, the board must have that confidence. And Tim Cook, who will still be there as Executive Chairman, otherwise they wouldn't be
handing him the reins. So, I think that the hope is that you will see newer devices that incorporate A.I. in a way that, you know, there have been
criticisms that Apple's been a little bit slow to the A.I. adoption game in a way that maybe some of its rivals like Samsung have not. So, I think it's
really going to behoove Ternus to show Wall Street that Apple takes A.I. seriously.
[18:25:00]
SCIUTTO: Yes, I mean, that's what I was getting at there. Before we go, if you could summarize Cook's legacy, what will he be remembered for as
Apple's CEO?
LA MONICA: Yes. I think that Cook really will be remembered for taking the baton from a business legend. I mean, some would argue that Steve Jobs was
the sort of Henry Ford of his generation. He had very big shoes to fill. And I think Tim Cook can take a step back and say that he did an extremely
admirable job running Apple after the death of Steve Jobs.
SCIUTTO: Yes. I remember those questions then. Who could fill those shoes, right? The legend's shoes. Well, judging by the market cap, I guess he did
a pretty good job. Paul La Monica, thanks so much for joining.
LA MONICA: Thank you.
SCIUTTO: Checking some of today's other business headlines, the Senate hearing is set to begin Tuesday for Kevin Warsh. That's President Trump's
pick to replace Fed Chair Jerome Powell. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent says he is confident Warsh will be confirmed by mid-May when Powell's term
as chairman is up. But Senate Republican Thom Tillis says he will block the nomination until the Justice Department drops its criminal probe of Powell.
The Wall Street Journal is learning from U.S. officials that the UAE is talking to the Trump administration about possible financial assistance due
to the Iran war. They tell the Journal the head of the UAE's central bank discussed a financial backstop in Washington last week. The Journal reports
Emirati officials have not yet formally requested the aid.
Elon Musk was a no-show at a scheduled meeting with French prosecutors Monday. Officials are investigating X and the A.I. chatbot Grok for
numerous offenses, including Grok's ability to create deepfake pornography. Musk denies the accusations and says the investigation is politically
motivated.
Coming up after the break, Ukraine once again strikes Russian oil facilities hours after Washington waives sanctions on Russian oil again.
Coincidence? Ukrainian ambassador to the U.S., she'll give me her view next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:30:00]
SCIUTTO: Welcome back to "The Brief." I'm Jim Sciutto and here are the international headlines we're watching today.
President Trump says the ceasefire with Iran will now expire on Wednesday evening time in the eastern time zone and that an extension a further
extension is highly unlikely. Remember it's supposed to end on Tuesday. The ceasefire moved once again. Sources say Vice President J.D. Vance is
expected to head to Pakistan Tuesday for potential talks. However, Tehran has said no negotiations are scheduled.
The Los Angeles County District Attorney has charged singer D4vd with first degree murder. This comes after police arrested him last week in connection
with the death of a 14-year-old girl. Her body was found in September inside a vehicle registered to D4vd. The singer has pleaded not guilty.
Japan's meteorological agency has scaled back a tsunami warning to an advisory in the wake of a powerful earthquake. That quake struck off the
northeastern coast of Japan. It was so intense it shook buildings in Tokyo. You see there. Some areas such as the northern island of Hokkaido
experienced high waves, but there were no reports of injuries or damage.
Ukrainian ambassador to the U.S. says that attacks on Russian oil targets are a way of enforcing sanctions. This after Washington granted Moscow yet
another waiver for its sanctioned oil on Friday. Ukraine struck more targets over the weekend. The waiver was issued to ease pressure on oil
prices, the result of the ongoing war with Iran.
The Ukrainian government has protested against relaxing those sanctions. A short time ago, I spoke to the Ukrainian ambassador to the U.S., Olga
Stefanishyna, and asked her if she had received any response from Washington.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
OLGA STEFANISHYNA, UKRAINIAN AMBASSADOR TO U.S.: Well, not yet. And we still need to go back and have a little bit of conversation because, as you
know, it was a financial week in the town last week, and there were like a finance minister and governor of national bank and a prime minister of
Ukraine. And we had a lot of meetings here and nothing in these meetings, you know, ring the bell that the sanctions will be reinstated. So, these
waivers will be reinstated.
So, this is obviously came as a surprise to everyone. And basically, the way and the trigger of this topic was that the Russian so-called envoy, he
called this waiver a cooperation, the outcome of successful cooperation, which is, you know, definitely not something you should use as a word for
granting a waiver from sanctions.
So, I think, you know, there is more than anything. Having the quotation of cooperation, we can see the nature of this reinstation.
SCIUTTO: As you know, it took this administration a long time to impose these additional sanctions here. Do you expect that the sanctions will ever
go back?
STEFANISHYNA: Well, they're like there is a huge body of sanctions which has been enforced. And we should also confirm the fact that President Trump
has imposed the really radical sanctions against Russian major assets of, you know, sources of war like Lukoil and Rosneft. This causes a huge
effect. But also, I think there are like lessons that could be learned both from Russian engagement and negotiations on Iran and also on Ukraine.
Basically, that at some point, Russia might not see a reason for necessity to end the war in Iran. Maybe continuing the aggression and continuing the
war could be a very beneficial effort for them because the sanctions have been waived. You know, attention from Ukraine has been distracted. And
basically, you know, they're just feeling much better at this point.
SCIUTTO: Ukraine, of course, has continued to attack with success Russian oil facilities here. Is that in effect oil sanctions by another means? I
mean, is that deliberate to increase those attacks while these relaxations have taken place?
STEFANISHYNA: Well, I would say that, you know, this is a way of enforcing sanctions. And that means that, you know, the sanctions have been imposed
and this shadow fleet has obtained its name because it's the huge mean and instrument of evasion of sanctions, avoiding bypassing the legal
restrictions in so many countries across the world.
[18:35:00]
So, this fleet is, you know, operating illegally. But also, the other thing we know that this shadow fleet brings the money, which being a source of a
fuel of war. And the war right now in Ukraine is the attacks against civilians. It's killing civilians. It's not just a front line. It's mostly
the massive attacks against civilian people. So, any source of Russian fuel the Russian government gains resources from is a direct fuel of war.
SCIUTTO: You have spoken about building a new way of relations with Washington. The president, the Ukrainian president, has at times been
critical of this administration's relationship. He said recently on Italian radio, in my view, Russia played the Americans again, played the president
of the United States again. Do you -- does Ukraine trust the U.S. today to help it to come to its aid?
STEFANISHYNA: Well, I don't think we should call it like a president being critical. He -- you know, there has been a lot of statements and a lot of
communication about Ukraine, this country. And of course, he has to react and he reacts the way -- he reacts as a chief of command of the, you know,
country under attack.
You know, it's very important that to this time, we also bring the reality from the ground, from the field, because, because one thing is the
rhetoric. The other thing is, you know, the decisions under the bombs. This is a very different thing.
So, I don't think we should really take it as a criticism, but I think, yes, we can say that we have built a relations across administration.
Ukraine has a very strong bipartisan support in Congress and in Senate. And yes, this is a totally different way of building relations, but I think
whenever we are successful, be it, you know, engagement with the U.S. on the energy dominance issue, enforcement of the mineral deal, installing the
SPERL mechanism for procurement of weapons, all of that works. Sanctions are enforced. But also, the narrative probably something we should all work
around.
SCIUTTO: But it's more than narrative, right? Because this administration, while you have bipartisan support in Congress, it has not renewed, and this
president, it seems, has not supported additional military assistance to Ukraine, although it does supply intelligence, as you know. He often speaks
glowingly of Vladimir Putin.
You know, he sends his peace envoys to Russia before he sends them to Ukraine, although Jared Kushner and Witkoff are finally visiting. It's a
very different approach, and I just wonder if your reaction to that is one that we are more on our own now. We have to do it ourselves.
STEFANISHYNA: Well, although I'm a newly arrived ambassador, I'm coming from a country of war, where I served in the government for five years,
four of which in a war country, being a member of a war cabinet. It's really, really hard to make me feel surprised, right? And that's why
exactly I'm operating in this town. We operate under circumstances we have.
And also, we know that basically, whenever we're talking about the ability of Ukraine to buy weapons, we are advocating for the availability of these
resources to Ukraine. We absolutely don't buy the narrative that there are more priority kill zones than the other across the world. Again, the U.S.
is the most powerful army and the military in the whole world.
And the major priorities we're asking is the access to ammunition, which secures the cities, grants the air defense. And we should start talking
about producing more, meeting the needs across the globe. And we are able to pay for that. We're not asking even for support and for assistance. It's
now a choice. The American defense and military market fully capable of scaling up their capabilities to the extent it meets the defense needs
across different priority areas.
SCIUTTO: Ukraine was in the somewhat unusual position during the Iran war of being asked for help, right? You had Gulf nations coming to you and even
the U.S. military asking for help, expertise. How does that feel?
STEFANISHYNA: Well, that feels -- first, we have always been underestimating ourselves. And when we're on Iran trying to survive, we
never have time to stop and look back and see where we have managed to go.
[18:40:00]
And of course, we discovered that we are the only spot on the whole planet which is capable of addressing this challenge because we have it all, the
software, the technology and the people.
SCIUTTO: And the necessity.
STEFANISHYNA: Yes. And we understood. There were no hesitation. President Zelenskyy made a decision immediately because he wanted to show how it is
important to provide not a condolences or a political statement but just a real action saving your people. This is what we were screaming and shouting
in February 2022 and it's absolutely unbelievable that we can provide it on our own right now.
SCIUTTO: Yes. Well, it's been remarkable to watch. Ambassador, we appreciate you taking the time.
STEFANISHYNA: Thank you so much.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCIUTTO: Coming up on "The Brief," enjoying a new life in South Korea just after one family took a perilous journey to escape North Korea. We're going
to share their story of defection which was 10 years in the making.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCIUTTO: Few people de facto from North Korea. It's an enormous challenge from the repressive state. One family, however, did, after preparing for 10
years. Two brothers planned every detail with the help of their father. While he didn't live long enough to start a new life with his family, his
ashes, however, made that trip to South Korea as well. And all nine members of the family made the perilous journey. CNN's Mike Valerio has their
story.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KIM II-HYEOK, NORTH KOREAN DEFECTOR (through translator): I was so tense that my heart was pounding in my ears as it was hitting my head. It was
silent and still, with no one speaking at all. It was pouring rain that night. The waves could have easily crashed our boat against the rocks
causing it to sink right away.
MIKE VELARIO, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): This small fishing boat carried Kim Il-Hyeok, his pregnant wife and seven other family members,
hoping to survive one of the most dangerous escapes from North Korea. A journey they say they planned for more than a decade.
As Kim settles into his new life in Seoul, he told us how his escape began with his father and his brother.
II-HYEOK (through translator): My father said, "There is no hope in this society. There is no way to change it. There is a vast, free world out
there. Let's go to South Korea". That's how it all started.
[18:45:00]
And my father sent my younger brother to the sea. While working at the sea, my brother built close relationships with local security officers, to
prevent any suspicions. He bribed them and earned the trust of party loyalists.
VELARIO (voice-over): For more than 10 years, Kim and his brother practice their plan sailing near the closely watched sea border between North and
South Korea. It's a boundary called the Northern Limit Line, or NLL.
II-HYEOK (through translator): When we get near the NLL, a patrol boat started following us like it was chasing us. We always calculated the time
it would take for them to catch up. We would say, "We're not trying to defect. We're just here to make money. Then we would be released. We went
through this several times".
VELARIO (voice-over): Kim says he finally decided his family needed to leave when the regime became even more repressive and COVID spread across
the country.
II-HYEOK (through translator): Things became extremely difficult during COVID. People focused on survival. Many people starved to death. Every day
we would wake up to stories of deaths and robberies.
VELARIO (voice-over): Kim later picked the precise timing for their defection, May 6th, 2023 10:00 p.m.
II-HYEOK (through translator): We specifically chose a day with tidal warnings. As the warning was issued, the waves grew higher, and a typhoon
came in, so the North Korean patrol boats retreated. My sister-in-law, my brother's mother-in- law, my mother and my wife passed through a minefield
and hid by the rocks on the shore. My brother's two children were also with us. When we put them in sacks we told them stay silent and not to move at
all.
To avoid detection, we moved at a slow speed. Even the engine sound was low, like "thump, thump, thump". The children didn't fall asleep and stayed
completely quiet. When I opened the sacks, their eyes were wide open, and they hadn't made a sound. With the GPS on our boat, we confirmed we'd
crossed the NLL. Then we saw Yeonpyeong Island. It was lit up like day light, while we were in total darkness. When we were rescued, the South
Korean Navy came, and talked to us with a loud speaker, asking if the engine had broken down.
They must have wanted to check our intentions. "No, our engine isn't broken. We're North Korean fishermen, and we've come to defect to South
Korea". My wife was emotional because we had left her family behind. Her eyes were swollen from crying so much. It felt like a huge weight was
lifted off my shoulders. I was filled with relief, thinking, "it's finally over," and my tension just melted away.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCIUTTO: Truly remarkable story. Finding their way to freedom. Straight ahead, "The Devil Wears Prada 2," a new movie sequel premieres today. We're
going to take a look back at the original hit film 20 years on.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:50:00]
SCIUTTO: Meryl Streep, high fashion, the city of light. That's the recipe that made "The Devil Wears Prada" a huge success 20 years ago. Now, the
main cast is back on the red carpet as the long-awaited sequel is returning to the big screen. The film's New York premiere kicked off in just the last
hour ahead of its wide release next month. Anne Hathaway, Stanley Tucci, Emily Blunt, and yes, Meryl Streep have all returned for "The Devil Wears
Prada 2."
Joining me now, entertainment journalist Michael Musto. Michael, good to have you.
MICHAEL MUSTO, ENTERTAINMENT JOURNALIST: Thank you for having me.
SCIUTTO: So, one thing on the plot here, because as I understand it, the whole story of the first movie, right, was Anne Hathaway's character, you
know, basically overcoming working for the evil boss Meryl Streep. But now in the sequel, she's back working for her. Did they not learn the lesson,
or has Meryl Streep changed?
MUSTO: Well, I doubt she's changed. Let's be clear, Meryl Streep's a nice person, but she plays Miranda Priestly, the editor of Runway, loosely based
on Anna Wintour, the editor of Vogue. And yet she was a supercilious, contemptibly condescending boss. Anne Hathaway's character, Andy, gets
away, as you say, and now she's come crawling back. Why? So, they can make a sequel. That's the only possible reason.
It really makes you feel like nothing was learned from the first time. And I haven't seen the film yet. I'm about to. But she's back for more, only so
that they can, you know, raise those box office coffers again. That actually works for me.
SCIUTTO: Yes.
MUSTO: Because I'd like a sequel.
SCIUTTO: Listen, there have been a thousand Hollywood sequels, right, that kind of twist the plot from the first one to get the stars back in the
room. And they did here. I mean, they got Stanley Tucci. They got Anne Hathaway. They got Meryl Streep. They got them all back on screen. I mean,
was that ever in doubt? Was it tough to bring the gang back together?
MUSTO: It was in doubt because they really didn't want to make a sequel. Anne Hathaway had to be really convinced. Meryl Streep didn't even
necessarily want to do the first "Devil Wears Prada." They had to add to her paycheck. And then she said, fine. So, this time around, I think they
dangled some dinero. And people said, you know what, a sequel is very important.
And they also have Emily Blunt, who was wonderful in the first one. She plays Emily. She's kind of the heart and soul but a bit of a rancid heart
and soul of the office. And I really feel that she's important to the story. They've now made her the bad girl. And she's at odds with Miranda.
So, it's going to be interesting to see which side Andy, the Anne Hathaway character, sides with. The whole thing is really an escapist thing. And I
think that's why this is going to be a very big, very big film.
We want -- the world is topsy-turvy right now. We want a return to people standing around the proverbial water cooler and talking about hemlines. And
talking about how print journalism is dying, but there's still hope for magazines. It's machinations on a smaller scale than we're hearing.
SCIUTTO: It can be just about the -- listen, it's hard to see why -- I love the movie "The Brothers McMullen." And I was watching the sequel, "The
Family McMullen." The twists and turns and gymnastics they went through to kind of like, you know, make the plot line for the sequel. But if you're
seeing some of the same characters, there's some of the same energy. I guess the question, will they be able to muster some of those iconic lines
again?
MUSTO: Yes, I'm sure they will. And even one of the lines in the trailer is ripped off of "Beverly Hills 90210." So, they're not above stealing
lines. But in any case, I just think this is going to be hot. Even though we know it's not going to be up to the level of the original. "Godfather 2"
is probably the only sequel that was possibly better than the first one. But we still want to be there for it because the elements will be there.
[18:55:00]
And by the way, the real Anna Wintour, who originally was a little bit in on the joke, which made it kind of cute. She's now not just in on the joke.
She is promoting the hell out of this movie. The cover of Vogue this month is Anna Wintour and Meryl Streep promoting the movie. So, Anna is basically
saying, go out and see them make fun of me. I liked it better when she was angry. That was the whole point.
SCIUTTO: Yes, yes. Well, listen --
MUSTO: The whole --
SCIUTTO: -- I'll just add to the "Godfather 2," "Empire Strikes Back," you know, sequels that made it work. We'll see if this one rises to that level.
MUSTO: True, true.
SCIUTTO: Michael Musto, thanks so much.
MUSTO: Thank you.
SCIUTTO: In today's Good Brief, proving how fast robot technology has come along in just the last year, dozens of Chinese made humanoids sprinted past
runners in a half marathon in Beijing on Sunday. They were separated from the 12,000 humans by a barrier, we should note. But the winning robot,
however, finishing the race in 50 minutes and 26 seconds, beating the half marathon record held by a Ugandan athlete by several minutes. The race was
not without its mishaps. But all in all, the robots were more reliable and autonomous than even just 12 months ago. And it's remarkable how quickly
that technology is moving forward. Although, well, they still trip up, too.
Thanks so much for joining. I'm Jim Sciutto on Washington. You've been watching "The Brief." Please do stay with CNN.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:00:00]
END
