Return to Transcripts main page
Amanpour
Interview with Former U.S. Ambassador to Russia and "Midnight in Moscow" Author John Sullivan; Interview with MSF Medical Team Leader Dr. Javid Abdelmoneim; Interview with The New York Times Opinion Columnist Masha Gessen. Aired 1-2p ET
Aired August 12, 2024 - 13:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[13:00:00]
CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Hello, everyone, and welcome to AMANPOUR. Here's what's coming up.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT (through translator): Ukraine is proving that it can indeed restore justice and ensure the necessary
pressure on the aggressor.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: Ukrainian forces press deeper into Russia as Moscow strikes around Kyiv. I asked the former U.S. ambassador to Russia, John Sullivan,
how Putin will respond to Zelenskyy's gamble.
Then, an Israeli strike on a school refuge in Gaza City sparking international outrage. Dr. Javid Abdelmoneim joins me after spending two
months in Gaza with the NGO MSF.
And --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MASHA GESSEN, OPINION COLUMNIST, THE NEW YORK TIMES: What they are trying to do is send a message to me and other journalists in exile that we are
still targets.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: -- Michel Martin sits down with New York Times columnist Masha Gessen to discuss their recent conviction in absentia by a Moscow court and
the Russia prisoner swap.
Welcome to the program, everyone. I'm Christiane Amanpour in London. It's been a week since Ukraine launched its surprise incursion into Russia.
President Zelenskyy's military chief says their troops now control about a thousand square kilometers of Russian territory, and Russian authorities
say they have evacuated around 120,000 civilians.
Today, President Vladimir Putin again framed this as a battle of survival against the west, saying that Kyiv's move is a negotiating tactic.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VLADIMIR PUTIN, RUSSIAN PRESIDENT (through translator): It appears that the enemy with the help of the western masters is fulfilling their will,
and the west is fighting us with the hands of the Ukrainians. So, it looks like the enemy seeks to improve its negotiating positions in the future.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: While President Zelenskyy officially confirmed this new strategy during an address to the nation on Saturday night.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT (through translator): I received several reports from Commander in Chief Syrskyi regarding the front lines
and our actions to push the war onto the aggressor's territory. I'm grateful to every unit of defense forces ensuring that. Ukraine is proving
that it can indeed restore justice and ensure the necessary pressure on the aggressor.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: Over the weekend, Moscow struck back with a barrage of missile and drone attacks in the Kyiv region, that killed a father and his four-
year-old son. While another strike in the east, the Donetsk region, killed at least 14 people.
John Sullivan was appointed U.S. ambassador to Russia by President Trump, and he was still there when Putin launched his full-scale invasion of
Ukraine in February, 2022. He previously served as deputy secretary of state, and he recounts all of this in his new book, "Midnight in Moscow."
He's joining us now from Washington. Ambassador Sullivan, welcome back to our program.
JOHN SULLIVAN, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO RUSSIA AND AUTHOR, "MIDNIGHT IN MOSCOW": Very good to be with you, Christiane.
AMANPOUR: So, let me ask you, how do you read Zelenskyy's move? Is it a gamble? Is it a negotiating tactic, as Putin says?
SULLIVAN: Maybe a bit of both. It's certainly a significant undertaking by the Ukrainian military with a lot of equipment and personnel being put to
use. But seeing the Russian reaction to this and following it over the last week, at first there was mild surprise at this annoyance on the border. But
after a week and almost a thousand square kilometers of Russian territory seized, the Russian government and the Russian people are realizing that
this is a serious problem that the government, the military has to deal with and may be revealing -- further revealing flaws and other inadequacies
in their own military and their own defense of the Russian Federation.
AMANPOUR: It's really interesting because we read, for instance, that some people in that region, some residents, you know, they've put out a sort of
an SOS. They've asked him to help via video. They said the defense ministry was lying when they said it was under control. One resident in that region
says these lies enable the local residents to die.
So, you think Putin actually could finally face some pressure or is this just another gnat bite from the people?
[13:05:00]
SULLIVAN: Well, it's certainly pressure on Putin. And you know what it reminds me of? It reminds me of the Prigozhin mutiny last year. And, you
know, it reveals inadequacies in the Russian system, in the Russian defense ministry. Put significant pressure on Putin. He's had -- they've had at
least 100,000 Russian citizens have had to be evacuated.
Large numbers of Russian troops, mainly conscripts, killed, slaughtered with missile strikes by the Ukrainians. And Russian citizens, I see this in
Russian social media, including pro war social media, are asking difficult questions. How could this have happened? And the explanation is that the
government is lying to us about what's happening with the special military operation.
AMANPOUR: So, Ambassador Sullivan, you know, these bloggers had been criticizing the war from the very beginning and now they're doing it again.
Putin doesn't take any notice. You mentioned the Prigozhin mutiny, it was put down quickly. Putin then had him assassinated or whatever you might
think. And that's that. Do you think this one will be as easy to control for Russia, or does this cross some kind of line that hasn't yet been
crossed?
SULLIVAN: Well, it's possible. The Russians would like to suggest that, and that the United States was involved in this, what they call, serious
provocation or terrorist incident that it's some sort of red line that the Ukrainians have crossed.
But what everyone forgets, including the Russians, it was the Russians that started this war, that cried havoc and let slip the dogs of war. And now,
they're paying the price, they're paying the consequence. And -- but I would also add, just as we saw last year with the Prigozhin mutiny, Putin
will respond as decisively as he can to push the Ukrainians out.
But what that also means is that will be a significant distraction to whatever offensive maneuvers they were planning in Ukraine. He will have to
withdraw forces that were in Ukraine or going to Ukraine to support an offensive to try to defend the Russian homeland and push Ukrainians out of
that homeland.
AMANPOUR: I just wanted to play a little bit more of what Putin said to his meeting and to the nation about, you know, you heard him say this is
probably a negotiating tactic by the enemy. And this is how he expanded on that. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PUTIN (through translator): What kind of negotiations can we even talk about with people who indiscriminately target civilians, civilian
infrastructure, or try to threaten nuclear power facilities? What can we even talk about with them?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: Ambassador, I didn't know who he was referring to, Ukraine or himself. I mean, that surely takes the chutzpah of the year award for
reflecting exactly what he's been doing for the last nearly 10 years, frankly.
SULLIVAN: You beat me to it. I mean, this from a man who launched a war that has had a catastrophic effect on the second largest by geographic area
country in Europe, almost 15 million Ukrainians either killed, wounded, driven from their homes as internally displaced persons or refugees from
their countries, hospitals, blasted schools, you name it.
And for the Russians now to claim that this is terrorism by the Ukrainians in response to a war that the Russians and Putin himself started, that is
chutzpah.
AMANPOUR: Ambassador, clearly the Ukrainians need to do something, right? We have been reading all these reports from the front lines over the last
several months. A thanks in great deal to the United States and frankly President Trump's influence not to send the weapons that they needed to
defend themselves.
So, what do you think? The U.S. has already said this incursion does not violate their red lines on military aid to Ukraine. Where do you see this
going next? I mean, is this going to be a major new strategic tactic? How can the Ukrainians keep up an invasion into Russian territory for very
long?
SULLIVAN: Well, I think what this reflects, Christiane, and I'm not a military expert, but as I understand from my former colleagues and friends
who are, the Russians and the Ukrainians both are in face -- are facing entrenched positions on both sides in Ukraine. And it's very difficult to
make even small tactical advances.
What the Ukrainians have done is found a weak spot. And made progress and blasted through a weak spot in the Russian defenses and claimed, as
President Zelenskyy said, a thousand square kilometers of territory. It's what the Russians have been trying to do in Ukraine, you know, since the
war started is to capture that territory.
[13:10:00]
And as for bargaining leverage, which is what Putin calls it, again, failing to acknowledge that this all stems from a war that he started. This
is a response, a defensive response by the Ukrainians that captures territory that the Russian government has been using to blast civilian
targets in Ukraine.
AMANPOUR: Ambassador, I mentioned when I introduced you that you've written a new book, "Midnight in Moscow," and it talks -- you talk about
working not under -- not just about under President Trump, but also presumably your interactions with Putin as well. You recount kind of an
amusing story that when, you know, President Trump talked to you and you said you wanted to go to Moscow, he looked at you as if you were nutty.
What was that moment like? Why did you want to go there?
SULLIVAN: Well, at that point, as I explained in the book, Christiane, I'd been deputy secretary of state for almost three years and very stressful
job. And I was looking to make a change. And at that point, Jon Huntsman, our ambassador in Moscow, had come back to Washington, this is the summer
of 2019, to tell the president, Secretary Pompeo, and me that he was leaving his post in Moscow to run for governor again in Utah. And the
thought occurred to me that this was a position for a variety of reasons that I might -- I would like to assume.
And I've been a lifelong Russell file. And so, it was a way for me in one way to get off the hot seat as deputy secretary of state. And I know that
saying moving to Moscow is not what people would think of as getting off the hot seat, but I explain in the book why I wanted to do it.
But as you know, President Trump -- this was in August of 2019, when I saw him, we were coming out of a meeting in the cabinet room at the White House
and he'd been asked by a reporter whether he was going to nominate me to be ambassador to Russia and he said, yes. And then, he later, after that media
scrum, came up to me and said, you really want to do this?
And he thought at the time, he thought, that then-Secretary Pompeo was forcing me out as deputy secretary, which was definitely not the case,
because he couldn't understand why anyone in their right mind would want to leave a beautiful office on Mahogany Row at the State Department to go to
cold and hostile Moscow. But that was my choice. I really wanted to go.
AMANPOUR: You know, a lot of people would say there's a lot of things that the former president doesn't really understand. He's talked about, you
know, ending the Ukraine war in 24 hours. He talked about getting Evan Gershkovich back in -- I don't know, in a record time, no deal. You know
how he is.
What do you think the policy would be if he were to come back into power? What would the Russia and Ukraine policy be, do you think, under a future,
again, President Trump?
SULLIVAN: Well, I think we saw a signal of that, Christiane, in an op-ed, I believe it was in The Wall Street Journal, that Former Secretary Pompeo,
my former boss, wrote about a Russia policy, potentially, in a new Trump administration, which involved a ceasefire, without acknowledging the
Russian seizure of the territory that they've already gained in Ukraine.
But supplying -- continuing to supply arms and support to the Ukrainians under sort of a lend lease arrangement and, you know, approaching the
conflict from that perspective. One thing I'd keep in mind, I know there's lots of speculation about what President Trump would do, he doesn't like to
lose. And if he's perceived as the person who lost Ukraine, that would not be good for him either.
He was asked in the in the debate in June with Biden, I think essentially, do you want to see Putin win in Ukraine or gain -- or defeat Ukraine? And
he answered without hesitation, no. The question is how he's going to go about doing it using our allies, I hope. And again, I think this op-ed by
Former Secretary Pompeo may be a signal, a positive signal of how the new administration, if Trump's elected, might approach it.
AMANPOUR: Well, as you can see, the polls as well and the energy in the Democratic side since Kamala Harris has taken the nomination and you
probably are reading how NATO and other allies in the Transatlantic alliance are reacting. They seem to be a little bit more reassured that at
least she's solid on NATO. She's a solid, you know, Atlanticist, Transatlanticist.
But they're also concerned that the U.S. will move its gaze from NATO -- or rather from Russia and Ukraine and Europe, and keep the gaze on the Indo-
Pacific. What do you think, you know, in a Harris administration will, you know, the Russia-Ukraine thing still be number one?
[13:15:00]
SULLIVAN: So, I've seen this now in several administrations over time that have come into office and seeking to pivot to Asia. And describing our
relationship with the PRC is the key determinative relationship that we have in international affairs, our chief strategic competitor. And every
time the administration, whether it's the Obama administration or the Trump administration, it's been the Russians and President Putin who have upset
that calculation.
So, Putin is going to get a vote in this, and this war, his war in Ukraine is going to continue. So, my expectation is this will have to be, no matter
what the policy instincts are of a new administration, whether it's Trump or Harris, the Ukraine war is going to have to be a priority for the new
administration, no matter who is president, because Putin won't allow it to slip off the agenda.
AMANPOUR: Do you support Trump and you're supporting him for president?
SULLIVAN: I haven't taken a position. I'm a lifelong Republican. Republicans and Democrats both buy books. So, I'm promoting my book, as
Michael Jordan once said, about selling sneakers. I'm a lifelong Republican and expect that my lifelong tendency will continue.
AMANPOUR: OK. So, yes, you support him and you'll vote for him. I think that's what you're saying. I want to ask you about prisoner exchanges
because you met with one of the American prisoners there, Paul Whelan, when he was in detention. President Trump -- former president has come out and
congratulated Putin on making another, quote/unquote, great deal. I want to just play this soundbite from Trump.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I'd like to congratulate Vladimir Putin for having made yet another great deal. Did you see the deal we made? Now, look, we want to get people
in. You know, we got 59 hostages. I never paid anything. They released some of the greatest killers anywhere in the world. Some of the most evil
killers they got and we got our people back. But boy, we make some horrible, horrible deals. And it's nice to say we got them back, but does
that set a bad precedent?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: Well, a couple of things there. The U.S. didn't pay anything in this round and of course, as we know, Trump did get into all sorts of
negotiations and prisoner swaps with the people he considers the scum of the earth, whether they're Iran, Taliban, the Houthis, and all the rest of
it.
But that aside, does it set a bad precedent? What do you think about what happened? Clearly America wants to get its people back.
SULLIVAN: Oh, absolutely. And there was a price that was paid by the United States in releasing not just the Russians who were convicted and in
prison in the United States, but of course, the person that Putin most wanted back, which was the FSB officer who was sent on a mission to commit
a murder on the streets of Berlin. So, the west has paid a significant price for getting these detainees out.
It's always a very difficult, emotional decision, and it ultimately comes to the president of the United States. And I've seen now both President
Trump and President Biden have to make these decisions. But, you know, it was a great, joyful moment to see. Paul Whelan, for example, released. I'd
spent a lot of time visiting Paul when he was in prison in Russia. That was a great moment for those United States citizens and for all of us to be
happy for them and their families. But to understand as well that there was a price that was paid by the United States and our allies for that joyful
moment.
AMANPOUR: Similar prices that, as you said, President Trump and previous presidents have paid. Ambassador Sullivan, thank you so much indeed for
joining us.
SULLIVAN: My pleasure, Christiane. Thank you.
AMANPOUR: And next, we turn to the bloody Israel-Gaza War, now into its 11th month since the Hamas atrocities of October 7th. U.S., Israeli, and
perhaps Hamas delegations are meant to negotiate another ceasefire attempt later this week, as the region also braces for a response from Iran to the
assassination of the Hamas chief negotiator and leader, Ismail Haniyeh.
Meantime, in Gaza, the level of killing continues. Bodies are still being identified after an Israeli strike killed nearly 100 people sheltering at a
school and a mosque in Gaza City, according to local officials. The director of Ambulance and Emergency Services in Northern Gaza said they
were, quote, civilians, unarmed children, the elderly, men and women.
Israel and its U.S. allies repeated the same platitudes they have done since this war began.
[13:20:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DANIEL HAGARI, IDF SPOKESPERSON: This military facility was embedded inside the Al-Tabi'in school building in Gaza City. After we received clear
intelligence of the threat posed by these terrorists, and in accordance with international humanitarian law, we took numerous steps to mitigate the
risk to civilians. The IDF conducted a precision strike against the terrorist in one specific building of the compound.
KAMALA HARRIS, U.S. VICE PRESIDENT AND U.S. PRESIDENTIAL DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE: Yet again, there are far too many civilians who have been
killed. I mean, Israel has a right to go after the terrorists that are Hamas. But, as I have said many, many times, they also have, I believe, an
important responsibility to avoid civilian casualties.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: Now, Dr. Javid Abdelmoneim has worked in war zones and humanitarian disasters for years for the NGO MSF. He's just spent two
months in Gaza, and he's joining me now. Welcome to the program.
You hear this, you know, obviously since you've come out, this latest strike has happened. When you hear both the Americans and the Israelis
saying all the same things they said over and over again, what -- how do you react, given what you've seen there?
DR. JAVID ABDELMONEIM, MEDICAL TEAM LEADER, MSF: Christiane, it's very hard. I mean, I'm in a period now where I've only just left Gaza, and I
think for a little bit of self-preservation, I'm walling off my emotions. My reaction is one of feeling of sickness. I feel sick. This has been my
seventh war with MSF, and it's been unique.
The number of civilians killed, the number of children, the fact that they can't move to safety has been unique for me. And that's something that's
really what I want people to understand because when you're there in Al Mawasi, in Khan Younis, you can see the Navy ships on the sea and you can
see the Apache helicopters and the fighter jets, the drones are constant. You know the sounds of the quadcopters. You learn very quickly, all day, to
differentiate the difference between shelling from warships, or quadcopters, or Apache guns. And this is happening all the time.
And then you're at work, and there are mass casualty after mass casualty after mass casualty of people living in a so-called safe zone.
AMANPOUR: And you talked about Khan Younis and yet, again, there are orders for civilians, I think nearly 70,000 or so are being told to move
from one end of the city to the other. Again, it just keeps on happening.
DR. ABDELMONEIM: Yes.
AMANPOUR: What is that toll on the people? I mean, you know, we look at it from outside and it's just, you know, a lot of people moving, but what --
how do people process being told to move every other week, it seems?
DR. ABDELMONEIM: Yes, my colleagues alone, some of them were displaced, forcibly displaced in this way, four times in the eight weeks that I was
there, and these are healthcare workers. And the whole population, you know, they're amongst them.
It's a form of harassment, it's -- there's an instability, there's a lack of safety for the children and the people. If you have to -- and sometimes
the evacuation orders come in, and the violence, the military action starts immediately. So, it's a real rush. And you see just thousands of people in
the images that the world has seen, and traffic runs to a standstill, and you see the look of despair and fear in people's faces, and the space to
which people can move is ever, every more concentrated.
You've got a huge concentration of people in a tiny space, which before the Rafah invasion of early May, was essentially a strip of sand. So, the
services in those areas are not fit for purpose. So, hygiene, sanitation. These are all leading to diseases and illnesses that shouldn't happen. So,
there's a lack of safety and there's a lack of hygiene and sanitation.
AMANPOUR: I listened to -- I mean, honestly, for me, it was shocking and an extraordinary, quote/unquote, interview on the BBC with an Israeli
spokesperson laying into a very distinguished BBC reporter when she was asking about the civilian casualties and repeating what local Palestinian
doctors were saying about this latest attack. I mean, he called her a pro- Palestinian propagandist. You know, it was truly awful.
And I just wonder though how -- when you see what's going on, and you know that Hamas is there, and they've even reported it themselves, what do you
see in these civilian shelter areas? Do you see armed men Do you see -- can you distinguish between who and what?
DR. ABDELMONEIM: I've not seen armed men and I've not seen any military action in and amongst the tents. So, when you're at work, I've certainly
not seen any military action or armed men within the hospital grounds.
[13:25:00]
I have witnessed, however, strikes from the Israelis in the so-called humanitarian zones where people are living. One of those strikes was at the
wall of the ICRC compound. These caused mass casualties. There aren't anywhere safe. And that's why we asked for a ceasefire as MSF, because we
can't practice safely and people are coming into a health service that is on its knees. So, I have not seen military action in and amongst the tents
and I've not seen military action in hospitals.
AMANPOUR: We're showing some of your video. Give us a little description of what we're seeing, what you photograph there, what incident?
DR. ABDELMONEIM: This looks like the emergency room actually (INAUDIBLE). Oh, it's in Khan Younis.
AMANPOUR: Yes.
DR. ABDELMONEIM: I can't quite see.
AMANPOUR: It's the Nasser Hospital.
DR. ABDELMONEIM: Is it in Nasser? There you go. So, you've got blood on the floor, you've got people working, and you've got injured people coming
in. When I tell you that these mass casualties, for example, on July the 13th, was 189 injured people and 55 dead. On July 22nd, 265 injured people
and over 80 dead. This is a huge influx of children, of healthcare workers in the mass casualty on the July 13th.
The second wave of injured coming in were uniformed ambulance workers. It's so shocking for someone who's been in a war to see healthcare workers
coming in like that.
AMANPOUR: I was going to say, it's one of the grimmest places for healthcare workers as well. They have been -- well, some targeted, some
killed in the crossfire, killed in the event. How do the people who you work with, how do they keep up their endurance and keep their, you know,
moral and professional duty to do no harm and to keep trying to help people survive under these circumstances?
DR. ABDELMONEIM: I think we're all medics at core, and you go to work and there's a huge element of stiff upper lip amongst my colleagues. And, you
know, the number of times I've seen them shaking, eyes, pupils dilated, fear because of an evacuation order, a strike near where they were living
that meant they had to displace and move somewhere for safety one night and the next day they're at work. Or for example, in middle of an evacuation
order, for example, July 22nd, large evacuation order for eastern parts of Khan Younis. Rolling mass casualty all day.
I look up from my mass casualty and there's a colleague there who I know shouldn't be there and ask them why you're there, and their brother and his
children and their collective home had been struck that day. Or I go back to the ward and the physiotherapist or the counselor both in tears. What's
happened? Our families are calling us from that evacuation zone. They can't move out of the building. They can see Israeli tanks. They don't feel safe
to come.
So, even though you're professional, you're working, you're coming to work, you have an armor, you steel yourself, there are moments where it
penetrates you, it penetrates you and it really takes you aback. And people are expressing to me, when they express any emotion, are expressing to me
that they'd rather just die. They're waiting for death. They've lost hope. And that's preferable to what they're going through with the serial
displacements and the lack of safety.
AMANPOUR: In your experience, and you've said this is your seventh war and you've been in countless disaster zones for MSF, you know, all the records
are being broken, so to speak, in Gaza. The most ordnance in the smallest territory in this number of months has been dropped. What in your
experience does that mean for the future? Let's say the guns fall silent. What happens the day after?
DR. ABDELMONEIM: Two or three things. I think one thing I'd like to say is, for example, the Nuseirat hostage rescue was June the 8th. We only
discharged our last child from that ward, from our ward, a trauma unit that we're running in Nasser with the ministry of health and MSF on July the
20th, June the 8th to July the 20th. This is a child who had a left forearm amputation, and a shattered femur with an external fixator metalwork still
on at the time of discharge. He also had such a severe concussion that he had seizures. Still smiling.
AMANPOUR: This was the -- these were the casualties of the --
DR. ABDELMONEIM: This is a child.
AMANPOUR: -- crossfire during the rescue.
DR. ABDELMONEIM: Absolutely. So, this is someone who's been in hospital more than 40 days. A family that are affected in that way. And that's one
child of how many injured. And we mustn't then forget the mental -- the trauma, the mental ill health that all Gazans are going through.
So, when the guns stop, everything that we're seeing now isn't -- it's not over. These people need rehabilitation. They need to regain their sense of
safety. Some restorative justice would be a good thing too.
[13:30:00]
AMANPOUR: I want to ask you something. As you know, Benjamin Netanyahu and his right-wing, far-right allies have talked about total victory. And there
seems to be an Israeli report that's saying the defense minister, Yoav Gallant, who also was speaking like that at the very beginning, has now
said that total victory or absolute victory against Hamas is, quote, a nonsense. He's criticizing the prime minister.
And I just wondered how you view it. I'm not asking you politically, but do you see areas that are so-called cleared of Hamas? Is there -- is it
getting any less Hamas or what? Because from what we gather, obviously the evacuation orders, the striking of this, the striking of that means that
these people are still there. It's like whack a mole.
DR. ABDELMONEIM: That's how I see it because the evacuation orders and the areas where you're getting strikes are repeating themselves. So, even in
Gaza City in the north where we had a clinic, there were more evacuation orders. Now, in Khan Younis, back and forth. Khan Younis was cleared much
earlier this year. So, them coming back to Khan Younis to have to do any more military action was a surprise. And if that's an indication that Hamas
are coming back, well, then it's an indication that Hamas are coming back when they were cleared.
The consequences that somewhere that was deemed safe or cleared, people moved back and then when there's a strike there again, that's why nowhere
is safe.
AMANPOUR: Do you hear from people at all? I don't know whether they would confide in you, but we do hear stories, we do hear reports that
occasionally when their polls can be taken, more and more Gazans are also blaming Hamas for their plight. They're just angry now. And we hear in
leaked testimony -- not testimony, but leaked messages from the Hamas people that, you know, this war has to continue et cetera, et cetera. Do
you hear -- what do you hear from Gazans? Who do they hold responsible as well?
DR. ABDELMONEIM: I do hear, sort of, in an evacuation moment, where you see, you know, people moving, you do hear -- and I speak Arabic, so I
understand. So, you do hear complaints about Hamas, but you hear complaints about the U.S., you hear complaints about the U.N., you hear complaints
about life. People feel that they've been left. People feel that their humanity is not recognized. People feel that they're abandoned and left to
the slaughter. And when you have to live a life where there is no sense of safety, day in, day out, I can understand that.
AMANPOUR: And as well as the, you know, deaths and casualties from actually being, you know, hit by all sorts of ordinance, there is a
situation where there's little clean water, there's little food, the pipeline has not been significantly expanded. And we're hearing talk about
diseases and skin diseases and air and waterborne, you know, pestilence. What have you seen? And the pictures are terrible. Lots of irritated skin.
DR. ABDELMONEIM: Yes. So, in the primary health care centers that we're running, amongst the five top diagnoses, four of them are skin infections,
scabies infestation, and eye infections and diarrheal infections. These are all water and sanitation related. And that's a sure sign to say that
hygiene, sanitation, and clean water is not available.
AMANPOUR: We're seeing these pictures now.
DR. ABDELMONEIM: Absolutely. There you go.
AMANPOUR: I mean, they're just dreadful.
DR. ABDELMONEIM: And now, of course --
AMANPOUR: On children.
DR. ABDELMONEIM: And there's been Hepatitis A all along, and we've had children dying of Hepatitis A in our pediatric units. But now, of course,
the ugly head of polio re-rearing itself in Gaza. This is a waterborne disease. This was eradicated in Gaza. The prospect of having to do a polio
max vaccination campaign in that insecure environment, I don't think it can be done.
AMANPOUR: I mean, there's just going to be so much fallout, even as I said, if the guns ever fall silent. I want to ask you finally what you did
-- what you have seen, because, you know, we hear from the Israelis that they are letting goods in. We hear from Gazans that they're not getting
enough goods in. And that incredibly right-wing finance minister, you know, Smotrich, has said in a speech that, quote, it may just be just and moral
to starve Gazan residents in the war against Hamas, but says, no one in the world would let us. And he's talking about 2 million people until the
hostages were released.
So, many people have condemned those, so many of the allies. I mean, that's -- so what are you seeing about aid and that lot? And how do you react to
that kind of comment?
DR. ABDELMONEIM: For the, for the supplies, we've not had enough. We've not had the supplies we need. For example, through the two months that I
was there, we had to either economize what we use or manufacture. We had to make surgical gowns and make crutches from local markets. We ran out of
ibuprofen, simple painkillers. We were very low on fentanyl. And there was a bartering that you do with other organizations. So, supplies were a
constant battle and there are first and second and third order ramifications of running low on something else or using other things.
[13:35:00]
Fuel at one point, at the beginning of July, the ministry wasn't getting enough fuel in and this meant that we could do less in the operating
theatres. Water wasn't being pumped onto the wards. How do you clean a ward without water? So, these are the things and challenges that are consistent.
For example, one of my shipments, which should have gone in really just before the Rafah offensive at the beginning of May, to the date that I
left, July the 31st, still hadn't completely arrived, and that's just one shipment. And that's why we were constantly patching together what we can
do. And that's taking up your headspace when you have to spend each day working out what drug should we use instead or -- and so forth? You're not
paying attention to quality of care, for example.
AMANPOUR: And you briefly mentioned on the toil took on you. How are you after these two months?
DR. ABDELMONEIM: I'm OK. I've been in many wars. I think Gaza, this experience has been very difficult for me because seeing my colleagues go
through it and live it in real-time has been very hard.
AMANPOUR: Doctor, thank you so much indeed for being with us.
DR. ABDELMONEIM: Thank you.
AMANPOUR: Now, while Russian President Putin was quick to condemn Ukraine's incursion into its territory, the Russian military has been
roundly criticized for its actions throughout the war. One critic is the exiled journalist Masha Gessen, who's recently been convicted in absentia
and sentenced by a Moscow court for reporting on the conflict.
They joined Michel Martin to share what it's like to be targeted by the Kremlin and to discuss their recent New York Times behind the scenes
account of the prisoner swap with Russia. Will it encourage Moscow, as we were just discussing, and other nations to keep taking hostages as
bargaining chips?
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MICHEL MARTIN, CONTRIBUTOR: Thanks, Christiane. Masha Gessen, thanks so much for talking with us once again.
MASHA GESSEN, OPINION COLUMNIST, THE NEW YORK TIMES: It's good to see you again, Michel.
MARTIN: There's obviously a lot to talk about, but if it's OK, I'd like to start with something that happened to you. Last month, a Russian court
convicted you in absentia for, quote, spreading false information about the Russian military. This was in an interview with a popular Russian online
blogger back in 2022. You were sentenced to jail for eight years. As briefly as you can, what is it that provoked these charges? And how do you
think about that?
GESSEN: Right. So, what provoked the charges was actually my reporting on Russian war crimes in Bucha. The reason that they cite the interview with
the Russian blogger instead of the actual article in The New Yorker was that the article was in English and the interview was in Russian. And
because they have this weird legalistic regime of repression, they actually follow some rules. And one of them is that they can't prosecute you for
something that's not in Russian. So, they waited for me to talk about it.
One of at least 255 people who have been tried or at least charged under this article, spreading false information about the Russian armed forces,
most of us are charged for reporting on the war or talking about the war, and particularly talking about war crimes.
But probably a majority of these people -- I can't say for sure, but probably a majority are like me, sentenced in absentia. So, we're abroad
and not in prison, but there are a number of people who are actually in prison.
MARTIN: Well, to that end, you are bilingual. You are a close follower of events in Russia and around the world. I'm sure you were aware that this
was a possibility. You are obviously a very courageous person anyway, but you had to know that doing an interview in Russian would expose you to
these charges to expose you to some additional harassment other than what you've already been experiencing. I was just wondering why you decided to
do it anyway. Why did you think it was important?
GESSEN: Well, last I checked the interview had been viewed 7 million times. That's the kind of reach in Russian that I can't possibly hope to
have or in fact, in any language, right? I don't know how many people read the article in the paper version of The New Yorker, but I suspect that
interview reached more people whom I want to have, information about Russian war crimes in Bucha than an article in The New Yorker could.
MARTIN: So, here's what the Committee to Protect Journalists said about that. They say, the nearly yearlong prosecution of exiled journalist Masha
Gessen, culminating in their conviction and sentencing is emblematic of Russian authorities' extreme measures against independent journalists.
Authorities must immediately drop all charges against them and cease Russia's transnational repression of critical voices.
You know, clearly that didn't happen. But I am, you know, wondering, if you don't mind my asking, if you are concerned about your safety. I mean,
you're -- you do travel for your work. You do continue to operate as a journalist, both within the United States and elsewhere. And I am wondering
if you're concerned about this.
[13:40:00]
GESSEN: The trial wasn't intended to put me in prison. They knew I was abroad. They know I live in New York. They know I work now at The New York
Times. What they are trying to do is send a message to me and other journalists in exile that we are still targets.
So, for me, this has some clear logistical consequences and some vague ones. The clear ones is I can't travel to most of the world now. Countries
of Asia, Africa, Latin America, a lot of them either have clear extradition agreements with Russia, or at least put you at risk of being arrested and
possibly extradited. So, my world has gotten a lot smaller.
And for the last few weeks, I've been trying to get an Australian visa. Australians are somehow concerned that I'm a convict. I'm obligated to
report that I have been charged and convicted of a crime. And whoever is looking at my application probably isn't quite aware of the political
situation in Russia. So, that's sort of the clear stuff.
And then there's the vague stuff of, you know, the message you have a target on your back. I'm one of, at this point, probably thousands of
people who are outside of Russia who have targets on their back.
MARTIN: Thousands of people. I think that maybe people aren't perhaps aware of that. What is the scope of people who you think who are living --
who are outside of Russia, who are basically targeted by the regime?
GESSEN: For one thing, the entire Russian independent journalism community has gone into exile. So, that's probably thousands of people right there.
There are large outlets like TV Rain, which is a great independent television station, or Meduza, which is a large online outlet. And then,
there are many, many small outlets that are doing incredible reporting.
I mean, what Russian journalists in exile have done to make themselves still relevant to the Russian audience in Russia, to a Russian speaking
audience in Ukraine, which is a hugely important audience, right, how heroically they've managed to report on the war, despite having no access
to either Russia or Ukraine. You know, these are really extraordinary people, extraordinary media organizations, and all of them are also working
under the threat of being harassed, convicted in absentia or killed. You know, we've seen many Russian journalists in exile being poisoned.
MARTIN: So, to the question of your own conviction in absentia, will you fight it? Is there any mechanism to do so?
GESSEN: I think my lawyer in Russia is appealing that eventually they want to take it to an international court. So, for that, we have to exhaust all
domestic remedies, which is the only reason to engage with the Russian legal system in the first place, right? It's not a legal system. And that's
-- I think that causes a lot of consternation for people like me who are in exile, because on the one hand, you don't want to recognize the authority
of a Russian court. On the other hand, you need to engage with it so that eventually you can have a decision of an international court that will, I
don't know, at least it will be on paper. I don't know how useful it will be in any pragmatic sense.
MARTIN: One of the reasons we wanted to talk to you, obviously, is your own work, but also, we are speaking shortly after this large prisoner swap
was accomplished. Involved a number of nations. Obviously, what is, I think, most visible to the American audience is Evan Gershkovich, who's a
Wall Street Journal reporter who had been in prison for more than a year. And also, a reporter for Radio Free Europe, Radio Liberty. I just had to
ask -- they were among the 24 detainees who were released in what's been called the largest prisoner exchange since the Cold War.
You've reported on this, you've written about the swap for The New York Times, you trace some of the backstory. What's your opinion of this?
Because, you know, on the one hand, obviously, those of us who believe that journalists should not be held prisoner for doing their work, we're also
deeply concerned about the safety of these individuals. You know, on the other hand, there are people who feel that this increases the price. You
know, it makes it more attractive to arrest and to detain journalists.
GESSEN: There's the obvious kind of what one of my interviewees called the moral hazard versus moral imperative arguments. Moral imperative to save
lives. Moral hazard, you release a Russian assassin, that encourages Russia to take more hostages if they ever need to get somebody released. It also
indirectly encourages Russians -- Russian assassinations abroad.
[13:45:00]
And one of the people who was instrumental in organizing this whole prisoner swap, and actually conceiving of it, was Christo Grozev, this
great investigative reporter, a Bulgarian born, who is now living in the United States because he's under threat by Russian assassins in Europe and
he was initially instrumental in identifying this assassin, and now, he's helped him go free, which puts a bigger target on Christo's back, right?
So, I mean, this is incredibly complicated. There are simple parts of it, like Evan Gershkovich. Obviously, he was held hostage. Obviously,
everybody's happy that he's free. There are more complicated parts of it, like eight Russian dissidents who did not -- at least some of them, did not
want to be exchanged, did not want to be released, had made a conscious decision to go to prison in Russia.
Several of them have said, look, I did not ask for a pardon. I did not ask for this exchange. I did not ask to be exiled from my country. And this is
a very important point. They have gained freedom and they have lost their home. They're now, with the rest of us, much more safe, much more free than
they were in a Russian prison, and also in forever exile.
MARTIN: Say more about why you think this increases the value of Russian assassinations abroad. Why so?
GESSEN: Well, here I'm going to quote Christo, who's thought a lot about this and has worked on a lot of spy cases. One of the guarantees that the
Russian regime gives its spies and its assassins is that they will be safe at home after they do what they're sent to do.
For the most part, because Russian assassins, for the most part, have not been caught, like for example, the famous assassinations carried out in the
United Kingdom, the polonium poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko, and then later another chemical weapon poisoning in Salisbury, I believe, those
assassins have come back to Russia and are safe there, are privileged there, one of them holds high political office, right? So, that's always
been the bait.
Vadim Krasikov, the assassin who was sentenced to life in Germany, was an exception. Now, that he is home along with probably five Russian spies who
were released as part of the swap, now that they're all home, Russia can say, OK, this, we will always make good on this guarantee. You can carry
out these dangerous missions. And if worse comes to worse, if you're arrested, we will still bring you home and you will still live out the rest
of your lives in privilege.
MARTIN: It's interesting because at a Trump rally Former President Trump said about the prisoner swap, I'd like to congratulate Vladimir Putin for
having made yet another great deal. Boy, we make some horrible, horrible deals. It's nice to say we got him back, but does that set a bad precedent?
I mean, look, you know, Trump is Trump, but is the insinuation here that Putin outsmarted American officials? I mean, obviously that's what sort of
Trump is trying to say, but what do you think?
GESSEN: I think Trump knows what he's talking about. A bad faith actor will always prevail. If you have -- you know, if you have somebody who's
completely ruthless, like Putin, or like Trump would be if we re-elected him, then they will bully any good faith person, any person or any system
that values humanity, that values human life to any extent, right?
I don't want to idealize the United States and Germany and all the other countries who participated in the swap, but at least they place some value
on human life. And the totalitarian regime in Russia places a no value in human life. And so, of course, they will always prevail.
MARTIN: But then, what's the alternative here? I mean --
GESSEN: There's no alternative.
MARTIN: I mean, American news organizations, not just American news organizations, but western news organizations who still feel that it is
important to try to report out of Russia are still trying to operate there. You know, we worry about our colleagues every day. But what's the
alternative? It's just to make it a black hole.
GESSEN: Right. So, I mean, there -- I think there are two questions, right? What's the alternative for a country whose citizens have been taken
hostage? And I think there's no alternative, right? You have to trade from -- you have to negotiate. And you have to, as my friend and colleague, Joe
Simon, told me for my story, you know, your only moral obligation is to make the best deal possible. And I think they probably did.
MARTIN: You also write about domestic politics. At a rally in Philadelphia, the Harris-Walz camp voice teams of freedom and joy and
saying, we're not going back. This is a -- I think it's fair to say a shift in tone from Biden's message. You know, Biden's message was more, you know,
vote for me and save democracy.
[13:50:00]
So, what's your sense of the race now? Do you think that there has been, not just a shift in tone, but maybe perhaps a shift in momentum?
GESSEN: I do feel like there's been a shift in momentum. I'm very excited about this. I think that what the Harris campaign is actually focusing on
is exactly what they need to be doing, which is showing that this is a future oriented politics, instead of a past oriented politics.
This is something that I've written a lot about. I think it's very important to understand that all modern-day autocrats or aspiring autocrats
have a past oriented politics. They all have this message, I'll take you back to the imaginary past. And engaging with them about the past is
useless. What we really need to do is engage with the future, say, look, we know you're anxious, we know these are scary times, we know these are times
of economic uncertainty and the climate emergency and great displacement and the future can be better. It can be better than today. And so, then you
don't have to dream of going back to this imaginary past. You can actually head into the future with confidence.
MARTIN: Why do you think it is that -- and I say this -- you've written extensively both about, you know, the specific events in Russia and
Ukraine, their full-on invasion of Ukraine, but you've also been writing about kind of the rise of autocratic movements around the world, which many
people for some reason have been reluctant to name as such, until I would say very recently.
Why do you think these autocratic movements have become so prevalent around the world? But why do you also think it's -- we've been reluctant until now
to name it as such?
GESSEN: So, I think they're prevalent because, the situation I just described, the situation of uncertainty of great anxiety, really, that's
like the dominant emotion of our day. The situation is not limited to the United States. It's a worldwide situation. And the -- you know, the
worldwide phenomenon of mass displacement, of mass rootlessness what Hannah Arendt called homelessness on an unprecedented scale, rootlessness on an
unprecedented depth, describing the conditions for totalitarianism in the 1930s, that's what we're seeing around the world now.
And the reason we're afraid to name it is because in any given country there is a kind of drive to normalize. We have exceptionalized 20th century
totalitarianism. We don't want to think that what happened -- what's happening now is what happened then. But the only way to understand what's
happening now is to compare it to the past. Of course, there are differences, but there are also key and really frightening similarities.
MARTIN: You know, totalitarianism has been essentially vanquished before. Is there anything that indicates that that -- that there is another
movement that could defeat this modern totalitarianism?
GESSEN: You know, we've seen perhaps panicked reactions, but still reactions and rejections of these autocratic movements now in a few places,
I think, in really inspiring ways like France. The French election looked really terrifying until suddenly the far-right was defeated.
I think we may be seeing this in the United States. I'm very optimistic, but obviously, we still have three months to go to the election and
anything could happen. It's still a close call. But I think that if Harris and Walz can really embrace, on the one hand, this future, future oriented
politics, and on the other hand, something that I've heard in Walz's interviews that really inspires me, which is a kind of politics of care,
right?
I haven't heard this in a really long time. Like, I think Biden has a politics of empathy and compassion, but Walz is a little different. He
really talks about getting people fed, having people taken care of, thinking deeply about people's home lives and how he as a political leader
can make them better. Like he is actually addressing the anxieties that drive people to support leaders like Trump.
And I don't know how excited I am about the whole freedom message. I mean, it's great. Freedom is very good, but I don't know if that really speaks to
the anxieties, because I don't think people are anxious about losing freedom. I think people are anxious about not being taken care of. And I
think if Walz can embrace that and if that can become part of the campaign, I think that's very promising.
MARTIN: Masha Gessen, thank you so much for speaking with us.
GESSEN: Thank you for having me.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
AMANPOUR: And finally, tonight, a two-week odyssey and antidote for those anxieties, aka, the Paris Olympics have ended. With a dramatic fireworks
show, star-studded musical performances, and Tom Cruise rappelling down from the top of the Stade de France. That's how France bid farewell to its
picture-perfect Summer Olympics, one that saw equal numbers of male and female athletes for the first time taking part, thrilling a jaded nation
and world with their dazzling achievements and soaring team spirit.
[13:55:00]
At the closing, they joined thousands of volunteers in a flag waving triumph of togetherness. Paris created indelible moments of sportsmanship,
building excitement for the next Summer Games in Los Angeles in 2028.
And that is it for now. You can find our latest episode, if you ever miss our show, shortly after it airs on our podcast, and also across social
media, our website and online. Thank you for watching, and goodbye from London.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:00:00]
END
