Return to Transcripts main page
Amanpour
Interview With The Wall Street Journal Chief Foreign-Affairs Correspondent Yaroslav Trofimov; Interview With "Three Years on Fire: The Destruction of Ukraine" Author Andrey Kurkov; Interview With "All The Empty Rooms" Subject And CBS News Correspondent Steve Hartman; Interview With Father Of Shooting Victim Gracie Muehlberger And "All the Empty Rooms" Subject Bryan Muehlberger; Interview With Former Iranian Minister for Women's Affairs Mahnaz Afkhami. Aired 1-2p ET
Aired December 02, 2025 - 13:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[13:00:00]
BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Hello, everyone, and welcome to "Amanpour." Here's what's coming up.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT: One strong country can start a war. Another strong country can help to stop the war.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: Trump's envoy at the Kremlin with hope that it could yield a breakthrough. But at what cost? I asked the Wall Street Journal's Chief
International Correspondent Yaroslav Trofimov.
Then as talks continue, missiles fall on Ukraine. I speak to writer Andrey Kurkov about the latest volume of his diary of destruction, "Three Years on
Fire."
Also ahead --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When that time comes that that room is not there, does she go away?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: -- "All the Empty Rooms." A new film documents the void left behind in the wake of school shootings. CBS correspondent Steve Hartman
joins Hari Sreenivasan alongside Brian Muehlberger, the father of one victim.
Plus --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MAHNAZ AFKHAMI, FORMER IRANIAN MINISTER FOR WOMEN'S AFFAIRS: The laws that we were able to pass are still unique in the world.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: -- the fight for equality in Iran. Christiane's conversation with trailblazer Mahnaz Afkhami, the first minister for women in 1970s
Tehran.
Welcome to the program, everyone. I'm Bianna Golodryga in New York sitting in for Christiane Amanpour.
Another day, another crucial change -- chance for America to negotiate an end to the war in Ukraine. For the sixth time this year, President Trump's
special envoy Steve Witkoff is meeting with President Putin in Moscow, presenting a proposal that was revamped after talks involving the White
House and Ukraine.
Ahead of the meeting, President Zelenskyy made one final push for diplomacy during a state visit to Ireland.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT (through translator): America is taking serious steps to end this war, one way or another, and our task, and
I'm sure that this is our common task for everyone in Europe, is to really end this war, the war, not just to get a pause in the fighting. We need a
decent, dignified peace, and for that to happen, everyone must be on this side of peace, everyone in Europe and all nations that value peace.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: Now, it comes as the Kremlin claims to have captured the eastern City of Pokrovsk after an 18-month struggle that has seen its population
decimated and much of its infrastructure destroyed. If true, it would be the biggest gain for Moscow in almost two years. Kyiv has dismissed the
claim. But the message from the Kremlin is clear, try to convince the world that Russia is winning. In addition to this, an investigation by the Wall
Street Journal alleges the White House may be prioritizing business interests with Russia over a just peace for Ukraine.
So, let's dig into this further with the newspaper's chief foreign affairs correspondent, Yaroslav Trofimov. He joins me from Washington, D.C.
Yaroslav, it's good to see you.
So, Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff, the president's envoy, are meeting with President Putin in Moscow right now. As we noted, this is a revised
U.S. peace proposal that initially was heavily favored towards Russia. Russia is still saying and holding on to its maximalist demands here and
saying they must be met. Kyiv, meantime, is saying that its sovereignty, its security, and its territory are non-negotiable. Do you see any
realistic world in which these opposing demands can somehow meet in the middle?
YAROSLAV TROFIMOV, CHIEF FOREIGN-AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL: It's really hard to imagine that because the demands that Russia
has are the demands for a country that was vanquished in a war. And while Ukraine is not winning the war, it hasn't lost the war yet.
Russia, as you rightly said, took the City of Pokrovsk, but after many, many months of fighting, that was a very tremendous cost, and the speed of
Russian advances is very slow and it comes at a very steep price in lives of Russian soldiers and Russian equipment.
[13:05:00]
I think as far as Ukraine is concerned, their biggest worry is that they cannot sign a deal that will just allow Russia to rearm and that would put
the Ukrainian military in a worse position and will just lead to the third round of this war, which, you know, if we all remember, began in 2014 after
-- you know, there was also a peace deal signed after that bout of fighting, but then the Russians invaded in 2022. And the consensus in
Ukraine is that the Russians still consider that their ultimate goal in this war, which is the elimination of Ukrainian statehood, elimination of
Ukraine as an independent country, has not been met.
GOLODRYGA: We also know that President Putin has laid out his demands back in 2022, right before this invasion, and really hasn't budged in nearly
four years. There are stresses on the country as well, economically, demographically. They've also lost a lot of men fighting in this war as
well. Do you see any change in Vladimir Putin in terms of his posture here that would suggest that we're at least at the beginning of the end of this
war?
TROFIMOV: Not really, no. I mean, President Putin is still at banks on a total victory in this war, and now that the U.S. has stopped fighting --
stopped funding the Ukrainian military and the Ukrainian government, and that the U.S. is really putting more and more pressure diplomatically on
Kyiv to acquiesce to Russian demands, I think he sees this victory in sight.
The problem is that President Zelenskyy has very little room for maneuver here when it comes to his own people, because no matter how much pressure
he receives internationally, the Ukrainians are just not ready to sign away their country, to capitulate, because they have not been defeated.
GOLODRYGA: And it's notable that since President Trump has returned to office, what they have viewed as a carrot to dangle in front of Vladimir
Putin is all about business deals and economic opportunities, especially between the United States and Russia once this war comes to an end. And
Vladimir Putin's approach, we know, for these four years, has largely been ideological.
So, I'm wondering, in terms of that piece that I referenced in the Wall Street Journal that was written over the weekend entitled "Make Money, Not
War," where you see Trump's real plan for peace in Ukraine, showing how economic deals, Arctic energy, rare earths, access to frozen Russian
assets, they've all become center to this -- and central to these peace talks. How is that approach being received in Russia?
TROFIMOV: Well, you know, this is really the Russian approach. I mean, the carrot is being dangled in front of the Trump administration and business
people close to Trump and the Trump family, not in front of Russia. It's the money that Russia is willing to pay, to fund, to allow to be used, to
buy Ukraine, essentially, and to buy American support for its plans for Ukraine. And in this vision, you know, Ukraine is an obstacle to these, you
know, wonderful business opportunities that some people in the U.S. and Russia can, you know, look forward to in the future.
And I think that that's the reason why the chief negotiator on the Russian side in this, Kirill Dmitriev, was the main financier of the Russian state,
if you will. You know, he's a Goldman Sachs alumni who really knows how to speak this language of business and how to spend these opportunities to
people who, you know, are quite drawn to them.
GOLODRYGA: Kirill Dmitriev had been sanctioned by the U.S. Those sanctions had to be specially wavered by the Trump administration for him to return
for these talks recently. And we should note that the Polish prime minister, Donald Tusk, after this piece was written and published, put it
bluntly, saying, this is not about peace, this is about business.
I do wonder about the stresses now being put on U.S. relations with Europe as a whole and the European alliance. I mean, it's sort of a split screen
that we've seen Ukrainian officials in Florida meeting with Secretary Rubio, where you've got European officials meeting both in France with
Zelenskyy and now in Ireland as well. How are Europeans viewing what appears to be more and more of a split between the United States and Europe
in their approach to bringing this war to an end?
TROFIMOV: Well, you know, the Europeans view this war as a war that is existential for Europe's own security. And, you know, just today, Putin
said that he's ready to wage war in Europe, if necessary, today. And I think, you know, the same concern that the Ukrainians have that, you know,
an unfair, rushed, unjust peace will just allow Russia to rearm quickly and have another go with Ukraine, well, they share that concern because they
also fear that if Russia succeeds with this other go at Ukraine, then countries like Poland or the Baltic states may be next.
And there are growing, growing doubts in Europe about whether the United States will come to the rescue and will actually honor its commitments
under the Article 5 of the NATO Charter.
[13:10:00]
GOLODRYGA: And all of this comes, as you've noted, more and more pressure internally on President Zelenskyy, I would say, on two fronts. One, not to
be forced to accept this deal, which largely looks like it favors Russia over Ukraine, but also politically.
TROFIMOV: Correct.
GOLODRYGA: He has been weakened and challenged over the corruption scandal that most recently saw the departure and resignation of his chief of staff,
his top adviser, Andriy Yermak, on Friday. Where do things stand right now in terms of his security and his support in the country, President
Zelenskyy, I mean?
TROFIMOV: I think they're two really separate tracks. And I think the mistake that was made by some American negotiators was to presume that just
because Zelenskyy is weakened by this very real corruption scandal at home, he will be somehow more pliable and make concessions and be forced into
agreements that go against Ukraine's national interest. And I think quite the opposite is true. Just because he's so weak, he cannot go against the
public opinion in Ukraine. And the public opinion is very much against surrendering to Russia at this stage.
And I think there's a very serious risk, some people in Ukraine say, that if he were to sign away territories and agree to unilateral withdrawal from
key territories in eastern Ukraine, the military just would not follow orders.
GOLODRYGA: Yes, and as we're hearing from President Zelenskyy today in Ireland, once again reiterate his support and hope for U.S. aid and
assistance here and coming to a peace agreement that also will uphold Ukraine's sovereignty, territory, and security, he said that he is afraid
that the U.S. might lose interest in the process. So, a real honest moment there from President Zelenskyy is Vladimir Putin has long betted that he
could just outweigh this war at whatever cost that means for him domestically as well. Yaroslav Trofimov, thank you so much. It's good to
see you as always.
TROFIMOV: Great to be on the show. Thank you.
GOLODRYGA: Well, as their future is being discussed in Moscow, the people of Ukraine continue to feel the full force of Russian attacks. Four people
were killed and 40 wounded in strikes on the eastern city of Dnipro on Monday, another devastating chapter in almost four years of war. And as the
nation braces for a tough winter ahead, hope is diminishing every day. Let's take a listen to two victims of a recent attack on Kyiv.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): This is intimidation by Russia. The attacks are targeting the civilian population in order for Kyiv and the
government to make a decision faster, to sign the agreement faster.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (through translator): Peace. I don't believe there will be peace anytime soon. With such neighbors, I doubt there will be peace
anytime soon. It's getting worse and worse. It's getting worse every day.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: And it's only getting colder as well. Andrey Kurkov is one of Ukraine's most acclaimed novelists. But when Moscow attacked, he switched
gears to chronicle the bleak reality facing his people. And now, he's releasing the third volume of his war diary, "Three Years on Fire: The
Destruction of Ukraine." And he joins me now.
Andrey, thank you so much for taking the time to speak with us. Your recent book, "Three Years of Fire," chronicles the third year of this full-scale
invasion from your home city in Kyiv and journeys across the country that's been transformed by the war. I'd like to read an excerpt from your book
about the way the Ukrainian people have sadly had to adjust to this new reality and lifestyle.
And you write, we adapt our habits and lifestyle to the wartime situation. We know where the nearest bomb shelters are. We go to restaurants and
cafes. We are in a hurry to get even a tiny dose of pleasure and happiness. Tomorrow, the restaurant may no longer exist.
From your travels and encounters, what moments in documenting this third year of the war stood out to you most?
ANDREY KURKOV, AUTHOR, "THREE YEARS ON FIRE: THE DESTRUCTION OF UKRAINE": Well, it's difficult just to single out one story because the beginning of
full-scale invasion was probably the most dramatic for my family's experience.
And I remember the first weeks in every detail. If we talk about 2024, it's like routine. I mean, it's like daily and nightly bombings, shellings,
explosions, drones over our block of flats. News from the friends who lost their friends and relatives. Our friend and actually almost neighbor, Irina
(ph), who lost her windows and doors and part of a roof when a missile exploded 100 meters from her house.
[13:15:00]
But also, lots of other stories. Stories of refugees. Stories of refugees coming, actually, from Donbas, from Kherson region, who are now settled in
different western regions of Ukraine, and they are coming to Kyiv to meet up every month and go to a cafe, go to a theater together. And actually,
visits to theaters are very difficult now because you have to buy tickets two or three months in advance. I mean, all the tickets are sold out. You
feel like people are escaping from the reality to the theater, knowing that actually if the alert sounds and the performance is interrupted for more
than 40 minutes, it is canceled and the tickets are valid for the next day. So, I mean, this is the life now.
GOLODRYGA: This is the life. And I think back to February 2022, right before that invasion where U.S. intelligence for the first time was sharing
publicly, hoping to prevent Russia's full-scale invasion from happening with the global community. And no one seemed to believe it. It was just too
shocking to imagine.
And I remember reading reports from people sitting at cafes, at movie theaters, at plays, probably some of the same locations that you're talking
about now, who said, nothing -- no one here is shocked. No one here is worried. There's no possible way that this could happen in 2022. And yet,
here we are nearly four years later and with nearly 4 million Ukrainians displaced, having left the country to other parts of Europe with their
families as well. This is also a concern for the future and the health, economically and demographically for the country, because the hope is that
these people will come back, but the longer they're outside of the country, the chances of them coming back start to diminish.
You've described yourself as one of the lucky ones to still live in your home. Was there ever a moment where you considered leaving with your
family?
KURKOV: We left for four months. In the beginning of full-scale invasion, we went to Uzhhorod, to the border with Slovakia in Transcarpathian region.
And then we spent two months in France and then we returned. But we never considered to move for good or to become refugees.
And actually, the stories which are coming now from Europe, stories of Ukrainian refugees are very worrying, because like yesterday or the day
before yesterday, Ukrainian refugees found a homeless Ukrainian child of four years. His name is Oleg (ph). He doesn't know where his parents are.
And actually, somebody posted his photo on Facebook asking if anybody knows the relatives or the parents of this boy.
There are new Ukrainian refugees homeless in the States. And many countries in Europe are closing down their programs of help to Ukrainian refugees. I
mean, like in France, it's becoming more and more difficult to get a social apartment, especially in the region of Bordeaux, where I recently went.
GOLODRYGA: And at the same time, you describe Russia's destruction of Ukrainian cultural monuments as an axe chopping away at our roots. Just
talk about, even for those Ukrainians that have stayed, to be witness to this, to watch Russia attempt to erase its own heritage, its own history,
its own culture, again, in 2025, in the modern era.
KURKOV: Well, it's unbelievable, but we all see that this is a reality. But one country can suddenly plunge into the past in the Middle Ages and decide
to destroy a country next door. And I mean, if we talk about the second level of this war, this is definitely a war against Ukrainian national
identity, because identity is made of language, culture, and history. And these are the historic monuments that are destroyed, theaters, libraries,
universities. I think -- we are talking now about almost 800 libraries in Ukraine, either destroyed or damaged.
GOLODRYGA: And you -- I have to say for myself as well, growing up, I mean, I moved to the U.S. as a baby with my parents from Moldova, which was then
part of the Soviet Union in 1980. I grew up speaking Russian at home. That was my mother tongue, in addition to English, obviously. Russian, I know,
is your mother tongue as well. And you've continued to write fiction in Russian and nonfiction in Russian, Ukrainian, and English.
I wonder what goes through your mind as you're advocating for Ukraine, Ukraine's sovereignty, Ukraine's independence, obviously, as its own
nation. Do you at times feel guilty for speaking Russian?
[13:20:00]
KURKOV: I felt guilty in the beginning of the full-scale invasion, probably as anybody who spoke Russian on the street. Suddenly you felt
uncomfortable, you felt like you are asking for troubles. But of course, since the beginning of the full-scale invasion, lots of Russian speakers
became bilingual or started speaking Russian -- Ukrainian, or sort of forced themselves not to speak Russian, and they were trying to think in
Ukrainian.
And this process is going on, actually, and I think the Russian language community will be very small after the end of the war, because half of
Russian speakers became refugees. I mean, I met lots of people from Donbas, from south of Ukraine, Russian speakers who are now learning German,
learning Polish, speaking Italian, and not thinking about going back.
GOLODRYGA: Right. Russian was spoken also in the City of Odessa, not just all on the eastern border there. And now, you see after four years of war.
KURKOV: Yes. Well, I mean, in --
GOLODRYGA: Yes.
KURKOV: In Transcarpathian, in Bukovina, where the -- I mean, on the border with Hungary, with Moldova, I mean, there are lots of languages spoken,
including Russian, Hungarian, and Polish. And probably people still speak there, because, I mean, in Odessa region, people speak -- Bulgarians speak
with Gagauz in Russian. I mean, this is what remains from the Soviet (INAUDIBLE).
Now, for me, the question was, what is more important for me, mother tongue or my country? And of course, my country, Ukraine, is much more important
than my mother tongue. And I accepted that I don't want now to have my books, especially during the war, to be published in Ukrainian, Russian
language, not to provoke, not to trigger more trauma for people who understand that this is not actually, although it is not about the
language, but it is about existence of the country, where Ukrainian language is the main official language.
GOLODRYGA: Well, Andrey, no matter what language you write your books in, it is clear that you are a Ukrainian, that you are supporting and fighting
for your country. And hopefully, in whatever language or country that that is being read around the world, people are learning something very
important for you, from you, about the resilience of the Ukrainian people. Andrey Kurkov, thank you so much for the time. Really appreciate it.
And do stay with CNN. We'll be right back after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
GOLODRYGA: Now, at least 70 school shootings have happened across the United States this year. Unbelievable. It is a story that most Americans
know all too well, sadly, with each incident as disturbing and traumatic as the last.
Feeling increasingly desensitized to these harrowing headlines, CBS News correspondent Steve Hartman channeled his frustration into this powerful
new documentary, "All the Empty Rooms," exploring the grief and loss experienced by families of young victims through the bedrooms they leave
behind.
Bryan Muehlberger lost his daughter, Gracie, in the 2019 Saugus High School shooting, and he joined Steve Hartman and Hari Sreenivasan to talk about
this painful yet moving portrait of America.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
HARI SREENIVASAN, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Bianna, thanks, Steve Hartman, Bryan Muehlberger, thank you both for joining us.
[13:25:00]
Steve, let me start with you. You have been working on this project for seven years on the side of your day job, and I guess you have been to so
many of these school shootings, the stories, the week after. Why do this project?
STEVE HARTMAN, SUBJECT, "ALL THE EMPTY ROOMS" AND CORRESPONDENT, CBS NEWS: The project was born out of kind of frustration that I felt the country was
growing numb to the school shooting epidemic, and I was growing numb, you know, and to be really honest, I guess I could say that I just didn't care
as much as I once did. There would be a school shooting, and it would make news for a little while, and everybody was moving on, and I didn't like
seeing that in myself, and I didn't like seeing it in the country, so I started thinking, what could I do to possibly shake people out of that
numbness, and this project was born from that feeling.
SREENIVASAN: I don't know if you felt this as a reporter, but I remember being in the living rooms after the Newtown tragedy of the parents, and it
was so devastating, and I thought for sure that was going to be it. That's the end. There couldn't be anything more tragic than all these children
that were gone down. OK, we're going to have legislation. We're going to stop this, but as the statistics in your film point out, it hasn't stopped.
HARTMAN: No. I don't think I ever really thought that. I know that that was kind of the mood in the country for maybe a few months afterwards, but, you
know, the whole debate, the gun debate and all the arguments, you know, they haven't led us anywhere. I mean, I think Sandy Hook is proof of that,
and the statistics are proof of that.
And I'm hoping that this film can serve as kind of a new beginning, a fresh start. You know, if we just -- because we can't begin to solve the problem,
I don't think, until we fully feel the weight of it, and this film definitely lets people feel the weight of it, and I hope people watch it
with an open mind, and they don't have to worry about being lectured about what, you know, guns or whatever the solution is. It's just let's start
back at the beginning, and let's care again. Let's restore empathy.
SREENIVASAN: Bryan, your daughter Gracie was killed at the Saugus High School shootings back in November of 2019, and you are one of the parents
that shared their stories and allowed Steve to just literally be in her room. Tell us, I guess, our audience a little bit about Gracie.
BRYAN MUEHLBERGER, FATHER OF SHOOTING VICTIM GRACIE MUEHLBERGER AND SUBJECT, "ALL THE EMPTY ROOMS": Yes, Gracie was our youngest daughter. So,
we had two boys and then Gracie. She was a vivacious, funny, just life of the party type of little girl. I mean, ever since she was little, she had a
camera phone in her hand or a camera of some sort, always filming herself and entertaining. And as she got older, she continued doing that, and she
just lived life to its fullest.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GRACIE MUEHLBERGER: Hi.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MUEHLBERGER: She was the life of the party. She brought a lot of joy to us. I feel like she was a gift from God, telling us what true joy looked like,
and that's what she represented for us.
SREENIVASAN: I guess one of the first things that people will wonder is why did you keep her room the same way?
MUEHLBERGER: You know, it was the first place we went to when we got home from the hospital that morning, and it was a place we spent a lot of time
in the days and weeks after. It started symbolizing, you know, the life that was in so many ways. It was a place where we went to feel Gracie's
presence in so many ways. It had, you know, her personality, you know, peppered throughout the entire place.
You know, as the years went on, we cleaned it up and straightened it up and things like that. It was quite a disaster the day of, like any teenager
room might be. You know, clothes strawed everywhere, all the 17 outfits she might have tried on that week, planning for her weekend and so forth. But
it was a place of peace, a place of solace where we could go and just feel her presence and be with her.
You know, for so many -- up until we recently moved, my wife every morning would open her door, Gracie's door, and say good morning, sweet pea, and
every night, you know, tell her good night and close the door, as if she was still there in so many ways. So, it was just a welcome opportunity to
have Steve and them experience some of that with us.
SREENIVASAN: Steve, you've now had the opportunity to stand in these places. For someone who might not have ever done that, give us a sense of
what that's like, what kind of emotions hit you.
[13:30:00]
HARTMAN: Well, the rooms, many times just -- they're frozen in time. And there are little details that stand out that show just how quickly that
life was extinguished. A lot of tasks left undone. Like the toothpaste tube with the cap still off. You know, homework strewn on the floor. I'll pick
that up later. I'll do that later. And later never came.
So, for me, you know, standing in the rooms just reminds me of how quickly the life was taken. And also allows -- for some reason I see my own kids in
all these rooms because, you know, there kind of -- there's a sameness to them and like sometimes the same little trinkets that they collect are in
my kids' rooms. And I think what sets the film apart is that, you know, you show the picture of a beautiful child that was killed in a school shooting
and you can easily dismiss, oh, that's somebody else's child, that's not me.
But you look around the room and I feel like it becomes your kid's room. And I think that maybe that's part of the reason that the film is
resonating as deeply as it is, is because we finally have a chance to put ourselves in those shoes.
SREENIVASAN: Bryan, you know, being kind of in this weird place where the spotlight is on you for maybe it's a day or a week and then you have Steve
Hartman kind of reaching out in this sort of very long-term project and asking you, what makes you want to say yes?
MUEHLBERGER: You know, it was -- we were a little apprehensive at first. We received his letter in April of '24. And Cindy and I talked about it at
length. We had a desire in our hearts to move out of California. We had been wanting to move for a while since the shooting. And we couldn't come
to peace and come to grips with things.
And we often thought, like, how would we go about this? Would we film the room ourselves? Get a professional photographer? You know, recreate it
where we land next and things like that. And it was, you know, kind of a blessing from God, as my wife always says to Steve, you're an angel from
heaven. And coming into our life and giving us this opportunity to film her room and to get really intimate with it so that people can experience that
sacred space really gave us a sense of peace.
And so, when they came in in June and started filming, we just felt this complete peace come over us that we just felt like this was meant to be,
you know, that we were supposed to share Gracie's room with the world and Gracie's personality.
HARTMAN: And if nothing else comes from this -- Bryan, you know, we've all invested a lot of time and effort into this film. And if nothing else comes
from it, then you guys being able to, you know, move and set the room aside, good by me.
MUEHLBERGER: Yes.
HARTMAN: Good.
MUEHLBERGER: Yes. It definitely made us feel that -- you know, I think I asked the -- you know, the question in the documentary, you know, if the
room goes away, does she go away? And we can honestly say that's not the case. She does not go away when that room goes away. She's still alive and
well in our hearts in the film. You get to see her personality. And, you know, we still experience her every single day of our lives.
SREENIVASAN: Bryan, Steve comes with a photographer, Lou Boak (ph), and they take photos, almost intimate portraits of things that are in Gracie's
room. Tell us if you can what are some of the things that were maybe revealed in these photos that you have been walking by but noticed in a
different way?
MUEHLBERGER: Yes. I mean, for one thing, you know, I had never seen such a responsible and respectful individual as I saw in Lou, you know, walking
into these rooms. You know, I didn't catch it until the movie came out and we saw the premiere of it. And, you know, he would take his shoes off
before he would go in there just to honor the sacred place of the rooms.
And, you know, he got in there and, you know, we showed him around a little bit. But then we left him to be. And he just sat there and looked at the
room in different angles and views and got on his belly and looked under the bed and under things and took light of things that you probably don't
capture, you know, as much when you're just walking by it day in and day out because the way, you know, he just photographs things. He's just
amazing.
I would say, you know, when we got Gracie's shoes back that she was wearing the day of the shooting and they sit on the stand where her clothes and
outfits were still hung up for the red remainder that week. She had two outfits still picked out for Friday that week. And the shoes are on there.
And he takes a picture of the shoes at such an angle that I can see moments of that day in a very surreal way that I never noticed before. And that's
just because he's -- you know, he's so up and close with the photo.
SREENIVASAN: Yes, yes.
[13:35:00]
MUEHLBERGER: He captured the personality of Gracie throughout, definitely. You know, the trinkets she had in her drawer and the notes she had to her
future self and the pillows on the bed and her big stuffed dog that she had there and things like that.
SREENIVASAN: Steve, when you did this project, I mean, this was not blessed by CBS News. You say in the documentary that you really kind of kept it
hidden from your bosses until it was pretty much done. Why?
HARTMAN: Because, you know, I'm the feel-good news guy. You know, I do the stories that come at the end of the newscast that are meant to restore your
faith in humanity. So, this project was way off brand for me. It was one of those better to ask forgiveness than permission kind of things.
SREENIVASAN: There seems to be also, as you kind of point out, a tension in how you approach the job, the assignments that you were given to try to
find that silver lining after a horrible week at the end of a mass shooting. And you just saying, I don't want to do this anymore.
HARTMAN: Yes. For a while, any time there was any mass shooting, because I was always -- my stories come at the end of the CBS Evening News. And, you
know, we want to leave people on a positive note. So, I was told to find some positive angle to this school shooting, as crazy as that sounds. And
there are things. There are the hero, teacher, or the community coming together. But just with this subject, I just didn't want to do it anymore.
You know, I wasn't -- I didn't want to do any more sort of feel-good stories about, you know, a school shooting. I just couldn't do it anymore.
I had to go in a different direction.
SREENIVASAN: One of the things that's fascinating is the ripple effects of how this sadness not just deals with the parents, but also the siblings.
What has it been like tolerating, bearing this grief while you still have to be a dad to kids who are also grieving, but kids who are trying to
process this and they need their mom and dad full-time as well?
MUEHLBERGER: Yes. I mean, it was something, you know, when I -- I'm working on writing a book right now, and I've kind of been reflecting on the day of
the shooting and the days after, I was talking to Heather, who was sitting next to my side, a friend of my wife's, and she was recalling, she goes,
you immediately went from, you know, down on your hands and knees crying to father mode. You know, you've got to now contact your boys. You've got to
start calling the family members and take action.
So, I think we're just innately wired to do that. And I think that's what keeps me going, you know. I'm sure this is hard on many families when they
go through a tragedy like this and losing a child. But I immediately just thought to myself, I've got these two other boys I've got to take care of.
I've got a wife who I need to be there for. And it's something that we do every day.
You know, I mean, we're always reaching out to our boys. We're spread across the country now. And, you know, they're doing well, but they're
still dealing with it as well, just like we are.
SREENIVASAN: Steve, you were able to capture a couple of the siblings as well. And you can see on camera how deeply affected the siblings are by
this.
MUEHLBERGER: Yes, the filmmaker Josh Seftel, he interviewed the boys of one of the families. And, you know, I was in the other room when he was doing
that interview. And it's hard to listen to because, you know, I don't know, you hear often from the grieving parents, but it's not often that you hear
what this whole experience is like for the siblings.
And, again, I just -- I'm just wired to sort of put myself in those shoes and think about, you know, my other kids and how devastated they would be.
So, yes, that's a -- the film is full of -- you know, there's -- it's emotional, and that's one of the more emotional moments in the film.
But the film also -- you know, there's laughs, you know, there's giggles at things. And I think ultimately, you know, through it all, you know, I feel
great hope at the end of this film. I feel like that we can find a better way. And I just feel like maybe this might just be the beginning. And I
certainly hope it is.
SREENIVASAN: The film is called "All the Empty Rooms." It's available now on Netflix. Bryan Muehlberger, Steve Hartman, thank you both for joining
us.
HARTMAN: Thanks for having us.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GOLODRYGA: Really important conversation there. We'll be right back after this short break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:40:00]
GOLODRYGA: We go now to Iran and the life and legacy of a pioneering woman. Mahnaz Afkhami has spent decades fighting for women's rights and made
history as the country's first women's affairs minister during the 1970s under the rule of the Shah. She briefly put Iran at the forefront of
women's rights globally by creating groundbreaking initiatives for mothers and child care.
But in 1979 the Islamic Revolution undid it all and she found herself living in exile. Since then, she has campaigned for women's rights from
abroad and recently was recognized for this work by Georgetown University.
As part of that celebration Christiane spoke with her about her extraordinary life and career. Here's part of their conversation.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: So, I want to start by asking you, you're a rare species indeed, a rare bird, an Iranian feminist
from 50 years ago or more. I mean the obvious question many women in the audience will identify with, being the only woman in the room, being the
only female cabinet minister amongst 20 other men. What was the reaction from those men and from society at large?
MAHNAZ AFKHAMI, FORMER IRANIAN MINISTER FOR WOMEN'S AFFAIRS: Well, it was it was strange because I was one of two women in the world who had that
position Francoise Giroud from France, and she had come to Iran just a few months before and she didn't really know what was this business of minister
of women.
But we had -- that was the difficult part, but the good part was that we were open because there was no way to follow, there was no particular
agenda. So, we could go ahead and see what's the best thing to do. And what's the best thing to do turned out to be something that we got from the
people themselves. Because in order to find out what is to be done, we had to go to different parts of Iran and talk to people in factories, in
schools, in all sorts of areas to see what it is that that they want.
And that's something that was very helpful and became the actual most important, basically, thinking of our work throughout the years. That is
not going with a particular idea or set of rules to people but to go and see what is it they want, you know, and to work with that. Not go from
theory to action but to go from action to theory, and that helped the great deal.
AMANPOUR: Yes. And I think the way you put it is you went from grassroots to national rather than from top down when you were, you know, leading the
women's organization of Iran. So, what were you hearing in the villages in the towns, you know, in mosques and schools and, you know, conservative
women's households and the more educated more urban women of Tehran? And what you were hearing, did you think there was a general consensus or was
some women, you know, completely wanting something much more progressive other women just wanting the basic right to leave their house? What was --
what were you hearing?
AFKHAMI: Well, there were different types of needs in different groups, but we started with the with the ordinary people, with the grassroots. And for
instance, my whole idea at the beginning was law that the laws have to change which was true, we really needed to change the laws.
[13:45:00]
But whenever we went to the factory and talk to people and ask them, you know, how about changing the divorce law or other ideas, they kept talking
about how they need money, they need skills building. And more and more, we realize that that's what they want, and it's really true, in almost
everywhere, that you have to be able to support yourself, you have to be able to support your family, or help support your family. And if you don't
have that, anything else is sort of a side issue.
And, of course, that's what we changed our whole approach, that we should focus on ordinary people, the people who need most to get change, and also
to do it in a way that is that is helpful to their situation. So, from -- not from theory to action, but from action and understanding of needs to
theory.
AMANPOUR: OK.
AFKHAMI: And that's how we change everything. Yes.
AMANPOUR: OK. So, that led your lobbying efforts, your work led to the 1975 passage of the family protection law, increase the safeguards of women's
rights in Iran. What specifically can you tell us? I mean, there's certain laws that women just simply didn't benefit from, in divorce, in custody, in
inheritance, what did you actually change for women with that 1975 law?
AFKHAMI: Well, there were a series of things, and they were worked on at different speeds, and on different times, and so forth. And I think that
what was interesting was for us not to do some of the things that were done in the West, and many of us were trained in the West. And that is to try to
teach men how to think, because it's not easy, it's easier to connect to them and see what their needs are. And I'm talking about now the cabinet,
for instance.
For instance, the Minister of Agriculture, when we brought a suggestion that we would have women and then ours -- our suggestions were very modern,
you know, women had started working and -- at every level, and we brought a suggestion to the cabinet that that women who had babies who were workers,
they would get something like half of their time would be paid to them, they could work for part-time, but then get full salary, while their
children were being taken care of until they are about three years old.
And this, of course, was very odd to the Minister of Agriculture, for instance, because he was the one we were most involved with for this
particular kind of labor and work. The laws that we were able to pass are still unique in the world. Even a place like the United States doesn't have
any of what we had, childcare on the premises of the workplace, part-time work, as I mentioned, all sorts of support for women working. And also,
very, very much focused on the idea of making women skilled in whatever it was they were trying to do.
AMANPOUR: Skilled?
AFKHAMI: So, it wouldn't be just -- skills, yes.
AMANPOUR: Yes, yes, yes.
AFKHAMI: To teach them, you know, to educate them, to -- so to speak. And so, all of that was very important. And the laws were extremely advanced,
you know.
AMANPOUR: Well, it's really interesting you hearing you talk about the laws, because that's really what matters. You know, the framework of law
and rule of law are to protect any citizen, especially women in these societies, and frankly, in every society.
So, I want to ask you, because we're now talking about your time before the Islamic revolution under the Shah. And he appeared to be an emancipated
kind of guy. If he wanted to -- you know, a ministry of women, he had a very powerful twin sister, Princess Ashraf, who I think was on the side of
women's empowerment, and his wife, the Empress Farah, as well.
But as soon as the Islamic Republic came into being the very fundamentalist, you know, conservative, and we've seen it elsewhere,
whether it's Iran, Afghanistan, whether it's Poland, whether God forbid, it's the United States of America, certain political and social convictions
go straight for the women and for women's rights.
[13:50:00]
What happened? What was the first thing Ayatollah Khomeini's regime did when they came to power? Having promised, I remember this, in their
slogans, oh, it's going to be democratic, oh, women will have their rights, all of that nonsense. Did the ministry survive the revolution?
AFKHAMI: No, not at all. You know, I was in the United States. And I was trying to sign an agreement in the United States with the U.N. to set up
this most extraordinary entity that was for women across the world. And it was for education and for better -- for skills building and childcare and
everything else. And by the time that that I signed and was ready to go home, they told me you can't go -- come home because I was known during the
first, you know, statements of the Ayatollah, that I was -- he called it a warrior with God, you know. And so, I couldn't go because I would have been
definitely killed immediately.
So, this was the way that the Ayatollah act, but the first thing that he did when he came to the country was he stopped the laws, you know, all of
the laws that we had passed. So, that was all set aside. And so -- and then he started bringing other things that he was interested in.
He was very smart in terms of how he presented himself and the people he chose when he was in France. And our government was pretty not, you know,
used to this type of thing, you know, to this kind of presentation that was total lies and so forth. And so, they didn't do anything, you know, that
they had -- there was every opportunity by people, both Europeans and the Middle Easterners to stop the Ayatollah and not let them to even return to
Iran, but the government did not accept that and they let him come and that's -- he went and did whatever he meant to give.
But again, the first group in Iran who started the demonstrations against Khomeini were women. And it was the 8th of March and he came in in
February, you know. And so, they were the first ones. It took the men a little bit longer because they had less in under pressure and less that
they thought they needed to think about. But they just somehow didn't get it. The women immediately realized that this was not what needs to be done.
AMANPOUR: Yes, because he insisted that they go under the hijab and the chador, the whole, you know, body covering immediately, having said that
that was not going to be an edict. So, yes, I mean, he tricked the women of Iran.
But I want to ask you, what do you think is your very briefly to sum up, if you can, what do you think your main accomplishment has been after a long
life of activism and really moving from one culture all the way to the other culture and having a really global vision?
AFKHAMI: Honestly, I hardly think that there was anything that I personally had a unique role in. But what I think that I was -- I learned, which was
very helpful, was working with people and listening to people, which is the exact opposite of how a patriarchy is shaped top to bottom and no serious
conversation.
I think what helped me was that I learned from the very first time that I started working with people that we learn from each other, and we should
listen to each other. And if we make decisions, the decisions should be on the basis of what we learn from each other and put into action. And I think
that that was the most important thing that I learned and very early in my career. And it's always helped me. It's always been a fantastic support and
the strength and feeling that there is so much help around the world. Everybody wants these things and will help with it.
And so, that's, that's my thing is, I think that that's my luck. Good luck is to learn how to work with other people and learn from them. And they're
generous and it's wonderful. And I am very happy with the opportunities that I've had.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
[13:55:00]
GOLODRYGA: And finally, we all know that Christmas is near when Santa Claus comes to town. And although he usually travels by sleigh, these Santas in
Peru are taking a day off to celebrate Christmas. And they're taking a different route, via the Huanchaco waters and traditional reed boats.
Donning their red and white suits, these artisan fishermen kicked off the festive season on the northern coast, offering free rides to passengers on
their ancient watercraft, a perfect blend of holiday cheer and maritime culture. Images you don't see every day. You don't see them every Christmas
either, but we bring them to you here.
Well, that is it for now. Remember, you can always catch us online, on our website, and all-over social media. Thank you so much for watching, and
goodbye from New York.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:00:00]
END
