Return to Transcripts main page
Amanpour
Interview with Spanish Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Albares; Interview with 22-Time Tennis Grand Slam Champion Rafael Nadal; Interview with The New York Times Reporter Mike Isaac. Aired 1-2p ET
Aired May 21, 2026 - 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.
Europe's split with America is laid bare as NATO foreign ministers meet in Sweden. One ally is breaking ranks more than most, Spain, clashing with
Washington over Iran, Gaza, Israel, and NATO itself. Is Madrid an outlier, or the shape of Europe to come? I ask Spain's foreign minister.
Then, he's the king of clay with 14 French Open titles among his 22 Grand Slams, and now a new Netflix series. Rafael Nadal speaks to me about glory,
sacrifice, and the price of greatness.
Plus, the Musk-Altman showdown, what the OpenAI verdict means for the future. New York Times reporter Mike Isaac joins Hari Sreenivasan.
Welcome to the program, everyone. I'm Christiane Amanpour in London.
NATO foreign ministers are gathering in Sweden today as the alliance faces mounting strains. President Trump has repeatedly criticized NATO,
threatening action over Greenland. And now, the Pentagon says thousands of U.S. troops will be pulled from Europe.
One country has been especially outspoken, Spain. Openly challenging Washington over its war in Iran, and sharply criticizing Israel's Palestine
policy. This week, Spain also condemned Israel for the on-camera humiliation by the far-right extremist minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, and his
treatment of detained activists aboard an intercepted aid flotilla that included dozens of Spaniards.
Ahead of that key NATO meeting, though, I spoke to Spain's foreign minister, Jose Manuel Albares, about all of this.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
AMANPOUR: Foreign minister Albares, welcome to the program.
JOSE MANUEL ALBARES, SPANISH FOREIGN MINISTER: My pleasure.
AMANPOUR: Let's just get to the heart of this issue of the intercepted flotilla. All those who are on it have now been deported back to their home
countries, according to the Israeli government. But you were very angry. You called Minister Ben-Gvir's actions, as we described, really
humiliating, all those. Monstrous, undignified and humiliating. Did you ever get an apology from the Israeli government?
ALBARES: No, not directly. I ask for one, because I think that a country that says that it's a democracy doesn't behave in this way. You don't
assault in international waters, and you don't make illegal detentions, and in addition, you don't inflict such an inhumane and humiliating treatment
to citizens. Democracies, we don't act like that. That's why I ask for those apologies. I haven't got them.
I sought the minister of foreign affairs or the prime minister of Israel in their social networks to really talk against this action, but not like a
formal apology to me and to many other countries in the world that we are asking for the same thing. And that's why Spain, with other European
countries, we are asking for a ban of this particular minister into the European Union, as Spain has enforced since many months ago.
AMANPOUR: That's interesting. Of course, you saw that Prime Minister Netanyahu and his foreign minister did post that this was not, you know,
action by Ben-Gvir in accordance with the norms and laws and sort of, you know, things of Israel. Are you convinced by their sort of wrapping him
over the knuckles?
ALBARES: No, I think that is better than saying nothing. But if in any democracy a minister could act and behave in that way, the next minute he
wouldn't be a minister anymore. And that's a common responsibility of the Israeli government. And these actions must stop.
It's not the first time that we see this sort of assault in international waters, where no Israeli agent has jurisdiction on any of our citizens.
And, of course, I find this appalling, outrageous, and I cannot accept and I will never accept that my citizens are treated in this way by anyone in
the world.
[13:05:00]
AMANPOUR: Now, you know that you've become sort of, you know, a bullseye target for the Israeli government, because Spain does lead a very prominent
pro-Palestinian policy, rights for the Palestinian people. You, along with many now in the U.N. General Assembly, do support a Palestinian state, as
is, you know, implicated in all the international laws around that. And you did lead an unsuccessful move to end the E.U. association agreement with
Israel.
And their foreign minister basically accuses you all in Spain of leading a hostile anti-Israel line. They call it, you know, trying to divert from,
quote, "your severe corruption" scandals through anti-Israel, antisemitic attacks. How do you respond to that?
ALBARES: It's absurd. That is ridiculous. Spain and its foreign policy is above all pro-peace, pro-peaceful coexistence, anti-war. We will never
accept that the only way that Israel has to relate with its neighbor is through war and through violence. There must be a way of peaceful
coexistence, and that is called the two-state solution.
Of course, we support the existence of the State of Israel peacefully and in security. Of course, the people of Israel have a right to peace and
security. We have condemned the horrible terrorist attack of Hamas on October the 7th. We have condemned and voted for every package of sanctions
to Hamas in E.U. Hamas has nothing to do with the future of Palestine.
But exactly the same right that the Israeli people has, a peaceful and secure state, has the Palestinian people and the Lebanese people and all
the other people on the Middle East. We are the first government that has issued a strategy against antisemitism here in Spain. We take it very
seriously.
But if they try to threat us with that, no, we are not going to lower our voice in favor of peace and the respect of international law and human
rights.
AMANPOUR: OK. Foreign Minister, talking about threats, you know the president of the United States has threatened NATO. He's already announced
the Pentagon will pull back, you know, thousands of troops from Germany and who knows where else in NATO. You're at a meeting in Sweden to prepare for
the future NATO summit with world leaders. He complains a lot about the leads Spain takes, whether it's on NATO, defense spending, on climate
policy, immigration.
You've really made it your business to challenge President Trump on these issues. And he responds by taking the kind of revenge I said regarding
pulling back troops. Tell me whether you think this is a policy that's working for you. How does it help to pull back, you know, American troops
from Europe?
ALBARES: We really believe in the transatlantic relation, trade, of course, and security. We believe in NATO. We are a very committed ally. We
have a historical deployment of almost 4,000 troops, a lot of them, most of them, in the eastern flank of Europe. Our airplanes guarantee the security
of the skies of the Baltics. Our troops are in Slovakia, in Romania.
We at the government have done the largest and the fastest increase in our defense expenditure. It's 2.1 right now, more than some of the countries in
NATO. And we have delivered all the capacities that have been requested. Not all the countries in NATO have done it.
We want that transatlantic relation to be as strong as possible within the framework of our common values and the respect of international law. But we
are a committed ally. Nothing of what we say goes against any ally, on the contrary.
AMANPOUR: Except that you are calling for a European army. You say we can't live our lives waking up every day wondering what the U.S. president
is going to say about our defense. And you're not paying the 5 percent that the president is demanding.
ALBARES: There are two things. One, we said since the very beginning that the debate should be on capacity, not on the percentage. We are 2.1, which
is more than some of the members of NATO right now. There is no one that is paying 5 percent at this very moment. And our position was very clear since
the very beginning. But we are delivering all the capacities.
We've got the defense expenditure in our country. It's 0.9 when we go to government. It's 2.1 right now. And we are delivering all the capacities.
And when it comes to the European army, to have a strong pilaf of European security, reinforce NATO. And the United States invites us Europeans to
take more of the burden of our security.
[13:10:00]
So, I find that this is complementary. European army and NATO are not two opposite things. On the contrary, they are complementary.
AMANPOUR: There is a great big war going on. I mean, it's in some kind of sort of suspended ceasefire right now. But between the United States,
Israel and Iran, we keep hearing some different things from the United States and Israel, often on the same day.
Where do you think it's headed, particularly now that we hear U.S. intelligence saying that Iran is rebuilding their defenses, could rebuild
within six months, and that President Trump is having, quote, "strong talks or strong disagreements" with Prime Minister Netanyahu, who wants continued
war, while Trump wants to try the negotiated exit? Where do you think this is heading?
ALBARES: I back the negotiation and I back the mediation of Pakistan and other countries. I think that there is no really military solution. On the
contrary, going back to the negotiating table can really tackle all the issues.
Of course, Iran cannot have the nuclear bomb. Iran must stop the unjustified attacks on the other Middle Eastern countries. The affiliated
groups of Iran must stop those attacks as well. Lebanon must be part of the global peace deal. And Hormuz must be reopened again with a free passage, a
secure passage, and no charge at all for that passage. I think it's possible to get an agreement.
Negotiations were going well right before the war. So, I think that's the right path, to make a sustainable and stable peace, instead of keeping this
status quo that can lead to an escalate with really global consequences.
AMANPOUR: What do you think of the consequences of the U.S. indictment of Raul Castro, former president and former defense minister of Cuba, sending
in an aircraft carrier, the Nimitz, and basically increasing the pressure? You are going to be meeting Marco Rubio. I don't know whether you're going
to ask him about this. But what is the plan and do you support the indictment? Because it does revolve around an issue where the Cubans did
shoot down civilian little planes, basically in cold blood, with MiGs all those decades ago.
ALBARES: We are very worried for the humanitarian situation of the Cuban people. Cuban people are brothers and sisters of Spain, as all the people
in Latin America. We see the humanitarian situation. We try to help them with that, with food, with medical staff, with solar panels.
And what I want for the Cuban people is exactly the same that I want for the Spanish people. Freedom, democracy, social justice, equality. But
everything must be done in full compliance with international law and also guaranteeing the sovereignty and the territorial integrity of Cuba. So,
that's where Spain is standing right now.
AMANPOUR: But just briefly, do you think they're headed towards extracting Castro?
ALBARES: I cannot answer that question. That's a question that only the government of the United States could answer.
AMANPOUR: OK. Now, it is not the best moment for your government and your country, certainly your government. Your party, or the -- you know, the
prime minister's party, lost very heavily in the local elections in Andalusia last weekend. And there's a huge corruption scandal going on.
Allegations. Let me just say, the prime minister's wife was charged with corruption, former transport minister, another senior party official on
trial over kickback allegations. And just this week, a former socialist prime minister was charged with money laundering, influence peddling and
other criminal offenses.
Given the extent of all of this, do you think it's time maybe for your prime minister to call new elections and try to clean up this slate that
we're seeing right now?
ALBARES: He has been very clear yesterday, saying that the parliamentary period will go to the end. When you see the results in our economy, when
you see our foreign policy, how it's really applauded by many countries in the world, when you see the rate of employment, never Spain had such a
level with 22 million people in our social security. There is no reason to stop. And the president is deciding to go until the end of the
parliamentary period and call elections when the time will be legally there.
AMANPOUR: And you're sure that this government still has legitimacy in the eyes of the people?
ALBARES: Certainly, this is something that we see in the parliament every day. This is a parliamentary regime and we can see it week per week.
[13:15:00]
AMANPOUR: All right. Foreign Minister Albares, thank you so much for joining us.
ALBARES: Thank you. My pleasure.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
AMANPOUR: And next to a Spanish sporting hero, my candid conversation with tennis legend Rafael Nadal and a new documentary about pain and suffering
along his record breaking journey. That's after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
AMANPOUR: Now, my next guest needs no introduction. And with the French Open at Roland Garros coming up, the presence of its greatest champion will
be sorely missed. Who else but Rafael Nadal, one of the greatest players ever to pick up a tennis racket.
He retired almost two years ago, but now he's unveiling the struggles behind his legendary grit from physical injuries to mental challenges. New
Netflix documentary, "Rafa," brings us the pain behind his 22 Grand Slams and the record 14 French Open titles. Here's some of the trailer.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RAFAEL NADAL, 22-TIME TENNIS GRAND SLAM CHAMPION (through translator): Everything has a beginning and an end.
It's difficult, I know. But it's time.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): Rafa Nadal will be back on court the first week of 2024.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): A year and a half without winning a title. Number 652 in the world, and almost 38 years old.
NADAL (through translator): Since I was young, I liked things that were difficult. But that's because I was educated by my uncle Toni that way.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): I never told Rafael it would be easy. But he got used to suffering.
NADAL (through translator): I told him, Toni, I'm sorry, but I can't take it anymore.
I was living with constant pain.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (through translator): It was very clear that his body couldn't give any more.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): Very few people would have endured it all.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: It is a searingly honest look. The documentary premiered in Spain this week and I spoke to the tennis great in Madrid.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
AMANPOUR: Rafael Nadal, welcome to the program.
NADAL: Thank you.
AMANPOUR: It's been about two years that you haven't been competing. How is retirement treating you?
NADAL: Very good. Two years now.
AMANPOUR: You liked it?
NADAL: Yes.
AMANPOUR: Yes.
NADAL: I never was afraid of that. And --
AMANPOUR: Really?
NADAL: Yes, honestly. Yes. I was --
AMANPOUR: OK. We'll get to that in a moment as well, because throughout the documentary, you're struggling with when to and whether to.
NADAL: Yes. But in a -- I mean, in a way, because after my hip surgery, I wanted to give myself the proper time to know if the things will be like
before or not in terms of feeling free to move.
AMANPOUR: All the way at the end of the documentary, I was really taken by what you said. You said you stopped being what you have been practically
all your life. You go back to being just the person. This is, you know, 22- time Grand Slam winner, 14-time Roland Garros champion. You go back to being just the person. What does that mean?
[13:20:00]
NADAL: No, because in some way, I think when you are in front of cameras almost every week in tournaments, in some way, I was lucky enough that I
always came back home. You know, when I came back home to my origins, I always have been treated the same way. So, in some way, I never lost that
real life that I named.
But in the other hand, you are a successful athlete. You are famous. You know, you receive a lot of attention from a lot of people. So, in some way,
you are living not in a fake world, but it's a part of your world. But I always considered that like a part of my life that is going to end.
AMANPOUR: You don't feel a hole inside?
NADAL: No, I mean, I enjoy it, of course. Because of that, I was able to enjoy so many unique experiences and privileges without a doubt. But in the
other hand, I always enjoyed being a little bit more just myself, my family, you know, being from a small village, different style of life.
AMANPOUR: Well, it comes across obviously in this four-part Netflix series. This is obviously your journey from being a kid player to where you
ended up. We'll talk about whether you're the greatest, the GOAT. Are you the GOAT?
NADAL: No.
AMANPOUR: Are you sure?
NADAL: I mean, in terms of numbers, no.
AMANPOUR: Yes. In terms of -- it was very clear in the documentary that you were holding on to your Roland Garros titles. You don't think anybody
will beat that.
NADAL: I mean, if I did, why not? But why not another one can come and beat that? But that said, it's obvious that it's something difficult to
repeat because -- I mean, you have to put a lot of things together and in some way, you need some luck, too.
AMANPOUR: This is a documentary, I thought, about pain and suffering. I mean, I really felt the pain halfway through. It was incredible. Also, you
did the documentary in 2024, a lot of it, and that was not a great year for you. It was a year where you were very, very injured, that you had all
these losses, and you ended up retiring. Having lost in Sweden, you decided to retire.
Why did you decide to reveal this part to the world? It's the underlying pain and suffering, as if that was the point.
NADAL: Well, I think it's about everything, you know, because I think in the documentary, you're going to see all the success, of course, all the
great moments. But on the other hand, you're always going to see the suffering, all the things that you are going through to try to be
successful. And it's true that when I started filming the documentary, it was in 2024, end of '23. So, it was after my hip surgery. So, it was late
on my career, very late.
And, of course, I came back from a situation that was very, very difficult. But I tried, and what I wanted to show in the documentary was my real life.
And real life is not only about playing Sundays, holding trophies on your hands, and good things, you know, there's another part of real life in the
professional athlete world. And that's my story.
AMANPOUR: And it really is, and it's shown in excruciating detail. I mean, in 2005, when you were playing the match, and you felt a crunch in your
foot, and it turned out you had broken something, and it turned out that you had this very rare -- is it called Mueller-Weiss?
NADAL: Yes.
AMANPOUR: You said, I'm devastated, I'm destroyed, this is in a car scene. You then had to wear an insole that, I don't know whether people knew about
that, but you tried to do everything you could to make it work. Tell me about that. What was it like having to play with that pain? Did you think
you'd be able to have a long career after that? That was 2005.
NADAL: Probably that was the toughest part in my tennis career, because that was just the beginning. 2005 was the first year that I won my first
Grand Slam. I finished my year like a world number two. So, that was one of the last tournaments of the year. So, after that, it was just the beginning
of my success.
So, in some way, when you receive all this news that maybe you will not be able to keep doing the same things as you are used to do it, wow. In some
way, you are projecting your future, being a professional tennis player, thinking that you're going to have at least, I mean, 7, 8, 10 years of
being on the professional tour.
[13:25:00]
That's why you have been practicing almost all your life. And in one second, it looks like, OK, now maybe you will not be able to keep doing
what you are doing. So --
AMANPOUR: Is it scary?
NADAL: Yes, because at 19 years old, of course, you feel everything in a different way. You are very young. It's difficult to assimilate all these
issues. But I was very lucky to have very good people next to me. And of course, I always hold the hope that things are going to move forward and I
will be able to keep playing. But the news for a couple of months haven't been positive. And at the end, it's true that we found a very drastic
solution. But it worked. And --
AMANPOUR: Which was?
NADAL: It was a very aggressive insole. After four months looking for solutions, trying different things, it was an insole that moved my foot 7
millimeters like this. So, literally, my foot was out of my shoe. And that's why I was lucky enough that day, that moment, that I talked to Nike.
I went to Portland straight away. I said, OK, like this, it looks like I'm going to have the chance to keep playing tennis. So, I need to fix that.
And I was lucky enough that they make it very quick. A completely new shoe, special for my foot, higher. They basically construct a shoe just for my
foot.
AMANPOUR: You do express throughout the documentary anxiety and stress about all of this, which is presumably understandable. Your wife talks
about it. You went to see a psychiatrist at some point or a therapist to try to get through it. This is going to resonate with people all over the
world, particularly men, young men. Tell me about the level of anxiety and stress, having to go out, for instance, at one point with a bottle of water
the whole time, you know, and how you work through that.
NADAL: Yes. I mean, probably because I went through a lot of injuries, a lot of pressure. And arrived a moment that, in some way, you are not able
to handle all of this. And even if -- in my mind I was able to handle all of this, arrived a point that your mind fails. And that's what happened.
So, when -- OK. I always thought that I need to fix things for myself in terms of mental strength. But arrived a moment that my feeling was, OK, I
cannot go out on the street without a bottle of water on my hand. So, yes, that's a big deal. So, I need to find help. And that's what I did.
I went to a psychologist first. I said, OK, I mean, I tried, but I think that's not working because all the things that I am listening here, I knew
already because I was very rational, let's say. But then I went to the psychiatrist.
AMANPOUR: Yes. Psychiatrist.
NADAL: Psychiatrist. And then after that I started with some -- yes, some medication for a while. And I was able to start feeling improvements after
a couple of months. And then, of course, that was for around a year. And then, of course, I recovered and I am again.
AMANPOUR: And then towards the end, I mean, when you were -- you know, in 2022, I mean, you won your 14th Roland Garros. I was there. I interviewed
you afterwards.
NADAL: Oh, yes. True.
AMANPOUR: I saw you limping into the interview room because you had had to have injections in your foot. And John McEnroe in the series says, oh, my
God, he can do it without feeling his feet. What's he going to do next, blindfold himself and win? It was extraordinary. It's an incredible
handicap. How did your talent, your practice, your muscle memory allow you to be able to stay upright and in direction even when you couldn't feel
your feet?
NADAL: Because in some way I think I was prepared for all these things, because I went through a lot during all my tennis career. I played all my
career with basically the navicular bone of my left foot bracket. I played with a lot of issues on my knees. So, I had plenty of things. So, I was
used to this suffering. I was used to find always a way to keep being competitive and to find a solution. And to that, my tennis and my
competitiveness to any situation. I think because I was -- I mean, I was educated a little bit like that.
[13:30:00]
AMANPOUR: Talking about education, your main coach was your uncle Toni, very famous in tennis history. And everybody associates you with Uncle
Toni. It seemed, though, he was very clear that you actually had to suffer to play. You know, when you play, you have to suffer to play. He would not
let you drink water for an hour during training or something when you were younger, try to get you used to it. In retrospect, was that the way to get
the best out of you, to push you to the brink? For me, it worked very well.
NADAL: I mean, that's all what I can say. Every kid is different. Every human being has a different talent. And I had the talent to hold all this
pressure. So, I think if my uncle will see myself not ready to hold all this pressure, probably he will not do it. That's my point of view. And he
did it because he wanted the best for me all the time.
And, of course, when you go to the limit, sometimes you cross the line. I was not always perfect. I was not always perfect. He was not always
perfect, of course, but he always tried to do the things in the best interest of myself.
AMANPOUR: Your rituals, I once asked you about it. You know, a lot of people say it's OCD, whatever. And I asked you about your rituals when you
won in Australia a few years ago. And you said, do you think I do this kind of stuff off the court? No, it's for me to feel in control and safe on the
court. Tell me a little bit more about that, because you really do talk about it a lot in the documentary. You explain it.
NADAL: Yes, because I think was -- I mean, people approach that a little bit like superstition, or that I need to do that. I mean, probably people,
when they watch me do all of this on the court, they think that I am doing all these things in my real life too. And it's completely the opposite. You
know, I was very organized on a tennis court because probably all these issues helped me to stay focused and to not think much on other stuff, not
just stay a little bit on my bubble.
To be honest, outside of the tennis court, I mean, you can talk with my people. I am not that organized. I don't have all these rituals. But that
really helped me to stay focused on what I needed to be.
AMANPOUR: Yes, well, it worked. I mean, you know, obviously, the record stands. Can I ask you about, it worked for me when I was asking you about,
you know, the really intense training, mentally and physically, you underwent? There are young people coming up now. You can hear many of them,
women and male players, saying it's really intense. There's 11 months of the year of hard work, and we're constantly pushing ourselves. Some are
getting injured.
Carlos Alcaraz is not playing. Even he's pulled out of Wimbledon. He had caused some controversy or debate in the tennis world when he gave an
interview that said, yes, I actually like to go to Ibiza. I want to go dance. I want to take time off, you know, from the grueling schedule of the
-- you know, of the off season. Do you think that's good?
NADAL: Everyone has a different personality. I did too. You know, I was not a guy that was -- my life was not only tennis, tennis, and tennis.
AMANPOUR: Did you dance?
NADAL: I did. I went to Ibiza every single year with my friends.
AMANPOUR: Did you?
NADAL: Yes, that's true.
AMANPOUR: I didn't know that.
NADAL: But, I mean, everyone needs to find their own space. You know, I think it's -- some people need more, some people need less, but my life was
much more than tennis. But I didn't want to project that to the world because I didn't find it interesting for the world that I was going to
Ibiza or I was going to this or the other thing. I mean, he decided to make that public. I respect that. It seems like it's working very well for him
too.
AMANPOUR: It does. He's doing unbelievably. But, of course, this is not a great year for him health-wise. He's injured. What advice? I know you're
doing --
NADAL: No, I think you will have injuries. The professional athletes always will have issues. Some players have more, like me. Some players have
less, like Novak, for example, or other players.
AMANPOUR: Is he superhuman physically?
NADAL: I mean, he had an amazing dedication to the job, and probably he had a privileged body to avoid important injuries. And that's why he had
probably the best numbers in the history of our sport, and he's able to keep playing tennis at 39 years old. So, I mean, that's part of our
business.
[13:35:00]
And the thing is, of course, the tennis have a long calendar. Nothing new. We have the same calendar since we started our tennis career. Something
that the conversation always comes back, but we already fight to change a little bit that thing. For me, the problem is not that super long calendar
of 11 months. For me, the problem is we had important tournaments during all those 11 months.
So, from my point of view, the tennis world will be a little bit better if we had during nine months important tournaments, and then the other two
months good tournaments, but you could play or don't play. It's your decision. So, that will be, from my point of view, the ideal world.
Because, you know, you have different point of view. If you have 11 months of tournaments, of course, you create more jobs because you have more
people living from our sport. If you only have nine months, you have less jobs in our sport. So, we make our sport bigger.
One of the missions that we have when we're players is try to let more people living from our sport, not only the top players, you know, winning a
lot of money, just trying to make the distribution a little bit better and a little bit more fair. And that's why, for me, it's good to have -- for
me, it will not be a problem if you have almost 11 months and a half tournaments. The only problem is when you have too many important
tournaments during all those periods of time.
AMANPOUR: Got it.
NADAL: So, you don't allow players to --
AMANPOUR: To rest.
NADAL: If they need, rest for two months.
AMANPOUR: Got it. We're in Spain. You're Spanish. Did you feel the weight and the burden of your nation's hopes and dreams on you, or did it power
you in a different way?
NADAL: For me, I always take that as a motivation. And I always felt very well supported and loved and respected, especially, of course, here in
Spain, but around the world. So, for me, it was not an extra weight on my shoulders. No, for me, I enjoyed all that support, all that love. And I
feel a very privileged person to be able to lift all of that.
AMANPOUR: And finally, your wife was interviewed in this. We haven't really seen her being interviewed. Your father also, for the first time.
We've never seen him being interviewed. I see a big smile on your face. Is family life phenomenal? Is it great? I mean, how do you feel now about
being able to be a full-time husband, father? What's next for Rafael Nadal?
NADAL: Well, I'm working more than what I expected, to be honest.
AMANPOUR: Oh, really?
NADAL: But I am able to enjoy a lot of my time with my family. Yes. I mean, I think it was great that during all those years, my father, my
mother, they were not public. My girlfriend, my wife, the same thing. Because for me personally and for them, it was great to come back home and
have a really normal life. You know, not be exposed as a family show. Just, OK, I was a famous tennis player, but that stays on myself. Not the others
need to pay that price.
And of course, the documentary, the personal documentary is normal that they talk. But yes, I am enjoying my new life. I am working on my projects.
Without a doubt, the academy, the foundation, the hotels, the NDL project. I mean, a lot of things that are moving forward. But at the same time, I am
organizing my time to spend as much time as I can with my family. And enjoying being father is one of the best things of my life that I
experienced. Difficult and tiring sometimes, but really amazing.
AMANPOUR: Well, that's great. Rafael Nadal, thank you so much.
NADAL: Thank you. Thank you, Christiane.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
AMANPOUR: And the extraordinary documentary series, "Rafa," will drop on Netflix next week, May 29th.
Coming up after the break, OpenAI reportedly moving toward a public offering with a possible $1 trillion valuation. But after Sam Altman's
court win over Elon Musk, what is next for the future of A.I.?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:40:00]
AMANPOUR: Now, it's been a big week for big tech. Fresh off CEO Sam Altman's legal victory against Elon Musk, news comes that OpenAI reportedly
is planning to go public very soon, as is Musk's SpaceX. Mike Isaac is a reporter for the New York Times, and he shares analysis of the recent court
battle with Musk with Hari Sreenivasan.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
HARI SREENIVASAN, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Christiane, thanks. Mike Isaac, thanks so much for joining us again.
Listen, you have covered tech for a long time. You've covered the rise of A.I. here. We've got this verdict from a jury within a couple of hours on
Monday rejecting Elon Musk's $150 billion lawsuit against Sam Altman. For people who aren't in tech, why did this trial matter?
MIKE ISAAC, REPORTER, THE NEW YORK TIMES: It's funny. A lot of journalists and folks in the media were basically saying, what did we learn here
afterwards? And we did kind of go back to the status quo. But I think it was one of these moments as A.I. is developing pretty rapidly that because
of two billionaires, essentially, entangled in a legal battle, we're asking, who should be the steward of developing this next generation
intelligence?
And a lot of this trial was Elon Musk levying this lawsuit, saying Sam Altman is not doing this for the right reasons. We started this as an
altruistic endeavor to build safe AI. And now, as the company has dollar signs in their eyes, they want to build it as a profitable endeavor. And
Sam Altman, OpenAI's CEO, is saying, Elon Musk is just building his own for-profit competitor, and he doesn't actually care about this either.
So -- but I really think it was one of these things where it reminds us that, oh, really, every big tech CEO in the valley right now is trying to
build advanced artificial intelligence. And we kind of have to wonder, who should, if this stuff works, who should be the steward of that? And who has
the proper intentions in place? And I'm not sure if we got an answer or a correct answer out of this trial. But at least it was a reminder, if that
makes sense.
SREENIVASAN: Yes. So, where did that relationship go wrong? I mean, it seems like now it's just this grudge match that's playing out in courts and
spending millions of dollars in legal fees and wasting jurors' time.
ISAAC: Yes, wasting jurors' time is a pretty good point. It was a month of taxpayer expenses. But -- so, around 2017 or 2018, Sam Altman and Greg
Brockman, who was another co-founder and the president of the company now, started talking and saying, look, there's been some advancements in A.I.
technology. This is actually going to cost us a lot more than we thought to train what are called A.I. models, which are the sort of gear under the
hood that powers these chatbots.
And we thought it could be maybe millions or tens of millions. And perhaps it's going to go into the billions even because of just how resource
intensive these computers and what are called GPUs required to train these models. And so, all of a sudden, a non-profit doesn't make as much sense to
them, according to their version of this. Elon Musk says, hey, hey, hey, what are you doing? We got into this to not build what he called the
Terminator future. We don't want to make a profit off of this. We want this to be a non-profit.
These guys start -- Greg Brockman and Sam Altman, start talking to Microsoft to take on more investment. And this is really the genesis of the
diversions between them because of how this non-profit should look, whether it's a for-profit company or not. And I think that's when things start
getting really from gnarly to outright acrimonious in just a couple of years.
SREENIVASAN: So, Elon at the time says, OK, I'm going to run it, or it's going to be in my possession or control. And the OpenAI folks are like, no,
we'll pass. I mean, and then Elon builds his own basically competitor, but a for-profit?
[13:45:00]
ISAAC: Yes, there was this other interesting moment during the trial where, as you might imagine, Elon likes to be in control of things. He has
a lot of his own companies. Tesla, SpaceX, it was PayPal at one point. And then there's a bunch of other companies that are like, the boring company.
He has a bunch of different things going on now, Twitter, which is called X.
And he's -- as this was getting, you know, rougher between them, he was saying, we should incubate OpenAI inside of Tesla. That was another thing
that came out in the trial, which people didn't. That's when they sort of split and said, no, we're going to do our own thing. And exactly what you
said, a few years later, Elon decides, I've got SpaceX going on. I have Tesla, which is self-driving -- which has self-driving technology, which
also relies on A.I. I should just be building this myself.
And ultimately, he buys Twitter, turns it into X, and then sort of attaches xAI, which is his A.I. wing of the company, and also something that is
supposed to be a for-profit company.
SREENIVASAN: OK. So, Musk took to X to point out to everybody and said, look, the judge and jury never actually ruled on the merits of the case,
just on a calendar technicality. There's no question to anyone following the case. This is Musk's opinion in detail that Altman and Brockman did, in
fact, enrich themselves by stealing a charity. The only question is when they did it. I will be filing an appeal with the ninth circuit because
creating a precedent to loot charities is incredibly destructive to charitable giving in America. OpenAI was founded to benefit all of
humanity. Now, could they win that appeal?
ISAAC: I mean, yes, technically they could. There's a few things he did right after the trial. Of course, immediately took to his social network
and started giving his opinion. He also did a post calling the judge an activist judge and like really, you know, railing against her. And then I
think his lawyers advised him to take it down because he deleted that tweet within the day. And that's -- it's probably a smart idea. And we actually
got outreach from his side saying, hey, can you note that he deleted the tweet?
But I do think that -- I know, exactly. It was not smart from him. But I think that -- I want to say his point about it being a technicality is a
little too strong because, look, one of the big key points of the case was statute of limitations. And he left in 2018. He didn't file the suit until
2024. And there's a three-year span of time in which you can file these suits, and he didn't do it there. So, like that was -- that's law rather
than just a minor detail.
That said, we didn't get to hear the jury rule on the merits of whether the other two counts of unjust enrichment and things that Elon Musk did also
charge. And so, you know, I think it's fair to say, is there another way to hear whether he would win those or not? But I don't think that's really
honestly the point at this point. I think it benefits for him to keep this tied up in court as long as possible.
SREENIVASAN: So, right before the trial, Elon Musk sent out this text to Greg Brockman, the co-founder of OpenAI with Sam Altman. And he said, I'm
going to make sure you and Sam Altman are the most hated men on earth. So, if the goal is to just reputationally damage Sam Altman and OpenAI before
this company goes public, is that a win for Elon?
ISAAC: That's a -- I mean, it's a great point. And that was pretty unequivocal in how he put it. I believe that was in a direct message on X
because so much of what these guys do is on social media a lot of the time in 2020.
SREENIVASAN: Right, right.
ISAAC: But yes, that's -- I think the greater goal in a lot of this and really the outcome of the trial was just like dragging Altman and OpenAI
through the mud. And I remember specifically Sam Altman's testimony just came out with this brutal series of character attacks and asking, can you
trust this person -- can you trust Sam Altman? Can you trust this company? And entering that into the record, I think, at a time in particular when I
think a lot of people, everyday people don't necessarily think A.I. is going to be positive for them or their jobs or their well-being, that's
damaging. You know, it's damaging to this company. And I think in a way, Elon Musk did kind of win in that regard.
SREENIVASAN: We've seen this incredible public opinion shift from, holy cow, this is an amazing tool or technology. I can't believe this computer
can do this, right, or software, to, wait, these guys have been bragging about how it's going to take away all our jobs and potentially kill us all.
[13:50:00]
And, oh, by the way, you're using all this power and water. I don't really want this in my neighborhood, right? I mean, it's so quick that shift has
happened. And I wonder, does anybody win here?
ISAAC: I completely agree. And I think that it's interesting. I think all the CEOs right now, certainly at OpenAI report -- we've reported on
internal discussions there. They bought a media company to try to change that narrative, basically. At Anthropic, which is another startup that
competes with these companies, but also has quickly grown. And they are probably the loudest voices on how profoundly, potentially damaging, or at
least reshaping of society that A.I. could be. And then we have Google, which just had their big developer event called Google I/O this week,
trying to figure out how to bring this as a positive message to the world.
But I think all of these companies have figured out, like, OK, we've been warning the alarm bells for too long at this point, and we need to shift
the narrative of, OK, these are tools that can actually help you. These can have economic benefits rather than put out of work. Meanwhile, the biggest
software companies in the world are cutting 10 to 20 percent of their ranks because they feel like they can replace those workers with A.I. So, it's a
real mixed message.
And to your point, trying to make this stuff sound good while at the same time showing hair-raising emails from the past and CEOs screaming at each
other online, at least, is a real -- it's a very big contrast is what I'd say.
SREENIVASAN: Does any of this affect OpenAI, which is planning to go public, SpaceX, which is one of Elon's companies that owns xAI, that's
going to go public? Do I think about that and say, should I be putting my money behind these companies that are primarily these big figureheads?
ISAAC: I think that's another huge point of this trial and dragging, certainly Sam through the muck, but both sides. And you're exactly right in
the sense that 2026, every, not every, many of the big A.I. companies are trying to get out the door and go public. And that's because they know
there's a lot of investor and retail sentiment to get exposure to A.I. companies, which are basically propping up significant parts of the economy
right now, huge investments in infrastructure.
And so, there's kind of a race between SpaceX, as you said, which is like this weird nesting doll of all of Elon's companies, OpenAI, as well as
Anthropic, which also wants to go public this year. But I think that was one of the most damaging parts for OpenAI in this trial. One of the other
things they recalled was how Altman was briefly fired by his own board of directors and had executives at the top of the company writing emails to
each other saying, I can't trust this guy.
And so, you have -- whether you -- whether people believe that or not, you have these figureheads who -- you know, retail investors might be like, all
right, do I trust this guy who has been painted as basically the biggest liar in Silicon Valley with my money, or do I want to wait for Anthropic or
go with Elon Musk?
SREENIVASAN: So, it's really in that larger context that even something as small as this trial, which seems like, oh, this is kind of a petty beef
between these two billionaires to, oh, this could have kind of knock-on effects on how these companies go public, whether investors trust this. As
you point out, how much of the U.S. economy is currently propped up by what these companies are spending and planning to spend.
ISAAC: Yes. And like, I think about that, not to, you know, scaremonger, but I think about that in terms of 401ks. I think about that in terms of
index funds, you know, right? Like the -- and for a while now, the tech sector has been one of the largest growth factors in, you know, the S&P 500
and things that have kept the American economy very strong. But that is also the way -- the other way to look at it is like, it's a huge risk
factor in terms of, OK, if this doesn't work out, if the type of A.I. they claim to be building is not as, you know, revolutionary as they might say,
then what does that, what does that look like? What does that mean for my retirement? Things like that. Or if, if there are volatile CEOs running
this stuff who maybe whose judgment we don't trust --
SREENIVASAN: Yes.
ISAAC: -- do I feel comfortable? And I don't know. I think I'm not -- not to get too alarmist, but I think it's worth like thinking --
(CNN U.S. SIMULCAST)
[14:00:00]
END
