Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Hamas: Agreement Guarantees War Will Not Return to Gaza; Israeli Security Cabinet Meeting on Gaza Ceasefire Plan; Judge Could Decide Today in Chicago National Guard Deployment Case; Monkey Sanctuary Provides Healing for Vets Dealing with PTSD. Aired 2:30-3p ET

Aired October 09, 2025 - 14:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[14:30:00]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Israeli Security Cabinet needs to approve the first phase of the deal. Stay with NEWS CENTRAL, we're back in just moments.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: There are still significant parts of the Israel-Hamas ceasefire deal that are yet to be resolved, but for the first time in months Palestinians living in Gaza can begin to imagine life after the war. Here's how some children in Gaza reacted.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translated text): Are you happy?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE CHILD (through translated text): Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translated text): And you?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE CHILD (through translated text): Yes. Because we're going back to our homes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translated text): God willing, you'll go back to your homes.

Are you happy?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE CHILD (through translated text): Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translated text): Swear to God.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE CHILD (through translated text): By God.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translated text): Are you?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE CHILD (through translated text): Yes, I'm happy.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translated text): Why are you happy?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE CHILD (through translated text): Because of the truce. We've spent two years, and now we're starting the third, living in a war. We're very tired of this life.

And now what will happen?

(END VIDEOTAPE)

[14:35:00]

SANCHEZ: And despite their optimism, the reality for so many Palestinians in Gaza is that they will have no home to return to after two years of war. Let's bring in Omar Baddar. He's a member of the National Policy Council of the Arab American Institute.

Omar, thank you so much for being with us. What does this first phase of a deal mean for the Palestinian people? Have you heard from folks on the ground?

OMAR BADDAR, NATIONAL POLICY COUNCIL, ARAB AMERICAN INSTITUTE: Yes, it's incredibly meaningful to see after two years of, frankly, a genocidal war that has completely devastated the Gaza Strip. I mean, this onslaught has broken so many records in terms of the number of journalists who have been killed, the number of medics, the number of UN workers, and even the sheer number of children who have been dismembered or lost their lives in it. So, any end to that is certainly welcome, and you can see it in the joy that we have seen in the images coming out of Gaza.

Unfortunately, there are many unanswered questions in terms of the long term, though. There is an unanswered question about whether this is going to be a real end to that violence, because Netanyahu, who, by the way, is wanted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes, has a history of breaking ceasefires. We're witnessing that in Lebanon right now, where there's a one-sided ceasefire, where there are literally thousands of Israeli violations of that ceasefire ongoing in Lebanon.

So, is Gaza potentially going to go back to that kind of model, where there's low-intensity warfare against Gaza instead of large-scale?

And the other question is whether Gaza is going to be allowed to be rebuilt, because Gaza is currently in complete ruins, with 92 percent of housing simply dismantled and destroyed. It's not really fit for human habitation.

And if, you know, Israel systematically destroyed Gaza as part of an effort to push the Palestinian population out, so the big question right now is, is Gaza going to be rebuilt? Because if it is not, then this might, in fact, be kicking the can down the road and not creating conditions that allow for Palestinians to remain on their own land.

KEILAR: And what does security look like? What does governance look like? The president was asked some of these questions in the Cabinet meeting.

He kept things pretty vague. It's clear there are a lot of sensitivities. I think people are holding their breath, waiting for Monday or Tuesday to come. But what do you think that picture is going to look like?

BADDAR: What we've seen in the 20-point plan that Trump has presented is, frankly, in a way kind of absurd. The idea that it's going to be governed by a board of peace that is led by Donald Trump himself and by Tony Blair, two people whose records, as far as the Middle East is concerned, in terms of war crimes and violations of rights, are not short. That --

KEILAR: But the involvement of other countries, because he's leaning a lot on that, of other Arab countries, how do you see that looking?

BADDAR: Sure. I mean, you can have some buy-in with some Arab support for a potential transitional governance in Gaza, but what you ultimately need is for Palestinians to be able to govern themselves, to be a free people in their own land, and that seems to be nowhere on the table in these conversations. Donald Trump has not alluded to it, and worse yet, Benjamin Netanyahu has made clear that there is no possibility for a Palestinian state from his perspective.

He's made that clear long before October 7th, and he's doubling down on that, saying that Israel is going to remain in complete control from the river to the sea, which means that Palestinians are going to be living under Israeli domination, and that is a dynamic. If that occupation stays, it's a dynamic that is going to essentially kick the can down the road and reproduce some sort of conflict later on because we're not dealing with that fundamental problem.

SANCHEZ: To that point, one of the prerequisites for phase two is that Hamas relinquish arms and relinquish political control of the enclave. I mean, I have a lot of questions there, whether you believe that's possible, and also, what happens then to the enclave? Who then steps in?

BADDAR: Yes. I think Hamas is willing and has made it clear actually a while back that they're willing to give up governing Gaza as a way of just getting an end to this war, and I frankly think that there could be a recipe by which you get disarmament in exchange for Palestinians being actually free. The problem is that there is no trust there.

We have a dynamic, again, where when Israel makes it clear that it's going to continue dominating Gaza, when they made it clear that they're going to maintain a security perimeter inside Gaza, essentially remaining deeper inside Gaza than they were even before a couple of years ago when that suffocating siege was already in place, it's difficult to know what incentive there is for Hamas to completely follow through on relinquishing everything. Because otherwise you're basically accepting that Palestinians must disarm and still remain occupied. And Hamas, as sort of projecting a brand of resistance and insisting that they are the party that's going to fight for Palestinian freedom, when freedom is not on the table, I certainly see plenty of landmines down the road for why that might not work out.

And still, in the meantime, though, that does not take anything away from what a breath of fresh air it is to see an end to the large-scale onslaught that we've witnessed for the past couple of years. KEILAR: How are you seeing the prisoner release, right? Because at this point you have Hamas saying Israel is trying to manipulate a list of Palestinian prisoners scheduled to be released in the deal. Do you have a sense of exactly what is happening there?

And also, there are a lot of concerns in Israel that they're releasing people who are only going to come back in the future and hurt them, which we've seen happen in the past.

[14:40:00]

BADDAR: What we've seen, part of what happens here in this dynamic, is that immediately in the aftermath of October 7th, what Israel did is essentially kidnap thousands of Palestinians off the streets in both Gaza and the West Bank. In many cases, those people are held without charge or trial. Essentially, frankly, the correct terminology from my perspective is to call them hostages, because that's what they are.

You have a much smaller percentage of people who are convicted of committing crimes, but even that is complicated, because the legal system in Israel, essentially Palestinians are living under military rule, and they go through military tribunals where there's a 99 percent conviction rate. So, we don't really know who's innocent and who's actually committed a crime, and who's simply guilty of resisting the occupation in ways that are legitimate under international law.

But nonetheless, I don't think that this is ultimately about the people who are you releasing and what they might do. There's always going to be people on both sides who are willing to commit acts of violence, and that's always an ever-present danger. What you actually need to do is solve the political injustice underneath, and that's when these extremists that exist would lose support, both within Palestine and Israel.

And the problem, of course, is that as long as the dynamic is Israel insisting that their solution to the problem is to keep the boot of occupation on the necks of Palestinians, that's somehow going to guarantee security.

If the past several decades have not proven to you that this does not work, I don't know what it will take. We have to try something different. That different thing is allowing Palestinians to be free in their own land, and we need external pressure on Israel to take that seriously, to recognize Palestinian humanity, and to say that any rights that Israelis are entitled to, certainly Palestinians should be entitled to as well.

SANCHEZ: Omar Baddar, we appreciate you coming in and sharing your point of view. Thanks for joining us.

BADDAR: Thank you very much.

SANCHEZ: Still, plenty more news to come on NEWS CENTRAL. Ongoing lawsuits in Portland and Chicago could determine the future of President Trump's push to send National Guard troops to both cities. That story next. [14:45:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Turning back to one of our top stories right now, moments ago arguments wrapped up over President Trump's right to deploy National Guard troops in Chicago. The hearing is in a break right now, but court is expected to reconvene at about 5 p.m. when we expect a decision in the case roughly in the next three hours or so.

Joining us now is CNN legal analyst and former federal prosecutor Elliot Williams. Elliot, always great to have you. Walk us through the arguments in this Chicago case.

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Sure. Chicago and Portland really come down to two questions, Boris. When we talk about activating the National Guard, number one, is there the risk of rebellion or insurrection of some sort or some kind of emergency that warrants calling up the National Guard -- or the president calling up the National Guard, or is the federal government incapable of carrying out its functions if the National Guard isn't called up?

Now, those are two pretty straightforward questions but quite complicated to answer. Now, is there a rebellion? We know what the word means.

Are people trying to overthrow the government? That doesn't make sense. Maybe one could make an argument that opposing the authority of immigration enforcement and ICE, that's a stretch, right?

And to the question of is the federal government incapable of carrying out its functions, that's not the case either. Now, certainly there's protests, there's disorder, whatever else, but causing a total inability for the government to carry out its functions just doesn't seem right.

So, we'll see what the judge does with it, but it's a complicated constitutional question.

SANCHEZ: Disruption is probably the best --

WILLIAMS: Yes.

SANCHEZ: -- adjective so far, but there's a DOJ attorney in the Chicago case that made the argument that there doesn't actually need to be rebellion for Trump to federalize the National Guard. They essentially are saying that the --

I'm sorry, I'm not sure what they're saying in my ear right now. Sometimes people interrupt us as we're talking. I'm not really sure what they're saying.

Nevertheless, the DOJ is basically making the case that this is the president's purview.

WILLIAMS: Right. SANCHEZ: And I wonder, is it really just a subjective point of view? Because I've poised this question before. Does the president just say, I don't like that, so that's rebellion?

WILLIAMS: Everything is subjective in the law, of course, right? That's why courts exist. But I would say that rebellion is a pretty straightforward concept. Is someone trying to engage in acts of violence against the government?

We don't want to dismiss or minimize violence or disruption or disorder that is impeding the government's ability to do its work. But rebellion, it's a legal term of art, and I think it's a stretch to go there, as the government seems to be doing.

SANCHEZ: And so, when you hear the judges looking at this case and saying that there is no rebellion, is it pretty clear to you where these two cases are going to land?

WILLIAMS: I don't know, because these things are so fraught and so complicated in how judges are going to see the questions.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

WILLIAMS: And so even to the second question of, can the federal -- is the federal government unable to carry out its functions, even that's not clear either. Yes, people are protesting or blocking entrances to buildings or whatever else, but that's not an inability, that's a disruption.

And would that warrant or necessitate calling in the National Guard in order to help ICE do its functions? That just doesn't seem to be right either. There's a long history, or tradition if you want to call it that, of people protesting government buildings.

You call in the cops, clear them out and get them out of the way. Often they don't seem to require the National Guard. And so, it is quite an escalation to, you know, to bless the legal sending in of National Guard troops and lowering the standard in the way that it seems to be happening here.

SANCHEZ: The other approach that I've heard folks in the administration take when it comes to arguing that this is totally legal is that the courts can't even actually challenge the powers that the presidents have, that this isn't the right venue for this. What do you think of that?

WILLIAMS: Yes, sure, where the administration is coming from with that is that policy decisions made by the president should not be reviewed by the courts.

[14:50:00]

And frankly, we as a country don't want courts second-guessing policy decisions. The decision to name that school this thing, or to, you know, move personnel in a certain place, those are policy choices, right? The question becomes, when does a policy decision become a legal one?

And when, by making a choice, has the president actually bent the law or violated it and twisted it? And that's a complicated question, too. Most things can and should be able to be reviewed by courts, and I think this administration has a pretty broad view of what its power is, and I think courts will help define that.

SANCHEZ: We look forward to seeing what the results in that case at 5 p.m. Elliot Williams, great to get your expertise. Thanks so much.

WILLIAMS: Thank you, Boris.

SANCHEZ: Coming up, how a Mississippi animal sanctuary is rescuing animals and helping America's veterans find peace at the same time.

[14:55:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KEILAR: In today's Homefront, a veteran who turned her personal trauma into healing, not just for her, but for veterans and animals who have endured their own ordeals. April Stewart founded the Gulf Coast Primate Sanctuary in Mississippi. The sanctuary takes in monkeys who are pets and whose owners ultimately couldn't care for them.

But it has another mission, and that is helping vets coping with PTSD after their military service. April is an Air Force veteran, and she joins us now.

April, talk to us a little bit about how you started this sanctuary and how it became a place where veterans are helping out and really getting a lot out of that.

APRIL STEWART, FOUNDER, GULF COAST PRIMATE SANCTUARY: Well, thank you for having me. You know, this place really has a heartbeat of its own. We initially started, when I got out of the military years and years ago, I had tremendous PTSD that was never dealt with properly, and that was partly my fault as well.

But after years went by, I discovered the isolation, the traumatic stress was, I was winding out of control. I was spiraling out of control. Animals helped, a huge help.

We started rescuing all types of animals, and one of the animals in particular were the primates. We noticed a lot of people with trauma issues, or maybe the kids were moving out. People would purchase monkeys as pets and then realize after the monkey became adolescent, they couldn't handle it anymore.

And we knew that the sanctuary need was huge, especially for a lot of the New World monkeys, the spider monkeys, things like that. One of the side benefits that really blossomed once we started bringing in volunteers was our veterans. I'll give you one example.

We had a veteran who was volunteering, completely isolated, wouldn't leave his house. He built a bond with one of our spider monkeys, and he would come see his little buddy every day. And he started utilizing his skills and refining his skills.

He started building self-confidence with himself. He actually restarted a business and is a productive member of society, but he still comes back and volunteers and helps us. When times get a little hard, he'll come back and hang out and just kind of unplug for a while.

KEILAR: That's amazing.

STEWART: We find that this is a sanctuary, yes, not only for them but for us.

KEILAR: And so, you can see it sort of helps break sort of a cycle that's headed in the wrong direction. And when I've talked to veterans in the past and they find something that helps with that, they talk often about finding peace. And I know that you've talked about it as if this is helping veterans finding peace.

What do they say about that, how it makes them feel?

STEWART: You know, when they come here and volunteer here, it's something really special. Not everybody gets to work with monkeys. And the monkeys that we get tend to have PTSD or some sort of trauma, either from the pet industry or the breeding industry.

I have two little monkeys right now. They were a couple in the breeding industry. Every baby they had was taken from them. So, they don't trust humans. So, it's a process for them to trust us.

But that really mirrors how veterans have to re-trust people too. We have to learn to re-trust after PTSD. So, us learning about the monkeys and the patience that we have to learn with them is really a mirror image of ourselves and how we have to give ourselves grace in healing with PTSD. And giving others and ourselves the ability and the time to heal and trust again. It's something really special here.

These are wild animals. They're not domesticated. And to be able to trust them enough where they can seem like a friend, and they're excited to see you, and you can care for them in a way that nobody else really can, it's remarkable. Unremarkable. It's magical.

KEILAR: Yes, it's amazing. It's amazing, April, and what you're doing. And taking something that worked for you and helping other people replicating that, it's really beautiful to watch ...

END