Return to Transcripts main page
Connect the World
World Food Programme: Gaza Hunger Levels Like " We've Never Seen Before"; Trump: Gazans Can't Get To Food Because Fences Are Up; CNN Examines Life-Threatening Hunger In Gaza; Samsung Wins Deal To Produce A16 Chips For Tesla. Aired 10-11a ET
Aired July 28, 2025 - 10:00:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[10:00:00]
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: In one of my very good moments, I turned it down, I didn't want to go to his island. Yes?
[10:00:05]
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Mr. President, from Gaza, next time you speak to Netanyahu, what will you ask him to do?
TRUMP: Say it more louder.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Next time you speak to Netanyahu, what will you ask him to do?
TRUMP: Well, I'm going to say, look, we're giving money and we're giving food, but we're over here and we're over in the United States. I think I
can speak for the prime minister. We're giving money and things. He's got to sort of like run it.
Well, I want them to make sure they get the food. I want to make sure they get the food, every ounce of food, I think you want the same thing.
KEIR STARMER, BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: Yes, absolutely.
TRUMP: Because that food is being delivered, or at least all of it.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Mr. President, you said you were going to essentially tariff (INAUDIBLE) but the world.
TRUMP: For the world.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What percent would that tariff be?
TRUMP: I would say it will be somewhere in the 15 to 20 percent range.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: So, maybe 15 or 20?
TRUMP: No, I said, you know, I sort of know, but I just want to be nice. I would say in the range of 15 to 20 percent, probably one of those two
numbers.
Aluminum, you're a pretty big aluminum maker.
STARMER: Yes, that's already covered in the deal that we've agreed. So, we're just doing the implementation of that.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But Mr. President, when will that come down from 25 percent to zero?
TRUMP: You mean, on the -- on the overall, on the world.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: On steel and aluminum from Britain? It's 25.
TRUMP: Well, we're going to know pretty soon. We're going to have it pretty soon. But you have -- you have no idea that these people are tough
negotiators, OK? But we're a big buyer of steel, but we're going to make our own steel. And we're going to make our own aluminum for the most part,
but we buy a lot of aluminum from right here, and a lot of steel too.
STARMER: Yes.
TRUMP: Who you with? Who are you with? Because you're asking such a nice question. Very good. They're lucky.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We have a lot of unhappy farmers in this country (INAUDIBLE) for raising it. We've had changes to inheritance tax between a
lot of farmers building and lose their farms when they die of their father. How important are farmers to the country?
TRUMP: You mean they're going to lose the farm because of estate taxes, OK? So, what I've done -- I know, they're cash for, their land rich and cash
poor. Lot of people, I've had that too. I've had -- sometimes I'm land rich and cash, sometimes I'm cash rich and land poor. I like it both ways, but
as they get older, I like the more conservative.
So, I did something that I don't know if you can do, but it was great. I love our farmers. As you know, in our tax bill, we have a clause that's
very important. We were losing a lot of farms to the banks because a mother -- a loving mother and father would die and left their farm to their
children, or their child, but their children, their family, and they loved their family, and they thought they were doing them a favor, but they had a
50 percent tax to pay so the land would get valued and at a high number, because some of the farms were valuable, but they didn't -- you know, they
couldn't quantify it, and they'd go out and borrow money to pay the estate tax, or the death tax, as it's called, and they'd over extend, and they'd
lose the farm, and they'd commit suicide in many cases.
STARMER: No, our levels are nowhere near 50 percent, they're not. We've just introduced where it's paid over many years.
TRUMP: Well, that's good.
STARMER: An extra two percent a year over 10 years. So, it's not at those levels by any stretch the imagination.
But the other thing that we've done, as you know, is make sure that we've got a pathway for farmers that actually increases their year on year
income, which is the most important thing. And in all of the deals that we do, we ensure that our farmers are the central focus for much of it,
particularly agriculture, including in the U.S. deal, because I don't think we can go on for years saying that it's acceptable for farmers to have a
year on year income which isn't sufficient. We've got to fix that problem. We can't simply live with that problem. So, it's a very different
situation.
TRUMP: Well, we ended the estate tax. There is no estate tax on farmers. So, when a -- when a parent leaves their farm, because, again, a lot of
these farms, they don't make a lot of money, but they -- it's a way of life, and they love their way of life. And they love that dirt, that dirt
is the most beautiful thing they've ever seen. They love it.
I mean, they're farmers. They love to it. They don't know how to do anything else, but they don't want to do anything else. I speak to farmers,
they say, would you like to live in my penthouse in Manhattan, I say it's beautiful. No, sir. I want this farm.
Now, what happens is, I mean, we were losing a lot of people to suicide. They'd buy -- they'd borrow money to pay the estate tax, and they were not
able to pay it, and some banks are ruthless, they wouldn't do anything, and they would end up committing suicide.
[10:05:08]
We have totally ended in the estate tax or those situations, so there's no estate tax, so when a parent leaves the farm to the kids, they don't have
to worry about their local, possibly unfriendly banker coming in and stealing their farms.
(CROSSTALK)
TRUMP: I don't like anything about it. They shouldn't be allowed in. Anybody illegally should not be allowed in the country. Thank you all very
much. Thank you.
BECKY ANDERSON, CNN ANCHOR: Well, you've been watching a hugely wide- ranging press event with the --
All right, you've been watching a hugely wide-ranging press event with the U.S. president and the British prime minister. Donald Trump has taken up
the vast majority of the airtime, though, Mr. Starmer did chime in on a few points, including on Gaza, on immigration, on trade, and how much he and
Mr. Trump get along and like each other. There is an awful lot to discuss.
Senior Politics Reporter Stephen Collinson, of course, following all of this closely. He joins us from Washington. We're also joined this hour by
Peter Westmacott, who has served as Britain's Ambassador to the U.S., France and Turkey. We also have Brett Bruen, a former U.S. National
Security Council official.
So, Stephen, let's start with you. Much foreign policy discussed here. Let's start with Gaza, Donald Trump apparently contradicting his Israeli
counterpart, Benjamin Netanyahu, saying there is real starvation, he said. Have a listen.
All right. Apologies. He said there is real starvation. You cannot fake that, he said. He also said it's difficult to deal with Hamas. What did you
make of Trump's comments on this issue, an issue that we cover, of course, on this show daily?
STEPHEN COLLINSON, CNN SENIOR POLITICS REPORTER: I think rhetorically, at least, that is a clear break, as you said, with Israeli Prime Minister
Netanyahu, who, as recently as overnight, I think, was saying that there is no starvation in Gaza. So, that is important. The question then becomes,
what is the U.S. actually going to do about it in practice?
The president said that the U.S. was going to set up food centers in Gaza. He didn't give us many details of exactly how that would work. One of the
issues there has been that this U.S.-Israeli backed private aid operation has proven very dangerous for Gazans who are showing up to get aid and then
seem to come into contact with the Israeli military, a number of them have been killed. Is it going to be something that is far more expansive than
that? How would that work, in terms of getting U.S. personnel even in there? Is that what he is talking about to set up these food centers? I
think a lot of it is very unclear.
But there does seem to be a hardening of Trump's position, whether that is because he is in Europe, he has been prevailed upon by the Prime Minister
who is under a great deal of domestic pressure on this issue. To change that, it isn't clear, but it does seem that the U.S., as looking at the
political implications here, the shifting of international pressure on Netanyahu, and in terms of words, at least, is joining that pressure.
ANDERSON: And Trump admitting that Israel can do a lot. Ambassador on food access, very specifically, as Stephen was pointing out there. Keir Starmer
chiming in on this. He mentioned that the British population isn't he used the term revolted by the images of starving, malnourished children out of
Gaza. Donald Trump has to assume that the U.S. public feels the same condemnation, certainly growing.
As you consider your experience in diplomacy, what do you make of Donald Trump's comments on what happens next? I wonder if you see any evidence
that he might exert real pressure on Benjamin Netanyahu, and as sort of as we consider a number of issues that were discussed, Gaza, Ukraine, trade,
and it will go on.
Just how you -- what your perception is of that kind of -- the kind of setting here, we've had more than an hour, it's got to be said. It's almost
like a stream of consciousness coming from the U.S. president, with the U.K. prime minister sitting at his side, chiming in at times when he
frankly felt it was absolutely necessary to put his personal and U.K. position, you know, out there.
[10:10:17]
PETER WESTMACOTT, FORMER BRITISH AMBASSADOR TO THE U.S.: Well, Becky, there's a whole lot of questions you've got there in that sentence. Let me
begin with your first question. I think what is striking is that
for weeks, we have seen, heard of casualties, injuries and stories from the hospitals of massive casualties in Gaza and none of that really has
changed, either the position that President Trump was saying or Netanyahu has changed.
What we have seen in the last few days has been these pictures of malnourished and starving children, and that does seem to have struck a
chord in President Trump's mind, much more so than the, if you like the theoretical, conceptual idea that lots of people are being killed by
Israeli military onslaughts on Gaza.
And I think that's also the case for the politics in the United Kingdom. So, what you've got -- and in France too. So, what you've got now is, I
think, a strong sense of outrage, as the prime minister put it, echoed by President Trump, and I think you are going to see now some real pressure
applied. We are beginning to see some reaction. We've seen that the Israeli government is talking about pause, some pauses for humanitarian purposes,
and trying harder to get the humanitarian relief in.
For a long time, they've said, oh, there's no obstacle. There isn't any famine, nobody's starving. We're not doing anything to block it. That
demonstrably wasn't true, and now they are changing their mind a bit. Thank goodness. It's a bit late, but I think it's been something to do with those
terrible pictures of starving children, which strikes a chord in everybody's heart. So, that's one point.
The second point, very briefly, if I may, is just to say that I think it is rather striking that there's the prime minister come to visit President
Trump in the United Kingdom, in Scotland, at his golf club.
Obviously, neither of them has got any other meeting they've got to rush off to, so their little chat in between two different working sessions has
gone on for a very long time. It's clear that the chemistry is good. It's clear that if Keir Starmer has got to say something which is slightly
different from what Trump has said, he feels free to do so without risking destroying a relationship.
And I think he is going to be trying very, very hard to get Donald Trump to go through with what he's hinting at now in terms of putting real pressure
on Vladimir Putin to stop the slaughter in Ukraine.
ANDERSON: Coming back to you, stand by. Brett, let me bring you in. On Russia, Trump apparently taking a hard line when it comes to these peace
talks that he wants on Ukraine, have a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I'm going to make a new deadline of about 1010, or 12 days from today. There's no reason in waiting. There's no reason in waiting. It's 50
days. I want to be generous, but we just don't see any progress being made.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANDERSON: This is like sort of negotiation, sort of, you know, in real time, isn't it? He's been moving deadlines, though, we know for months. Is
this a real shift in his stance do you believe on Ukraine?
BRETT BRUEN, FORMER U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL AND STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Well, it's interesting, Becky, because there is a through line in
Trump's shift, both on Gaza and on Ukraine, and it comes down to what we actually saw back in his first term with Bashar al-Assad and the attacks on
places like Aleppo that had significant casualties of children. That seems to impact Trump. It seems to change his calculus, because before, he's been
very dismissive about the civilian casualties, obviously, about the territorial integrity of Ukraine.
And yet, when we start to see some of these images, when, obviously, he's on the phone with Putin and Putin's, you know, whispering all of these
flattering things to him, and yet, then he turns on the television Fox News here in the U.S., and he sees those civilians, those children being pulled
out of apartment buildings, that is starting to have an impact.
And world leaders should pay attention to this. Certainly, you know, for the likes of Netanyahu and Putin, they've overplayed their hand, and Putin,
I think, is going to pay a price for it.
ANDERSON: It's fascinating. Ambassador Westmacott, President Trump met with protests, of course, when he arrived in Scotland. What is the public's
perception of him? Is it -- is it -- is it easy to describe?
[10:15:02]
WESTMACOTT: I don't think it's that straightforward. Of course, the politicians choose their words very carefully, and the British government
has to look after the national interest, and the national interest requires it to have a good, functional working relationship with President of the
United States.
Public opinion is something altogether different. You've seen a few demonstrations, but far fewer, in fact, than you saw during the state visit
that he paid to the United Kingdom during his first term.
So, I think there are some people who are saying they want to make their point, if you like, but it's not a widespread sense of why have we got to
have this man back here for a second, unprecedented state visit.
But public opinion is, generally speaking, I would say, not wildly pro, they've seen Donald Trump on the television saying a lot of things that
demonstrably are true or in the past have been insulting or disobliging to Canada, for example, of which the king is the head of state, as well as the
king of our own country, and a whole lot of other issues. And some of the things he said about immigration and about windmills. You know, people
think, what is all this?
But overall, I think there is a sense that, OK, the American people have chosen this guy for a second term. They knew what they were getting. This
is what's happened. It isn't what we would have wanted, and the destruction of global free trade is by no means a good thing for the United Kingdom
interests, even if we've got what looks like a deal that is less bad than it might be and less bad than other people have got. So, people are not
that pleased with it.
But I think on the whole, it's a sort of shrug and well, that's the decision of the American people and the rest of us just have to live with
it.
ANDERSON: Brett, I just wonder, when you watch Donald Trump sort of riffing on other politicians, you aren't even in the room, as it were, like Nigel
Farage, like the London Mayor Sadiq Khan. Farage given the thumbs up. Sadiq Khan, frankly, it feels is in Donald Trump's crosshairs, metaphorically
speaking, of course.
You know, how tough is it? You must have -- you know, you've witnessed many a president in the room with an international partner. As you witness this,
and you see Ursula von der Leyen in the room with him yesterday, they've all sort of trekked up to Turnberry to see Donald Trump. Just how tough is
this for the guy or woman sitting next to him as it were?
BRUEN: Yes, and let me start with the point the ambassador rightly made, which is just bizarre from a diplomatic protocol standpoint, that you have
Ursula von der Leyen, certainly that you have the prime minister of United Kingdom receiving the U.S. president at his private golf club in Scotland.
I mean, that just goes against not just, you know, from those diplomatic niceties, it's a power play. And obviously, you see that power play playing
out in a lot of these press availabilities. It was the case yesterday with Ursula von der Leyen, again today with Sir Keir Starmer.
You know, all of this is, you know, at the one hand, yes, it's him riffing about Nigel Farage, about the Mayor of London City Khan, but it's also very
strategic.
And I think what we saw, unfortunately, the case of the European Union, is that they played their hand, they negotiated very poorly. I think Keir
Starmer is offering a case study for other leaders in how can you ensure, yes, Trump is going to say some of these outrageous things, but you want to
co-opt that, and you want to coerce him into a more constructive context.
So, know when to engage, know when to avoid taking the bait. And that, I think, is what we saw just in the last hour.
ANDERSON: Yes, I know, fascinating. Look, to all of you, thank you. I've run out of time, and it's been a very, very busy hour and 10 minutes
listening in to Donald Trump. I very much appreciate you guys standing by, and we will touch base with you again. We've just discussed the foreign
policy involved in that discussion.
Up next, economic policy. Have we really just seen Donald Trump's biggest deal ever? Well, we will discuss that up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[10:21:22]
ANDERSON: On his visit to Scotland, Donald Trump struck a trade agreement with Europe that ends a month's long standoff. He called it the biggest
deal ever made, and it seems the European Commission president doesn't disagree. Have a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
URSULA VON DER LEYEN, PRESIDENT, EUROPEAN COMMISSION: t's a huge deal. It will bring stability. It will bring predictability. That's very important
for our businesses on both sides of the Atlantic.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANDERSON: Well, joining me now is CNN Business and Economics reporter Anna Cooban and Professor of International Economic Law, David Collins. Thank
you both for joining us.
Anna, let me start with you, the French Prime Minister writing on X, this is a dark day when an alliance of free peoples, brought together to affirm
their common values, defend their common interests resigns itself to submission. The French Prime Minister certainly does not see this as the
conclusion of a very successful deal clearly for the E.U., your sense?
ANNA COOBAN, CNN BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS REPORTER: Well, I think his sense is similar to many other European leaders, which is that this was
essentially an exercise in damage limitations.
So, yes, the 15 percent across the board tariff that Europe has now agreed to with Trump is much lower than the 30 percent they were fearing was going
to be implemented on Friday.
But let's remember, it is so much more than the 1.2 percent average tariff that was on E.U. goods to the U.S. prior to Trump really relaunching his
trade war at the start of his second term.
ANDERSON: Is this a fantastic deal then struck by Donald Trump and just terrible negotiation on the part of the E.U.? I mean, how do you --
DAVID COLLINS, AUTHOR OF "PRINCIPLES OF WORLD TRADE LAW": I think that's an accurate assessment. To me, this is a humiliating capitulation on behalf of
the E.U., and it really calls into question this amazing negotiating strength, this leverage that the E.U. is supposed to exert as a superpower
on world affairs, it really makes you wonder, what is it actually doing for its member states, if the U.K. can, on its own, get a better deal than this
giant economy?
So, I think it's a real failure on the part of the European Commission in negotiating here. And obviously it's better than not having any deal at
all, 30 percent or something. But this is really a wasted opportunity, I think, for the E.U. and absolutely a victor on behalf of the Trump
administration.
ANDERSON: Let's have a listen to how Donald Trump feels about the deal.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: You've done a fantastic job with regard to the trade deal. You know they wanted a trade deal here for years, many years, through many different
terms of different people, and you got it done. So, I want to congratulate you on that, and it's a great -- it's a great deal for both. It brings
unity. We didn't need unity, but we -- it brings us even closer together. I think it's good for both parties.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANDERSON: That's the U.S. then -- the U.S. president on the U.S.-U.K. deal. So, stepping back for the moment, this is a big week, of course. I mean, we
are -- you know, we've got this sort of Trump imposed deadline, once again, for countries to sign up to deals. Otherwise, tariffs are going to go sky
high on them. That is Friday, August the first. This is always going to be a big week.
What we've heard Sunday is this deal that you have described as capitulation, you have described as damage control. Others are describing a
submission by the E.U.
Step back for a moment, what does this all basically mean? Let's start with the United States. Where are we at with Donald Trump his trade deals and
the U.S. economy at this point?
COOBAN: Well, Donald Trump has said that there is now seven trade deals with America's trading partners, and obviously that's more than there were
a few weeks ago, but it's still significantly less than what there needs to be if we're talking about all of America's trading partnerships.
[10:25:05]
But this is part of Trump's real crusade to redress what he perceives to be imbalances, unfairness towards America, from U.S. trading partners.
Just to give you an example, the E.U., he has -- really has been the in Trump's crosshairs for quite a while now. He has referred to the E.U. as
being designed to screw the U.S., and he's called out tariffs, but also the non-tariff barriers that the E.U. places on the U.S., like a digital
service tax, for example.
So, the bigger picture is that Trump is still very much pursuing his longer-term goal of achieving what he perceives to be fairness for America.
ANDERSON: David, one of the things that Donald Trump brought up today was that he would deal with the pharmaceutical deals or the pharmaceutical
trade or the pharmaceutical tariffs soon.
Few days ago, he threatened levies as high as 200 percent on imports in that industry. Now, I just want to get you want to get you some facts here.
CNN reports that this threat is exposing China's tight grip on that industry.
For example, China controls 80 percent of the raw materials required to produce amoxicillin, a relative of penicillin. Of course, in this new
chapter in the global trade war. It does feel as if -- you know, and it's where we started, I guess, with the Trump administration, that this is
about China, ultimately. What did you make -- what do you make of his sort of fight against the pharmaceutical industry at this point?
COLLINS: Well, I think it's just another tool in his arsenal to inflict damage on China with a way to securing a deal from them. We know right now
in Stockholm, that's what's going on.
And the more pressure he can place on these various strategic industries like pharmaceuticals, the more likely is to secure the deal that he wants
to get from China, which I suspect will be forthcoming, probably not in the next couple of days, I suspect there's likely going to be an extension on
that, probably until October.
But he's just flagged pharmaceuticals as yet another pressure point, and why not? If that helps him secure a tariff reduction or the intellectual
property --
ANDERSON: Very briefly, do any of these deals suit the WTO or are these deals are ultimately flouting what are the multilateral rules that
certainly you and I, not you have grown up with over the years? I mean, where are we?
COLLINS: Well, I'm happy that you asked that. I don't often get asked that.
No, I think you're exactly right. This is probably not WTO compliant, which is surprising from the part of the E.U., because they're understood as
major supporters of the WTO framework, and the U.S., not so much.
This is a violation of most favored nation. If you give one country a preferential tariff or preferential treatment, then you've breached the
most favored nation obligation under the GAT, unless it's a formal free trade agreement. And this doesn't, they're not. These are, these are,
"Deals," which is a phrase that we're all throwing around. But they're not formal free trade agreements, as in treaties.
Now, they might become that, but I don't see any indication that that's going to happen for this -- for obvious reasons, with this -- with the
question of the E.U., you have to get all of the E.U. member states because of these mix of the issues, there's no way there's going to be U.S.-E.U.
free trade agreement the next couple of years.
And I would add, the U.K.-U.S. free trade agreement is probably also non- WTO compliant. But that doesn't mean that they're not good for the economy, but it's sort of -- it's troubling for the multilateral framework. Let's
put it that way.
ANDERSON: I'm glad you brought that up, because my last question really to you, Anna, is, you know, what does this all mean for U.S., European, U.K.
consumers at the end of the day?
COOBAN: Well, higher tariffs tend to mean, Becky, higher prices for the end consumer. So, there are import taxes. So, when you raise the price to
import intermediate materials to make goods, and then manufacturers will usually pass on that cost to the end consumer.
So, many critics within the U.S., the states around tariffs, have said that this is essentially raising taxes on Americans and Europeans.
ANDERSON: Thank you both.
COLLINS: Thank you.
ANDERSON: David was just mentioning, the U.S. turning its attention back to China, officials from Beijing and Washington meeting today in the Swedish
capital of Stockholm for what is their third round of talks in as many months.
U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent says it should result in an extension of their trade truce, currently due to expire on August the 12th.
Without a deal, tariffs could snap back to levels of more than 100 percent on goods moving in both directions.
CNN's Marc Stewart is in Beijing keeping a keen eye on what is going on. I wonder whether China comes into this with some strength when it comes to
negotiating with U.S. And if so, can you explain how.
[10:30:01]
MARC STEWART, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: I think so, Becky. I think, China really has two things going for it as it enters these talks in
Stockholm.
Number one, rare earth minerals, which you alluded to. These are substances that American families and American companies depend on for things like
lights, for electronics, for E.V.s. China has a hold on them, Americans need them. That's a big point of strength for China.
And then, the other thing that China has in its favor is the economy. For the moment, we are seeing better than expected results, now, of course,
economists will give any economic data from China a second look. But for the moment, the readings that we are seeing on GDP are better than
expected. So, China is going to use that as a point of strength.
As you mentioned, the tariffs that the U.S. has imposed on China are very high. They could go up to well over 100 percent or around that. Right now,
they are at around 55 percent. Expect China to use these different tools to fight to lower the tariffs to a more reasonable level.
And as you mentioned, this is yet another round of talks we have seen -- this is now the third round of talks. Sometimes, they result in substance,
but in the aftermath, in many cases, we have seen strife. And as one analyst told me, if we look at where things stand between these two
economic superpowers, it's really Becky, a fragile cease fire.
ANDERSON: Fascinating. Good to have you, Marc, as ever.
You are watching connect well with me, Becky Anderson, live from London today.
Still ahead, why a top U.N. official saying the next few days are critical in getting food to starving Palestinians in Gaza.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ANDERSON: You are watching CONNECT THE WORLD with me, Becky Anderson, out of London today, where the time is just after half past three.
Here are your headlines this hour: The U.S. president making announcements on multiple subjects in a meeting with the British Prime Minister Keir
Starmer. Donald Trump, revealed that the U.S. plans to step up what he called food centers in Gaza to address an ongoing starvation crisis. He
also says he is shortening a deadline that he gave to the Russian president to agree to a peace deal with Ukraine.
Well, officials from China and the United States are meeting in Sweden today for another round of trade talks. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott
Bessent says that the negotiations will likely see an extension of the current tariff truce.
[10:34:59]
The two sides are facing a deadline of August the 12th to reach an accord or seat duties on trade in both directions, snap back to more than 100
percent.
The United Nations aid chief says the next few days will be make or break for getting aid to starving civilians in Gaza. Israel's military announced
a daytime tactical pause to allow aid in. But Thom Fletcher says humanitarian workers face massive security constraints and looting.
Well, another 14 people are dead from hunger in Gaza over the past 24 hours. This is the word from health officials there as humanitarian workers
try to get desperately needed food into the besieged enclave. The Palestinian health ministry now says 147 people have died in recent weeks
from malnutrition, 88 of those, kids.
A regional director of the World Food Program says Gaza is now experiencing unprecedented levels of food security.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SAMER ABDELJABER, REGIONAL DIRECTOR, WORLD FOOD PROGRAMME: The situation is really disappointing and depressing for us, because we are seeing levels of
food insecurity that we've never seen before. And like you said, it's famine-like conditions, 470,000 people at risk, and unfortunately, with the
reports that we are seeing that people are dying because of the lack of food.
Food is available, we are able to scale up. We have 170,000 metric tons of food across the region. Unfortunately, with the humanitarian pose, which is
very positive, we are hoping that it will facilitate a faster flow of aid into Gaza. But only two crossings have been opened, and the bureaucratic
impediments are still pretty high.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANDERSON: Well, Nic Robertson is with us this hour. Nic, you were listening to President Trump, speaking for about an hour and 15 minutes has to be
said alongside Keir Starmer at Turnberry in Scotland. He rebutted a bit Benjamin Netanyahu's false claim that there is no starvation in Gaza.
Have a listen very specifically to what the U.S. president said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: And we're going to set up food centers and where the people can walk in and no boundaries. We're not
going to have fences. And, you know, they can't -- they see the food from 30, you would say, yards away, and they see the food. It's all there, but
nobody's at it because there are fences set up that nobody can even get it. It's crazy what's going on over there?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANDERSON: President Trump talking there about food centers needing to be set up. Look, there is two things here. Firstly, he very specifically
talked about the starvation, and he said, you can't fake that. Your response (INAUDIBLE)?
NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: He did. He was --
Yes, sure. Look, he was asked a very specific question. Do you believe what Prime Minister Netanyahu is saying that there is no starvation? And he said
it's very difficult because of what you see on television, those images, the children. And as you say that, you know, he said you can't fake that
stuff.
So, Donald Trump is clearly indicating is not taken in by what Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is saying. And I think, this -- the -- what the
president went on to say about the new distribution centers is illuminating again of conversations that will have been had between the White House and
between Prime Minister Netanyahu and his government, because they are changing up the way that aid is distributed on the ground.
The criticism, the deaths, the 14 people killed today, the more than 10 killed yesterday, and so, on and so forth. More than a thousand since the
Gaza humanitarian foundation, the U.S. Israeli-backed group that distributes aid through these very narrow, wired channels, where tensions
are high, people are closer to aid.
Everything President Trump was describing there. He says they are going to undo, they are going to get rid of it. So, is he indicating here that the
Gaza humanitarian foundation will no longer run those places? He is certainly indicating that he is dissatisfied with the way that they are
running, and they are going to be done in a different way.
So, I think we're seeing potentially a marginalization of that -- of that program, and an increase, if it actually happens, over time, of the U.N.
aid coming in.
And I think there were other areas where President Trump spoke about what's happening in Gaza and gave illuminating answers to some of the things that
we are looking for questions about -- answers about, rather, specifically, hostages.
ANDERSON: Yes, what did he say about the hostages?
ROBERTSON: Yes. He seemed, again, this was an area where you got the sense that he was sort of -- he was -- he was publicly weighing up two ways to do
it.
He said, you know, he's asked the question, what do you do about the hostages?
[10:40:00]
And he said the best way to do it is through negotiations and talks. And then, he spoke about, you know, there is only 20 living hostages left.
Then, he said -- as he said many times, I always said that that's going to be the moment that Hamas wants to hold on to them, that getting the rest of
hostages out alive is going to be really tough thing. And then, he started postulating this idea about, you could go in and be ruthless and violent,
he said, to try to get those hostages out, but indicated that you wouldn't get them all out.
And in the context of that, he said, we know where the hostages are. Now, it's all always sort of been roughly understood that, perhaps, the IDF do
know where they are, are afraid to go because of reaction and retribution against those hostages.
But Trump's kind of putting in the public domain here what sounds like conversations that have been had over the decisions to take, but clearly,
he is preferring the negotiations a part here. And it's not clear that there is momentum in that at the moment.
ANDERSON: it's good to have you, Nic. Thank you.
We just heard a short time ago, the leaders of the U.S. and Britain talk about the devastating images coming out of Gaza. Palestinians and children
in particular, starving to death as they endure days on end without food.
Well, CNN's chief medical correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta, looks at the devastating impact of food deprivation. And I have to warn you, his report
has some disturbing images.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DR. NICK MAYNARD, SURGEON, MEDICAL AID FOR PALESTINIANS: The expression, skin and bones, doesn't do it justice that every single rib visible.
DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: That's Dr Nick Maynard. He is a surgeon volunteering in a hospital in southern Gaza.
His patients are among the 2 million residents of the Gaza Strip, now in the midst of a hunger crisis.
According to the U.N.'s World Food Programme, nearly 100,000 women and children alone are suffering from severe, acute malnutrition. That is
actually a specific medical diagnosis, and while it may seem obvious, it occurs when people simply can't get enough energy in the form of calories.
And oftentimes, not enough of the right nutrients inside the few calories they do receive.
Now, in some people, severe malnutrition can look like this, a condition known as marasmus. It is distinctive and it is frightening. You can
actually trace the skeletal outline of an individual because of the significant loss of muscle and fat.
In others, particularly in children, they can present as a condition known as kwashiorkor. That can occur when there is severe protein deficiency in a
person's diet. In those cases, the legs and even the abdomen will actually swell, because the body starts to desperately retain fluids.
According to the U.N.'s World Food Programme, as things stand now, a third of Gaza's population hasn't eaten anything at all for days in a row.
And we know when that happens, the body will begin foraging through its own energy stores, carbohydrates, fats, and proteins. Then, the body's
metabolism will swell, and it will begin to have a hard time regulating temperature. The kidneys and immune system will weaken, making them
susceptible to infections.
Eventually, the body will fully start to turn on itself, consuming muscle, anything to try and sustain itself, major organs shut down and the heart
stops.
This 41-year-old man, Muhammad Al-Hassan (PH), is one of at least 45 people who've died of malnutrition this week alone.
During this conflict with Israel, the Palestinian health ministry said 80 percent of those who have died from malnutrition were children.
You know, this crisis reminds me of the famine in Somalia in 2011. It was among the most difficult and challenging reporting assignments I have ever
covered. Brutal to watch people die for lack of basic needs and also come to grips with the fact that mass starvation is too often the cause of human
politics.
TEDROS ADHANOM GHEBREYESUS, DIRECTOR-GENERAL, WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION: I don't know what you would call it other than mass starvation, and it's man-
made and that's very clear.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANDERSON: You now see WHO chief in a report by CNN's chief medical correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta. We will closely monitor the situation,
continue to do that, we have done for months in Gaza and bring you the latest developments during what is this critical week for the people there,
we will be right back in.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[10:46:33]
ANDERSON: And the U.S. President Donald Trump is calling for some major American T.V. networks to be stripped of their broadcast licenses.
Important to note, national networks are not licensed, though, local stations are, are. In a social media post over the weekend, Mr. Trump
accused the networks of being political pawns of the Democratic Party.
Now, this comes as the president and his allies continue to attack news outlets that he views as unfavorable to him.
Well, CNN's chief media analyst Brian Stelter joins us now live. And Brian, good to have you.
Besides that fact that national networks actually are not licensed, the FCC hasn't denied any license renewal in decades. So, what do you -- what
should we make of Donald Trump's threats at this point?
BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST: Right. Historically, FCC licensing of local T.V. stations has been a non-partisan affair.
Frankly, it's been a boring topic, Becky. I've never really bothered to cover it in the past, because licenses have just been renewed almost
automatically. It's been like a rubber stamp process. And maybe there are pros and cons to that, but there is never been a debate about taking
stations off the air because an American president just personally doesn't like them, or claims of their bias in some way. This is completely
unchartered territory.
Whether Trump follows through or not, of course, is always an open question. But you might look at his post on Truth Social as a form of
public pressure for his own agency appointees. In this case, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr, who was a Trump loyalist, doesn't necessarily need to read
Trump's Truth Social posts to know what President Trump wants.
He does talk to the President on a regular basis, and he also goes on Fox News to impress President Trump. Whether there is actual an attempt to move
against these licenses, you know, again, remains to be seen. It would be very difficult. It would take years. It would end up being tied up in the
courts. The only x factor here, Becky, is whether Congress would take action to change the licensing process, to make it easier for the president
and his agency appointees to actually revoke these licenses.
And of course, all of it matters because it's in the context of Trump filing lawsuits against media outlets --
(CROSSTALK)
ANDERSON: Yes.
STELTER: getting settlements from CBS's parent Paramount earlier this month, it does create this, this chilling effect more broadly, against
media coverage.
ANDERSON: And this is, of course, a federal agency, the FCC, and it is supposed to be independent.
I spoke with Tom Wheeler, the former chairman of the FCC. Have a listen to what he told me about the agency.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TOM WHEELER, FORMER CHAIRMAN, UNITED STATES FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION: There is the regulatory power of an agency that is supposed to
be independent and supposed to be making its decisions in the public interest, exercising that regulatory power in what appears to be designed
to benefit Donald Trump and the MAGA political agenda.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANDERSON: And this was in reference to that Paramount sky dance merger that you referenced. I did that interview with Tom before that merger was proved
by the FCC just days after the most recent sort of saga that being the dropping of the Stephen Colbert show. What do you make of Tom Wheeler's
comments there?
STELTER: Yes. And all of this comes as a form of repetition by President Trump.
[10:50:03]
He has said over and over again that he wants station licenses to be revoked. He has said this repeatedly and that softens the ground for more
autocratic actions in the future. When I see Trump talking about station licenses or his other assaults on the media, I think about the Hungary
model, Victor Orban's model in Hungary.
When I've spoken to experts who lived through it, who lived through the democratic backsliding in Hungary, they say many of the steps taken there
are reminiscent of what Trump is talking about now. Most of what Trump is doing is through words, not actions, but he has successfully defunded
public broadcasting in the U.S., and he has achieved these settlements with a couple of big media companies in the U.S., and that is related to the
Hungary model, insofar as you weaken the independent media sources, you empower your supporters in the media a propaganda -- propagandistic, more
pliant press, and you try to create a sense of, what one expert said to me are autocratic sticks and carrots, you know, punishing those that fall out
of line and using your carrots to keep others in line. Trump's words, his rhetoric around station licenses, are very much in keeping with that
autocratic approach toward the media.
ANDERSON: It's fascinating. It's good to have you, Brian. Thank you very much indeed. Brian Stelter, in the house.
Coming up, Samsung scores a major win with the U.S. automaker, Tesla. Details on that is after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ANDERSON: Well, Tesla has signed a deal with Samsung worth $16.5 billion. The South Korean company will supply -- what will it supply? It will supply
the next generation of semiconductors to power Tesla's self-driving technology under the eight-year agreement. Shares of Samsung surged nearly
seven percent after Elon Musk made that announcement.
CNN tech editor, Lisa Eadicicco joins me now. A major win for Samsung. Walk us through the details. It certainly feels like that.
LISA EADICICCO, CNN BUSINESS TECH EDITOR: Yes, absolutely.
So, this is a really big deal for Samsung. So, as part of the deal, as you mentioned, Samsung will be producing the A16 chip for Tesla, which is
really important these chips -- these A.I. chips power some of the self- driving car features in Tesla's vehicles. And this is a big deal because Samsung is kind of perceived to be a little bit behind in the race for A.I.
chips.
Now, there are two big markets that Samsung plays in here that are relevant to that conversation. One of them is contract chip manufacturing, which is
in this case, what's happening with Tesla here that is going to be producing these chips for Tesla, and its biggest rival in that space is
TSMC, which actually produces the A15 chip for Tesla currently.
Now, this is a really big deal that Samsung is kind of getting Tesla as a major customer here, especially in this new factory that will be opening up
in Texas. There have been media reports that Samsung has actually delayed the opening of that facility because it doesn't have enough customers.
There was another report from Reuters that also said that Samsung had delayed the delivery of some manufacturing equipment to that facility for
similar reasons. So, this could be a really big win here. Again, this is something that Samsung is perceived to be behind the competition.
For context, a report from TrendForce, which is a market research firm, indicates that Samsung only has about eight percent of that market for chip
manufacturing, whereas, TSMC has about 67 percent.
ANDERSON: All right. Where does this leave Tesla? Where is it headed? What does this deal say about that company going forward?
[10:55:01]
EADICICCO: Yes. So, the deal -- we don't have too many details on the deal itself yet, but what this really says is that Tesla does see the future of
the company as being beyond cars. It's trying to kind of shift itself into an A.I. company and a robotics company. This message also came through loud
and clear on Tesla's earnings last week. There is a lot of discussion around the expansion of self-driving cars and the robotic taxi program.
So, I think this is just kind of another sign that things are moving in that direction, and chips like these are going to be critical to those
efforts moving forward.
ANDERSON: And it's good to have you. Thank you very much indeed. And that is it for CONNECT WORLD.
From the team working with me this week in London and those in Abu Dhabi, and working with us around the world. It is a full-on global effort. Stay
with CNN. "ONE WORLD" is up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
END
