♪♪ >>> HELLO AND WELCOME TO "AMANPOUR & COMPANY."

HERE'S WHAT'S COMING UP.

>> AS RUSSIA BOMBARDS SOUTHERN UKRAINE I AM JOINED BY ACTIVIST DARIA KALENIUK.

WE DISCUSS THE REALITY OF DAILY LIFE AND I ASK HER IF CREEK UP CORRUPTION COULD UNLOCK NATO MEMBERSHIP FOR UKRAINE.

>>> AND -- EXCITEMENT ABOUNDS AT AN HISTORIC WOMEN'S WORLD CUP.

WHILE NATIONS BEGIN BATTLING IT OUT ON THE PITCH, THE LATE ET CETERA WITH TOP SPORTS JOURNALIST CHRISTINE BRENNAN.

>> ALSO, U.S./CHINA RELATIONS REACH A CROSSROADS AS AMERICA'S ELDER STATESMAN HENRY KISSINGER MEETS WITH CHINESE PRESIDENT XU XI, I TALK TO AUTHOR AND CHINA EXPERT KEYU JIN ABOUT WHAT LIES AHEAD.

>>> THEN -- >> WE ARE IN A RACE AGAINST THE NAZIS.

>> AND I KNOW WHAT IT MEANS.

THE NAZIS HAVE A BOMB.

>> AS A NEW FILM ABOUT THE FATHER OF THE ATOMIC BOMBS EXPLODES IN CINEMAS, WALTER ISAACSON TALKS TO AUTHOR KAI BIRD WHOSE BOOK ON ROBERT OPPENHEIMER INSPIRED THE MOVIE.

>>> "AMANPOUR & COMPANY" IS MADE POSSIBLE BY -- CANDACE KING WEIR.

THE FAMILY FOUNDATION OF LAYLA AND NIKKI STRAUSS.

JIM ATWOOD AND LESLIE WILLIAMS.

MARK J. BLECHNER.

SETON J. MELVIN.

CHARLES ROSENBLUM.

CUE AND PATRICIA YUEN, COMMITTED TO BRIDGING CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN OUR COMMUNITIES.

BARBARA HOPE ZUCKERBERG.

WE TRY TO LIVE IN THE MOMENT, TO NOT MISS WHAT'S RIGHT IN FRONT OF US.

AT MUTUAL OF AMERICA, WE BELIEVE TAKING CARE OF TOMORROW CAN HELP YOU MAKE THE MOST OF TODAY.

MUTUAL OF AMERICA FINANCIAL GROUP, RETIREMENT SERVICES AND INVESTMENTS.

ADDITIONAL SUPPORT PROVIDED BY THESE FUNDERS AND BY CONTRIBUTIONS TO YOUR PBS STATION FROM VIEWERS LIKE YOU.

THANK YOU.

>>> WELCOME TO THE PROGRAM.

I'M BIANNA GOLODRYGA IN NEW YORK SITTING IN FOR CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR.

THE UKRAINIAN PORT CITY OF ODESA HAS FACED ITS THIRD CONSECUTIVE NIGHT OF RUSSIAN STRIKES.

THIS BOMBARDMENT OF ODESA COMES AFTER RUSSIA LEFT THE BLACK SEA GRAIN DEAL THAT ALLOWED UKRAINE TO EXPORT FOODSTUFFS AMID THE WAR.

TOP EU OFFICIAL JOSEP BORNELL IS ACCUSING MOSCOW OF CAUSING A GLOBAL FOOD CRISIS AND ATTACKING GRAIN STORAGE FACILITIES IN ODESA.

THESE KINDS YOU HAVE ATTACKS PUNCTUATE LIFE FOR MY FIRST GUEST.

THE JOURNALIST AND ACTIVIST DARIA KALENIUK.

THE HEAD OF THE ANTI-CORRUPTION ACTION CENTER IN KYIV.

SHE HAS BEEN HOLDING HER GOVERNMENT AND OTHERS TO ACCOUNT DURING THE WAR.

JUST LISTEN TO HER QUESTIONING OF U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR JAKE SULLIVAN WHEN SHE PRESSED HIM ON NATO MEMBERSHIP FOR UKRAINE.

>> JAKE, WHAT SHOULD I TELL MY SON THAT PRESIDENT BIDEN AND NATO DIDN'T INVITE UKRAINE TO NATO BECAUSE HE IS AFRAID OF RUSSIA, AFRAID OF RUSSIA LOSING, AFRAID OF UKRAINE WINNING, OR THE COMMUNICATIONS WITH KREMLIN, WHICH IS TERRORIST ORGANIZATION, TO REACH THE DEAL, SHOULD I PREPARE MY SON TO BE A SOLDIER AND FIGHT RUSSIANS WHEN HE WILL BE 18 YEARS IN SEVEN YEARS?

THANK YOU, JAKE.

[ APPLAUSE ] >> SO, FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU FOR THE WORK THAT YOU DO EVERY DAY TO TRY TO ADVANCE UKRAINE'S DEMOCRACY, DEEPEN IT, TO TRY TO DEAL WITH THE CHALLENGE OF CORRUPTION, WHICH CONTINUES TO EXIST AND I KNOW THAT YOU HAVE BEEN A BIG CHAMPION FOR THAT.

AND THAT I WOULD SAY TO YOUR SON AND TO EVERYONE IN UKRAINE IS, YOU KNOW, THE REST OF THE WORLD IS IN AWE OF THE BRAVERY AND COURAGE OF EVERY UKRAINIAN CITIZEN WHO IS STANDING UP IN THE FACE OF RUSSIA'S BRUTAL WAR, BRUTAL AGGRESSION.

I THINK THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IN THIS RESPECT IS FOR US TO ABLE TO HAVE THE KIND OF HONESTY THAT WAS INHERIT IN YOUR QUESTION, BUT ALSO FOR US TO MAKE SURE THAT IN HAVING THAT HONESTY, CERTAIN INSINUATIONS OR IMPLICATIONS INHERENT IN YOUR QUESTION, WHICH ARE NOT FOUNDED GERKTS CHECKED AT THE DOOR SO WE CAN TALK TO ONE ANOTHER IN GOODWILL, IN GOOD FAITH, AND, YOU KNOW, THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF CONSPIRACY THEORIZING THAT SIMPLY IS NOT BASED ON ANY REALITY WHATSOEVER, AND ALSO I WOULD JUST SAY THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HAVE SOUGHT IN WATCHING AND WANTING TO STAND IN SOLIDARITY WITH THE BRAVE AND COURAGEOUS PEOPLE OF UKRAINE TO STEP UP AND DELIVER, AND I THINK THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DO DESERVE A DEGREE OF GRATITUDE.

>> AND DARIA KALENIUK JOINS ME NOW FROM KYIV.

GOOD TO SEE YOU.

IT WAS CLEAR THAT YOU WERE EXASPERATED AND FRUSTRATED IN THAT QUESTIONING THERE AND I AM JUST CURIOUS IF YOU CAN EXPLAIN FOR OUR VIEWERS OVER A YEAR INTO THIS WAR NOW, WHAT ULTIMATELY DROVE YOU TO ASK JAKE THAT QUESTION GIVEN WHAT YOU HAVE BEEN ENDURING IN UKRAINE FOR ALL THIS TIME NOW?

>> WELL, I AM ADVOCATING FOR SUPPORT FOR UKRAINIAN VICTORY FOR MORE THAN A YEAR, AND WE WERE TALKING ABOUT TANKS, ABOUT LONG-RANGE MUNITIONS, FIGHTER JETS.

NOW WE ARE TALKING ABOUT NATO.

AND EVERY TIME WE ARE STARTING TO TALK ABOUT SPECIFIC WEAPONS OR SPECIFIC DECISIONS OF VARIOUS ADMINISTRATIONS ACROSS THE WORLD, PARTICULARLY IN THE U.S., ESPECIALLY IN THE U.S., FIRST, THERE IS NO, THEN HESITATION, THEN THERE IS THE FINAL DECISION, WHICH IS ACTUALLY BROADLY SUPPORTED BY THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

HOWEVER, THIS DELAY WITH THE FINAL DECISIONS OF SUPPORTING COMMITMENT FOR UKRAINIAN VICTORY MEANS THAT SOMEBODY WILL LOSE HIS OR HER LIFE.

IT MEANS THAT MORE AND MORE UKRAINIAN KIDS WILL BE SLEEPING IN CORRIDORS LIKE MY SONS ARE DOING.

MEANS THAT MORE AND MORE PEOPLE IN THE WORLD WILL BE STRUGGLING BECAUSE OF THE HUNGER AS RUSSIA JUST BLOCKED UKRAINIAN BLACK SEA PORTS, MILITARILY AND IS NOT ALLOWING OUR FARMERS TO TRADE WITH THE WORLD WITH OUR GRAIN AND TO FEED THE PEOPLE ACROSS THE GLOBE.

SO, THEREFORE, I AM FRUSTRATED WITH THIS HESITATION, WITH THIS APPROACH, NONPROVOKETIVE APPROACH, AND I BELIEVE THAT YOU SHOW WEAKNESS TO RUSSIA, IT IS PROVOKING.

IF YOU SHOW HESITATION, IT IS PROVOKING.

THIS IS THE WAY HOW RUSSIA BEHAVES AND WILL LEARN FOR THE KIDS EXACTLY THAT.

>> WE HEARD FROM JAKE OFFERING SUCHL THINK FOR YOUR CHILDREN AND, OBVIOUSLY, THE SITUATION THAT THE COUNTRY HAS BEEN PUT IN NOW GIVEN THIS UNPROVOKED WAR FROM RUSSIA AND THE WORK THAT YOU ARE DOING TO FIGHT CORRUPTION.

WE WILL GET TO THAT IN A SECOND.

I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO RESPOND TO WHAT HE ENDED SAYING, AND THAT IS THAT THE U.S.

DESERVES SOME GRATITUDE FOR ALL OF THE HELP AND AID THAT IT HAS PROVIDED TO UKRAINE BECAUSE YOU KNOW THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY FOLLOWED BY SIMILAR WORDS FROM THE BRITISH DEFENSE SECRETARY WHO SAID THAT THE UK AND ALLIES SHOULD NOT BE TREATED IN HIS WORDS LIKE AN AMAZON.

>> YOU KNOW, UKRAINIAN PEOPLE ARE SUPER GRATEFUL TO EVERY NATION, EVERY PEOPLE WHO IS SUPPORTING US WITH, YOU KNOW, IN THE SMALL, YOU KNOW, WAY OF WEAPONS OR EVEN HUMANITARIAN AID.

ESPECIALLY WE ARE IN HUGE GRATITUDE TO AMERICAN PEOPLE BECAUSE AMERICANS ARE PROVIDING THE LARGEST PART OF THE SUPPORT.

BUT STILL, YOU KNOW, WE FEEL THAT AMERICAN PEOPLE WOULD SUPPORT MORE SUPPORT FOR UKRAINIAN PEOPLE, AND PARTICULARLY I CAN'T UNDERSTAND WHY THERE IS A DELAY WITH SENDING FIGHTER JETS TO UKRAINE AS TO COULD STOP SUFFERING FOR MANY UKRAINIANS AND WOULD HELP TO UNBLOCK THE BLACK SEA PORTS.

AND WE ARE TALKING ABOUT FIGHTER JETS FOR MORE THAN A YEAR AND STILL THERE IS HESITANCY FROM THE ADMINISTRATION.

AND AS FOR THE GRATITUDE AND EXPRESSING THE GRATITUDE, I DIFFERENTIATE PEOPLE OF VARIOUS NATIONS AND THEIR ADMINISTRATION.

SO WE ARE VERY THANKFUL TO THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES AND PEOPLE OF THE UK, BUT WE THINK THAT ADMINISTRATION, PARTICULARLY IN THE U.S., COULD BE MUCH MORE DECISIVE, AND ONE OF THE REASONS WHY IS BECAUSE UKRAINE SIMPLY DECIDED TO GIVE UP OUR NUCLEAR WEAPONS, WHICH WE HAD AND IT WAS THE SECOND LARGEST NUCLEAR ARSENAL IN THE WORLD IN 1994, IN EXCHANGE FOR SECURITY ASSURANCES FROM THIS PARTICULAR TWO NATION, FROM THE U.S. AND FROM THE UK, AND BY THE WAY, FROM RUSSIA.

SO RUSSIA INVADED US WITH A GENERAL SIDE WAR.

EVERY NIGHT THEY ARE TERRORIZING OUR CIVILIANS AND KILLING SOMEBODY.

THEY KIDNAPPED HUNDREDS, THOUSANDS OF OUR KIDS.

I CAN'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY ARE DOING WITH OUR KIDS, ARE THEY ALIVE OR NOT.

AND U.S. AND UK ARE EXPECTED GRATITUDE FROM UKRAINE.

WE ARE EXTREME WILL I GRATEFUL.

WE TRY TOKES PLAIN TO THE WORLD, AND PARTICULARLY TO THE LEADERS.

FREE WORLD, THAT WHILE YOU ARE HESITATING, WE ARE DYING.

WHAT IS LEFT FOR US?

SIMPLY TO BE PATIENT, STRATEGICALLY PATIENT AND TO DIE?

THAT'S THE OPEN QUESTION.

>> UKRAINE WALKED AWAY WITH CONTINUED SECURITY GUARANTEES NOT ONLY FROM NATO LEADERS BUT FROM G7 LEADERS AS WELL.

AS YOU KNOW, UKRAINE DID NOT WALK AWAY WITH AN INVITATION OR TIMELINE TO JOIN THE ALLIANCE.

SHORTLY LATER, YOU TWEETED A PICTURE OF THE SONS THAT YOU MENTIONED AND HERE IS WHAT YOU SAID.

YOU SAID MY SONS ARE SLEEPING IN THE OR DOR DURING NIGHT AIR RAIDS IN KYIV.

I WILL TELL THEM TO BE, QUOTE, STRATEGICALLY PATIENT WHEN ARRIVING HOME TOMORROW AFTER NATO SUMMIT.

TELL ME, HOW MANY UKRAINIANS DO YOU SPEAK FOR WHEN YOU EXPRESS SENTIMENT LIKE THAT?

>> I AM HEARING IT FROM EVERYBODY.

IT WAS NOT UNNOTICED AMONG UKRAINIAN AUDIENCE AND I RECEIVE SO MANY FEEDBACK FROM PEOPLE I KNOW AND PEOPLE I DON'T KNOW THAT THANK YOU FOR ASKING THIS.

THAT IT IS IN THE MINDS OF MILLIONS OF UKRAINIANS.

AND PARTICULARLY IT IS IN THE MINDS OF THE PARENTS OF UKRAINIAN PARENTS HOW TO GROW KIDS IN THE SITUATION OF THE CONSTANT AIR RAIDS, OF THE CONSTANT ATTACKS AND THE CONSTANT TERROR COMING FROM RUSSIA.

BUT IMPORTANT THING WHICH I WANT TO MENTION IS THAT I DON'T FEEL THAT WE WALKED AWAY FROM NATO SUMMIT WITH SECURITY GUARANTEES.

THE ONLY SECURITY GUARANTEE WHICH IS REAL GUARANTEE WHICH MATTERS SOMETHING IS INVITATION TO NATO AND THE CLEAR PATH WITH CLEAR DEADLINES FOR UKRAINE NATO MEMBERSHIP.

WE ALREADY HAD SECURITY ASSURANCES.

WE SAW THESE, BUT THEN EVERYBODY TOLD US THE U.S. AND UK TOLD US THAT IN EXCHANGE FOR US GIVING UP NUCLEAR WEAPONS THAT THERE ARE NO GUARANTEES, WE ARE NOT 'BLIGED TO DO ANYTHING, JUST A PIECE OF PAPER.

SO, GUYS, SURVIVE.

WE WILL SEND YOU SOME WEAPONS.

AND NOW WE HAVE GOT COMMITMENTS FROM VARIOUS NATIONS AND WE ARE THANKFUL FOR THAT COMMITMENTS TO KEEP SUPPORTING UKRAINE WITH WEAPONS.

AND BUT THE DECISION, HOW MUCH WEAPONS TO SEND, WHAT QUALITY OF WEAPONS TO SEND, DIRECTLY DEPENDS ON THE STRATEGY OF THE NATO AND PARTICULARLY OF THE MOST POWERFUL MEMBERS OF THE NATO LIKE THE U.S., WHAT IS THE END GAME?

SOMEWHAT THE END GAME OF THEIR POLITICAL LEADERSHIP OF THESE COUNTRIES THAT WILL IMPACT THE DECISIONS OF THE MILITARY HAD THEY WILL DECIDE WHAT KIND OF EQUIPMENT TO SEND TO UKRAINE.

AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND AND MANY PEOPLE IN UKRAINE, THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT IS THE END GAME IN THE WORDS, WHICH IS LIKE WE ARE READY TO SUPPORT UKRAINE AS LONG AS IT TAKES.

SO WHENEVER I AM HEARING THIS MESSAGE, I AM ASKING MYSELF, WHAT DOES AS LONG AS IT TAKES MEAN?

FOR OUR SOLDIERS TO DIE?

DOES IT MEAN AS LONG AS AS IT TAKE OUR CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE TO BE DESTROYED?

OR AS LONG AS IT TAKES RUSSIA TO BLOW UP THE ZAPORIZHZHIA NUCLEAR POWER PLANT WHICH THEY ARE OCCUPYING AND THEY SIMPLY MIND AND CAN BLOW IT ANY MOMENT LIKE THEY HAVE DONE WITH THE ELECTRIC POWER PLANT.

SO WE WANT TO EXPECT FROM THE LEADERSHIP FROM THE U.S. AND ALSO FROM NATO MEMBERS LEADERSHIP CLARITY.

WHAT ARE THEIRnd GAME STRATEGY?

AND THE REASON I HAVE ASKED, YOU KNOW, WE FEEL THAT THERE IS A SMELL OF SOME BACKCHANNEL COMMUNICATIONS WITH RUSSIA.

THERE IS HOPE WITHIN AN ADMINISTRATION IN THE U.S. AND OTHER NATIONS PARTICULARLY IN GERMANY, THAT UKRAINE AND RUSSIA WILL REACH CERTAIN LEVEL OF THE CEASEFIRE.

AND WE DON'T BELIEVE IN ANY CEASEFIRE WITH RUSSIA, ON THE RUSSIAN TERMS.

WHEN UKRAINE AND -- IT'S THE MAJORITY OF UKRAINIANS, WE BELIEVE IN THE FULL REOCCUPATION OF OUR TERRITORIES AND RETURN OF OUR PEOPLE AND RUSSIAN TROOPS MUST LEAVE UKRAINIAN TERRITORY.

>> I HAVE TO TELL YOU THE QUESTION OF HOW LONG WILL IT TAKE, AND WILL IT TAKE AND WHAT WILL THE END RESULT BE IS A QUESTION NOT ONLY BEING ASKED IN UKRAINE, BUT ALSO AS YOU KNOW IN THE UNITED STATES AS WELL AND IN WASHINGTON IN PARTICULAR.

I DO WANT TO GET YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE WORK THAT YOU ARE DOING IN FIGHTING ANTI-CORRUPTION.

YOU ARE HEAD OF THE ANTI-CORRUPTION ACTION CENTER, YOU HAVE BEEN A PART EVER SINCE 2011.

DECISION NOT TO INVITE UKRAINE INTO NATO NOT ONLY FOCUSED ON THE WAR, BUT ALSO ON OTHER THRESHOLDS THAT NATO MEMBERS SAY UKRAINE HAS YET TO MAKE.

ONE OF THAT BEING FIGHTING CORRUPTION.

YOU HAVE ACKNOWLEDGED YOURSELF THAT THERE ARE STILL MORE WORK TO DO.

HERE IS WHAT YOU TOLD THE "FINANCIAL TIMES."

YOU SAID IF UKRAINE HADN'T CHANGED SINCE 2013, RUSSIA WOULDN'T HAVE NEEDED THE FULL-SCALE INVASION BUT WOULD HAVE TAKEN OVER FROM THE INSIDE LIKE IN BELARUS.

IN 2022, THE UKRAINE CAME IN 116th.

TALK ABOUT THE ACHIEVEMENTS THAT YOU HAVE MADE THUS FAR AND OBJECTIVELY WHAT WORK STILL NEEDS TO BE DONE.

>> THAT WAS IN MY QUESTION TO JAKE SULLIVAN AS WELL.

IF CORRUPTION IS A PROBLEM FOR NOT INVITING UKRAINE TO NATO, PLEASE SPECIFY WHAT THE HOMEWORK WE NEED TO DO AND WE WILL WET IT DONE.

MY PARTICULAR OPINION IS THAT THE REASON THAT THE ONLY MAIN REASON FOR NOT INVITING UKRAINE TO NATO IS RUSSIA.

CORRUPTION IS A VERY GOOD FACE-SAVING EXCUSE.

IT IS NOT TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THAT THERE IS STILL CORRUPTION IN UKRAINE AND STILL WE HAVE DO A LOT, PARTICULARLY IN THE SECURITY AND DEFENSE SECTOR, BUT WHAT YOU ARE ARGUING AND WE WERE TRYING TO ENCOURAGE LEADERS OF THE FREE WORLD TO DO IS INCRATE UKRAINE TO NATO.

IT DOESN'T MEAN IMMEDIATELY UKRAINE WILL BE THE MEMBER OF NATO.

AND THEN HAVE JOINT WORK WITH UKRAINIAN SUFL SOCIETY, WITH THE UKRAINIAN GOVERNMENT ON THE REFORMS LIKE THE EU DID FOR UKRAINE.

THEY FWAIF US SEVEN REFORMS, INCLUDING FIVE ANTI-CORRUPTION REFORMS, AND WE WILL FULFILL THIS LIST UNTIL THE NEXT SUMMIT IN WASHINGTON.

I WOULD HAVE EXPECTED JAKE SULLIVAN AND NATO LEADERS TO PRESENT THIS KIND OF REFORMS FOR OUR HOMEWORK.

MY PERSONAL OPINION THAT BUILT SUCCESSFULLY ANTI-CORRUPTION INFRASTRUCTURE IN UKRAINE, WE HAVE SEPARATE ANTI-CORRUPTION AGENCIES, WHICH ARE THROWN INTO JAIL JUDGES FOR CORRUPTION.

RECENTLY, THE HEAD OF THE SUPREME COURT WAS CAUGHT ON BRIBE AND THERE IS INVESTIGATION ONGOING.

AND WE HAVE AS A DISCLOSURE SYSTEM WE HAVE QUITE A LOT WHICH WE HAVE ACHIEVED IN THE SECURITY AND DEFENSE SECTOR, WE ARE NOT WORKING, PUSHING HARD OUR GOVERNMENT TO DELIVER ON THE DEFENSE PROCUREMENT AND DIGITAL SYSTEM OF LOGISTICS.

IT WOULD BE MUCH MORE EASIER FOR US, FOR CIVIL SOCIETY IN UKRAINE, TO HAVE LEADERS OF NATO TO SAY ALSO SOMETHING ON THAT.

AND SEND THE EXPERTS ON THE GROUND IN KYIV TO WORK WITH OUR MINISTER OF DEFENSE AND WORK WITH CIVIL SOCIETY SO THAT WE KNOW CLEARLY WHAT IS NEEDED TO BE DONE AND WE HAVE TIMELINE UNTIL NEXT TIME IN WASHINGTON TO COME AGAIN TO THE SUMMIT AND SAY, YOU KNOW, GUYS, WE TREAT CORRUPTION IN UKRAINE VERY SKEERIOUSLY.

AND THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE DONE.

PLEASE LET'S GO FOR THE NECK STEP OF INTEGRATION.

>> DARIA KALENIUK THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

WE HOPE THIS WAR COMES TO AN END VERY SOON AND WE DO NOT WANT TO HAVE YOUR BOYS WORRYING ABOUT WHETHER THEY WILL BE FIGHTING IN IT IN YEARS TO COME.

APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU.

>>> WELL, NEXT WE TURN TO THE WORLD OF SPORT.

THE WOMEN'S SOCCER WORLD CUP IS OFF TO ROARING START IN AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND WITH BOTH HOST NATIONS WINNING CRUCIAL EARLY VICTORIES.

IT'S AN HISTORIC TOURNAMENT WITH TEAMS FROM ACROSS THE GLOBE COMPETING IN THE HOPE OF GLORY.

RECORD ATTENDANCES ARE EXPECTED.

THE FAVORITES ARE TEAM USA HE HOPING TO CLINCH A HAT-TRICK TITLE, THREE WORLD CUP WINS IN A ROW.

JOINING ME WITH ALL THE DETAILS IS CHRISTINE BRENNAN, A LEADING SPORTS JOURNALIST AND COME EP TATER.

I HOPE I DIDN'T JINX TEAM USA WITH A WISH FOR A HOOT.

I AM NOT THE ONLY ONE WISHING THAT'S WHAT WE SEE.

THE NINTH WOMEN'S WORLD CUP.

AS WE SAID, A LOT OF POSITIVE SIGNS.

RECORD ATTENDANCE, EVEN A BOOST IN SALARY, THOUGH NOWHERE WHERE WE SHOULD BE FOR THE PLAYERS.

TALK ABOUT WHAT WE CAN TPT EXPECT TO SEE AT THIS WORLD CUP.

>> YEAH, YOU NAILED IT.

THIS IS ARE PART SPORTS AND PART HISTORY AND CHURL.

ONCE AGAIN WE ARE SEEING WOMEN ATHLETES TAKE SENATOR STAGE AND GET THE ATTENTION THEY DESERVE.

I HAVE BEEN COVERING THE WORLD CUP SINCE 1999 AND THAT REALLY IS THE THROUGH LINE WHEN THOSE STADIUMS IN THE UNITED STATES WERE FILLED TO CAPACITY, FOOTBALL, AMERICAN FOOTBALL STADIUMS FILLED FOR WOMEN'S SOCCER IN 1999.

THE NATION FELL IN LOVE WHEN IT CREATED WITH TITLE 9, OF COURSE THE TEAM WON, AND BRANDI CHASTAIN, AMAZING, PENALTY KICK DO WIN IT, RIPPING OFF HER SHIRT, ET CETERA, ALL OF THEM BECOMING HOUSEHOLD NAMES.

THAT REALLY WAS THE START OF WHAT WE'RE SEEING TODAY, WHICH IS AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND USING THEIR BIG STADIUMS.

THOSE STADIUMS ARE FULL.

WOMEN TAKING OVER THE HEADLINES.

FEMALE ATHLETES GETTING THE RESPECT THAT THEY -- THAT IS ZEEVED FOR THEM.

YOU'RE RIGHT.

THE PAY IS NOWHERE NEAR.

IT'S ABOUT ONE-FOURTH WHAT THE MEN GOT IN QATAR A FEW MONTHS AC BUT IT IS SO MUCH BETTER THAN IT WAS.

AND THESE ATHLETES ARE HEROES IN THEIR COUNTRIES AND IT'S BEGINNING, AS YOU SAID, AROUND ALREADY AN UPSET, NEW ZEALAND UPSETTING NORWAY, A VERY BIG DEAL.

ON WITH WE GO AND AWAY WE GO TO WHAT SHOULD BE A FASCINATING FEW WEEKS.

>> IT'S INTERESTING HOW MUCH THE FOCUS IN THE U.S.

SINCE THE LAST WORLD CUP WAS ON THIS PAY GAP AND WOMEN NOT GETTING THE ACCOLADES THAT THEY DESERVE, ESPECIALLY ON TEAM USA.

BUT WHAT REALLY STRUCK ME IS THAT SEEMED TO BE A GLOBAL CONSENSUS THAT THIS ISN'T JUST A U.S.

PROBLEM AND IT CAN'T JUST A WESTERN COUNTRIES THAT ARE FOCUSED ON THIS WORLD CUP AND MAKING THE ATTEND HE HAS RECORD HERE.

IT IS SOMETHING THAT CHANGED GLOBALLY IN RESPONSE TO WOMEN'S SPORTS AND IN PARTICULAR WOMEN'S SOCCER.

>> YEAH, I AGREE WITH YOU.

AND THERE ARE EIGHT NEW COUNTRIES FIFA DECIDED TO TREAT THE WOMEN EQUAL TO THE MEN AGAIN, A THEME, BY HAVING 32 TEAMS LIKE THE MEN DID A FEW MONTHS AGO AT THEIR WORLD CUP.

AND TO YOU HAVE GOT NATIONS LIKE VIETNAM AND THE PHILIPPINES AND HAITI NEVER BEEN HERE BEFORE.

IRELAND, PORTUGAL.

AND THAT MEANS WHAT'S HAPPENED IN PORTUGAL, FROM A TINY BUDGET A FEW YEARS AGO AND THEY DIDN'T THINK WOMEN CARED ABOUT SOCCER, FOOTBALL, I MEAN, HOW RIDICULOUS IS THAT?

THIS IS YOUR UNTAPPED MARKET.

THIS IS THE PLACE YOU CAN GO AND ENCOURAGE THE OTHER 50% OF YOUR POPULATION TO PLAY THIS GAME THAT EVERYONE IN PORTUGAL LOVES AND AROUND THE WORLD LOVES AND PORTUGAL INVESTED MONEY AND NOW THEY HAVE A TEAM.

WE WILL SEE HOW THEY DO AGAINST THE U.S.

IN THE SAME GROUP.

ABSOLUTELY.

THIS BECAME A CHANT AT THE LAST WORLD CUP AS YOU KNOW.

EQUAL PAY.

THAT WAS IN FRANCE.

AND COUNTRIES AROUND THE WORLD ARE STARTING TO SAY WHY AREN'T WE GIVING OUR WOMEN ATHLETES AT LEAST A PERCENTAGE OF WHAT THE MEN GET AS WELL AS RESPECT, AND THAT'S THE CONVERSATION THAT'S STARTING TO CHANGE.

>> A MAJOR HEADLINE BEFORE THE GAMES BEGAN CAME IN THE FORM OF MEGAN RAPINOE, STAR OF TEAM USA, ANNOUNCING SHE WOULD BE RETIRING.

IT'S HARD TO IMAGINE THIS SPORT AND THIS TEAM WITHOUT HER.

AND I DON'T WANT TO CALL THEM AN AGING TEAM, LET'S CALL THEM A HIGHLY EXPERIENCED TEAM, IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE SEEING PLAYING THIS SUMMER.

WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO BE WATCHING FOR AND DO YOU THINK TEAM USA HAS WHAT IT TAKES FOR THAT COVETED HAT-TRICK?

>> IT GETS HARDER EVERY YEAR.

THE NATIONS AROUND THE WORLD HAVE CAUGHT UP TO THE UNITED STATES IN LARGE PART BECAUSE OF THE UNITED STATES.

THE U.S.

TEAM BEING THE JOHNNY APPLESEEDS, PLANTING SEEDS AROUND THE WORLD TO ENCOURAGE WOMEN TO PLAY THE GAME.

OF COURSE, THE WORLD HAS GOTTEN BETTER.

I THINK THE U.S. CAN WIN.

YOU'RE RIGHT.

IT'S A COMBINATION OF THE 30 SOMETHINGS LIKE ALEX MORGAN, MEGAN RAPINOE, 38 YEARS OLD, WITH YOUNG TALENT LIKE TRINITY RODMAN AND OTHERS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN TO THE WORLD CUP BEFORE.

IT'S ALSO THE MOST RACIALLY DIVERSE U.S.

TEAM EVER WITH NINE WOMEN OF COLOR ON THE 23-MEMBER TEAM AS THAT SHOULD BE.

AS THE GAME GROSS IN OTHER PLACES, NOT JUST WITH EAST SUBURBAN WHITE GIRLS IN THE UNITED STATES.

I THINK THE U.S. CAN DO IT BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE EASY AND THE EUROPEAN COUNTRIES WHERE THE MEN'S PRO LEAGUES HAVE WOMEN'S TEAMS NOW, SO THEY ARE INVESTING BIG TIME IN THE PRO LEAGUE FOR WOMEN IN EUROPE, ENGLAND, GERMANY, WATCH FOR SWEDEN AND OF COURSE CANADA IS THE REIGNING OLYMPIC GOLD MEDALIST FROM TOKYO TWO YEARS AGO, AND THEY HAVE 40-YEAR-OLD CHRISTINE SINCLAIR, ONE OF THE GREATEST TO PLAY THE GAME.

LET'S NOT RULE OUT CANADA AS A POSSIBLE RIFLE FOR THE U.S. AS WELL.

>> I LOVE SPORTS SO MUCH.

AS A JOURNALIST I LOVE TO BECAUSE IT'S THE ONLY TIME I CAN SHOW MY TRUE COLORS AND MY FAVORITISM AND I AM GOING ALL TEAM USA AND SPEAKING OF COLORS I CAN'T WAIT TO SEE WHAT COLOR MEGAN RAPINOE'S WILL BE L GO TEAM USA.

GO WOMEN'S SOCCER.

GO WOMEN'S SPORTS.

CHRISTINE BRENNAN, GREAT TO SEE YOU.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

YOU, TOO.

>>> AMERICA'S ELDER STATESMAN HENRY KISSINGER IS IN CHINA TO MEET WITH THE COUNTRY'S LEADER.

NO, IT'S NOT THE EARLY '70s WHEN HE AND THEN-PRESIDENT NIXON OPENED THE DOOR TO CHINA.

IT'S THE PRESENT DAY AND THE CENTENARIAN, FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE VUFTS ATTA TIME WHEN RELATIONS ARE AT HISTORIC LOWS.

EARLIER THIS WEEK U.S.

CLIMATE ENVOY JOHN KERRY LEFT WITH LITTLE AFTER TALKS ON THE CLIMATE CRISIS HIT A WALL.

I SPOKE ABOUT THE CURRENT TENSIONS WITH KEYU JIN, AN EXPERT ON CHINA AND PROFESSOR AT THE LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS.

HER BOOK, "THE NEW CHINA PLAYBOOK," AIMS TO DISPEL SOME OF THE MYTHS AND MISUNDERSTAND INGS THE WEST HAS ABOUT BEIJING.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US TODAY.

LET'S START WITH THE LESS THAN STELLAR ECONOMIC NEWS OUT OF CHINA FOR THE PAST SEVERAL MONTHS NOW.

WE JUST FOUND OUT THE SECOND QUARTER GDP GREW AT 0.8% COMPARED TO WITH THE PREVIOUS THREE MONTHS.

PROPERTY INVESTMENT IN DECLINE.

MAKES UP ABOUT A QUARTER OF THE OVERALL GDP.

IT SLID 8% IN THE FIRST HALF OF THE YEAR.

WE ALSO KNOW THAT TRADE IS DOWN AS WELL.

THIS PROMPTING CONCERN AMONG MANY ECONOMISTS THAT IT'S TIME FOR CHINA TO CONSIDER BOTH A MONETARY AND FISCAL STIMULUS FOR THE COUNTRY.

IT DOESN'T APPEAR THAT THAT'S THE DIRECTION THAT PRESIDENT XI IS PREPARED TO TAKE RIGHT NOW AND INSTEAD SOME OBSERVERS ARE SAYING THAT HE IS ADHERING TO A POSITION OF MAINTAINING STRATEGIC FOCUS.

ONE, PERT PUT IT THIS WAY.

XI JINPING DOES NOT DEFINE ECONOMIC SUCCESS IN TERMS OF GDP GROWTH.

HE DEFINES IT IN TERMS OF TECH, SELF-SUFFICIENCY.

WOULD YOU AGREE WITH THAT ASSESSMENT?

>> I THINK THAT'S BRADLEY RIGHT.

THERE ARE SOME SERIOUS CONFIDENCE ISSUES IN THE CHINESE ECONOMY AND WE GOT TO UNDERSTAND WHETHER THIS IS REALLY CYCLICAL MATTERS OR LONG-TERM STRUCTURAL DECLINE.

I AM MORE INCLINED TO BELIEVE THAT IT IS MORE TOWARDS THE FORM EARP.

JUST TO PUTTING IT IN PERSPECTIVE, CHINA DID GROW THREE TIMES THE WORLD AVERAGE GROWTH RATE IN THE SECOND QUARTER AND IS LIKELY GOING TO CONTRIBUTE TO 35% OF GLOBAL GROWTH.

SO THAT IS ALL FINE RELATIVELY SPEAK, BUT OF COURSE MUCH BELOW MARKET EXPECTATIONS.

AND AS YOU RIGHTLY POINTED OUT, THERE IS A PREFERENCE OF THE STATE, OF THE LEADERSHIP TOWARDS THE SUPPLY RATHER THAN TOWARDS DEMAND.

THERE IS THIS VIEW OF HARNESSING RESOURCES FOR LONGER TERM STRATEGIC GOALS LIKE HIGH-TECH AND NATIONAL SECURITY RATHER THAN SHORT-TERM STIMULUS THAT CAN HELP ON THE DEMAND SIDE WHICH IS ACTUALLY WHAT THE ECONOMY IS IN TROUBLE, THAT LACK OF DEMAND THE COUNTRY.

>> WHY DO YOU THINK THAT THERE IS NOT A LONG-TERM STRUCTURAL ISSUE AT PLAY HERE GIVEN THAT WE ARE SEEING A DECLINE, A SHRINKING DEMOGRAPHIC IN THE COUNTRY AND A REAL CONCERN ABOUT WHAT THE FUTURE THERE LOOKS LIKE AND ABOUT A 20% UNEMPLOYMENT RATE AMONG THE YOUTH POPULATION THERE IN THE COUNTRY?

>> I THINK THE STRUCTURAL FACTORS ARE STILL A BIT OVERESTIMATED CURRENTLY.

BUT IF WE ARE LOOKING AT AN ECONOMY TRYING TO WEAN OFF OF PROPERTY, WHICH BROADLY, BROADLY SPEAKING, ACCOUNTED FOR A THIRD OF THE COUNTRY'S GDP, AND A HIGHLY INDEBTED GOVERNMENT, LOCAL GOVERNMENT ESPECIALLY, WHEN YOU COUNT IN THE HIDDEN DEBT, THERE IS A REAL PROBLEM WITH SHORT-TERM UNEMPLOYMENT FOR THE YOUTH, CONFIDENCE ISSUES, ET CETERA.

IF WE LOOK AT THE CONSUMPTION NUMBERS, 8.2% SUGGEST AN ECONOMY IS SLOWLY RECOVERING FROM THE STRUCTURAL -- SORRY, FROM THE KIND OF LINGERING PAINS OF THE PANDEMIC.

SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, THE DEMOGRAPHICS WILL PLAY OUT OVER THE LONG RUN.

WE ARE TALKING ABOUT 0.1% DECLINE IN POPULATION WHEN WE ARE SEEING 6% AT THE VERY LEAST PRODUCTIVITY GROWTH.

THE PROBLEM IS NOT THE AIMING.

IT'S AS YOU POINTED OUT.

THOSE PEOPLE WITH COLLEGE DEGREES, 25% OF THEM ARE WITHOUT JOBS.

SO IT'S A SKILL JOB MISMATCH RATHER THAN AGING ISSUE RIGHT NOW.

>> WHAT ARE SOME POLICY SUGGESTIONS THAT WE'RE HEARING FROM XI ON DOWN IN TERMS OF ADDRESSING MISMATCH?

>> SO FIRST OF ALL, IF WE LOOK AT THE STRUCTURAL PROBLEMS AS YOU POINTED OUT, THERE IS ONE REALLY BIG ONE, WHICH LEADS TO THE UNEMPLOYMENT ISSUES, WHY THEY ARE NOT DOING SO MUCH STIMULUS.

THAT IS THE FUNDAMENTAL AILMENT OF THE FINANCIAL SYSTEM.

THE CAPITAL, STIMULUS DOESN'T REACH THE BOTTOM SORT OF THE REAL ECONOMY, THE PRIVATE SECTORS.

THEY ARE HAVING A HIGH COST OF CAPITAL, 6 TO 10%, AND IT DOESN'T TRANSMIT BECAUSE IT'S STUCK IN THE BANKING SYSTEM.

TO SO I THINK THAT'S KIND OF CURRENTLY WHY THE STIMULUS ARE NOT AS EFFECTIVE AND ALSO THEY DON'T HAVE AN APPETITE FOR A HUGE STIMULUS BECAUSE THEY WANT IT GEARED TOWARDS LONGER THEM GOALS.

THE UNEMPLOYMENT PROBLEM IS BECAUSE THE EDUCATION HAS RACED AHEAD OF THE ECONOMY.

IT'S NOT LIKE THERE ARE NO JOBS.

25 MILLION MANUFACTURING JOBS AROUND GAP BY 2025, 300,000 TALENT GAP IN SEMI CONDUCTORS ET CETERA.

THEY SIMPLY DON'T NT TO DO A LOT OF FOX CON JOB WORKERS THAT PREVIOUS GENERATIONS WERE HAPPY WITH.

>> YOUR NEW BOOK, "THE NEW CHINA PLAYBOOK," AND YOU TALK ABOUT THE LEVEL OF THE WEST NOT REALLY UNDERSTANDING THE CHINESE ECONOMY.

WHY DO YOU THINK THERE ARE CERTAIN BLIND SPOTS HERE AND WHY DO YOU THINK THAT YOU, GIVEN YOUR BACKGROUND AND YOUR FATHER'S ROLE IN THE PREVIOUS GOVERNMENTS THERE, HAVE MORE INSIGHT INTO WHAT'S ACTUALLY TAKING PLACE IN THE CHINESE ECONOMY TODAY?

>> FIRST OF ALL, I HAVE STUDIED THOROUGHLY WESTERN ECONOMICS AND I THINK THAT THE VIEW IS THAT THERE IS BASICALLY ONE MODEL THAT WORKS AND I THINK THAT UNDERLINES SOME OF THE MISUNDERSTANDING ABOUT THIS STATE OR MANAGED CAPITALISM OR THE MAYOR ECONOMY, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO GIVE THE CHINESE ECONOMY A LABEL, A STRONG REEL OF THE DATE, BUT VERY MUCH THAT MARKET WORKED VERY WELL AND A DECENTRALIZED ECONOMIC SYSTEM.

IT'S NOT JUST THE CENTRALIZED POLITICAL APPROACH, BUT, YOU KNOW, LOCAL MAYORS AROUND COMPETING WITH EACH OTHER, GALVANIZING CREATIVITY, PUSHING FOR INNOVATION ALL OVER THE COUNTRY.

I MEAN, THAT IS A VERY, VERY UNIQUE MODEL THAT I THINK FAILS TO GET THAT KIND OF ATTENTION OUTSIDE.

AND IT'S NOT LIKE THERE ARE NO CHALLENGES.

THERE ARE SERIOUS CHALLENGES ABOUT THE CHINESE ECONOMY.

IT'S NOT JUST -- IT'S JUST NOT THE ONES THAT THE WEST ARE POINTING OUT IN THE LAST FEW DECADES, PREDICTING OF CHINA'S ECONOMIC DEMISE EVERY TIME.

I AM AN ECONOMIST.

I WORK -- I WORK WITH DATA.

THERE IS EVIDENCE.

THERE IS A HUGE AMOUNT OF VAST, YOU KNOW, SCHOLARLY WORKS ON CHINA THAT TELLS A REAL SIDE OF IT.

THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE FUTURE.

AND I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT IT HOLISTICALLY RATHER THAN JUST SELECTIVELY.

>> AS YOU KNOW, WE ARE AL A CROSSROADS IN TERMS OF U.S./CHINA RELATIONS NOT ONLY ECONOMICALLY AND SORT OF THE TRADE STRUCTURES BETWEEN THE TWO COUNTRIES BLEEDING OVER FROM ONE ADMINISTRATION TO ANOTHER IN THE WEST, BUT ALSO GEOPOLITICALLY.

AND THERE IS A CONFLUENCE HERE OF WESTERN LEADERS BEING CONCERNED ABOUT WHERE THIS MAY LEAD AND THANKFULLY WE HAVE SEEN A NUMBER OF HIGH-LEVEL MEETINGS OVER THE PAST FEW WEEKS TO SORT OF SIMMER DOWN THE TENSIONS.

U.S. TREASURY SECRETARY JOHN KELLY JANET YELLEN SAYS THERE IS COOPERATION AND DECOUPLING ISN'T NECESSARILY THE OUTCOME THAT SOME SAY IS INEVITABLE.

LET'S LISTEN.

>> PRESIDENT BIDEN AND I DO NOT SEE THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE U.S. AND CHINA THROUGH THE FRAME OF GREAT POWER CONFLICT.

WE BELIEVE THAT THE WORLD IS BIG ENOUGH FOR BOTH OF OUR COUNTRIES TO THRIVE.

BOTH NATIONS HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO RESPONSIBLY MANAGE THIS RELATIONSHIP.

>> IS THERE A DESIRE, I GUESS, FROM THE CHINESE PERSPECTIVE TO RECIPROCATE IN THAT APPROACH, THAT YOU CAN HAVE COMPETITION WITHOUT CONFLICT?

>> THE ANSWER IS A RESOUNDING YES.

AND I THINK THAT IS THE KIND OF STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE THAT CHINA WOULD LIKE TO ACHIEVE.

I THINK THE BEST-CASE SCENARIO OR A VERY LIKELY SCENARIO IS A RETURN OF NORMAL TRADE AND, HOPEFULLY, TO A CERTAIN EXTENT INVESTMENT RELATIONS.

YOU THINK BOTH COUNTRIES ARE CLEARLY AWARE THAT IN TERMS OF HIGH-TECH AND TECHNOLOGY THEY WILL PROBABLY BE MOVING IN PARALLEL WAYS.

BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THEY SHOULDN'T KEEP ON TALKING, KEEP ON COMMUNICATING, KEEP ON SHAPING GLOBAL NORMS AND CLIMATE CHANGE.

LOTS YOU HAVE THINGS TO WORK ON.

SO I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, GLOBAL PUBLIC GOODS COLLABORATION AND COMPETITIVE COLLABORATION IS SOMETHING THAT CHINA DOES WANT TO PURSUE WITH THE U.S., BUT I THINK ONE OF THE PROBLEMS IS THAT OF COMMUNICATION AND THAT STEMS FROM THE LACK OF COMMUNICATION, MISCOMMUNICATION STEMS FROM SOMEWHAT OF A DIFFERENT CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE AND FROM CHINA'S PERSPECTIVE THE NEED FOR -- TO FEEL THAT IT IS RESPECTED AND FROM THE U.S.'S PERSPECTIVE TO HAVE CHINA, YOU KNOW, OPEN UP THE MARKETS AND A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD FIRE COMPANIES.

>> THAT ALSO RAISES A QUESTION OF TRUST, WHICH APPEARS TO BE VERY LOW FROM BOTH SIDES AT THIS POINT AND IN THE MIDDLE YOU HAVE EUROPE, WHICH OVER THE COURSE -- DEFINITELY SINCE THE WAR BEGAN IN UKRAINE, IT DOES APPEAR THAT EUROPE IS LEANING MORE TOWARDS THE UNITED STATES AND BEING VERY SKEPTICAL ABOUT LONG-TERM RELATIONS WITH CHINA AND THIS IS COMING AS CHINA IS TRYING TO COURT WESTERN COUNTRIES, EUROPEAN COUNTRIES, AN WESTERN BUSINESSES.

DO YOU SEE A DISCONNECT IN ATTEMPTING TO COURT THESE COMPANIES WHILE AT THE SAME TIME AS YOU KNOW MANY PRIVATE SECTOR EXECUTIVES ARE CONCERNED ABOUT STABILITY INSIDE THE COUNTRY RIGHT NOW.

RECENT CRACKDOWNS ON THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN CHINA HAVE MANY BUSINESSES ALARMED AND WE HAVE SEEN RAIDS OF WESTERN COMPANIES AS WELL TAKE PLACE.

>> I THINK ALL COUNTRIES ARE LOOKING TO STABILIZE RELATIONS.

ALL ECONOMIES ARE DOING VERY POORLY AND I AM NOT GOING TO MENTION EUROPE'S GROWTH NUMBERS THIS QUARTER.

AND I THINK DIFFERENT COUNTRIES ALSO HAVE A DIFFERENT PRIORITY BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, SECURITY OR PERCEIVED NATIONAL SECURITY AND KMUK INTERESTS, EVEN WITHIN EUROPE, THEY ARE A DIVERGENT INTERESTS.

CHINA CERTAINLY FOR SURE IS LOOKING FOR A MORE PRAGMATIC BROACH.

AND I THINK THERE IS QUITE A BIT OF MISUNDERSTANDING ABOUT THE REGULATORY CRACKDOWNS AND THE PERCEIVED HOSTILITY TOWARDS ENTREPRENEURS.

IF WE REALLY LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S HAPPENED THE LAST FEW MONTHS, THE GOVERNMENT HAS BACKTRACKED ON A LOT OF REGULATORY REFORMS.

THEY HAVE COME OUT AND OPENLY EMBRACED THESE PLATFORM ECONOMIES THAT WERE ONCE THE SUBJECT OF THE CRACKDOWNS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW WHAT?

THE GOVERNMENT NEEDS THE PRIVATE SECTOR.

THAT'S JUST HOW IT WORKS.

AND TODAY YOU NEED THE PRIVATE SECTOR TO DRIVE THE ECONOMY.

OF COURSE, THEY WERE THINKING A LOT ABOUT, YOU KNOW HARNESSING RESOURCES FOR HIGH-TECH, BUT THE TRUTH IS THEY ARE NOT AGAINST EXPERIENCE IF YOU LOOK AT THE ENTREPRENEURIAL DYNAMISM ON CHINA ON THE GROUND, VERY DIFFERENT FROM THE RHETORIC UP TOP.

SHOWCASES THAT IT'S STILL A MARKED KMU THAT WORKS.

I THINK CHINA DOES A POOR ONOF COMMUNICATE BEING THE MARKETS, WITH THE WEST.

THERE IS A, YOU KNOW, BIG RHETORIC AND TONE, THINGS THAT CAN BE IMPROVED AND THAT SCARES A CAPITAL MARKETS.

SO DON'T FORGET THE WESTERN GOVERNMENT TOOK 100 YEARS, MORE, TO PERFECT THE ART AND PERHAPS NOT PERFECT YET, OF MANAGING EXPECTATIONS AND SUS STAGES CONFIDENCE AND THAT'S JUST A LEARNING BY DOING FOR CHINA TODAY.

SO DON'T TAKE ANYTHING AS PERMANENT.

IT'S ALWAYS RECALIBRATED AND YOU WILL SEE THE PENDULUM SWING.

>> WE WILL SEE IF PRESIDENT XI IS CAPABLE OF RECALLBRATION, AS YOU SAY.

PERHAPS HE IS.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

AND CONGRATULATIONS ON THE BOOK.

>> THANK YOU.

GREAT TO BE WITH YOU.

>>> CHRISTOPHER NOLAN'S NUCLEAR THRILLER "OPPENHEIMER" STARRING KILLIAN MURPHY AND FLORENCE PUGH LANDS IN THEATERS FRIDAY.

IT IS ABOUT THE 1945 TRINITY TEST IN NEW MEXICO FOR THE WORLD'S FIRST NUCLEAR DEVICE WAS SKELFULLY DETONATED.

>> WE ARE IN A RACE AGAINST THE NAZIS.

AND I KNOW WHAT IT MEANS.

THE NAZIS HAVE A BOMB.

>> THEY HAVE A 12-MONTH HEAD START.

18.

>> HOW COULD YOU KNOW THAT?

>> WE HAVE GOT ONE HOPE.

ALL OF AMERICA'S TO SCIENTIFIC MIGHT AND INSEWVATION CONNECTED HERE.

A SECRET LABORATORY.

KEEP EVERYONE THERE UNTIL IT'S DONE.

>> LET'S GO RECRUIT SOME SCIENTISTS.

>> THE FILM IS BASED ON THE PULITZER PRAISE WINNING WORK "AMERICAN PROMETHEUS" WRITTEN BY KAI BIRD AND MARTIN J. SHERWIN.

BIRD DISCUSSES THE TRIUMPH AND TRAGEDY OF ROBERT OPPENHEIMER AND THE IM OF HIS CREATION ON OUR MODERN WORLD WITH WALTER ISAACSON.

>> THANK YOU.

AND KAI BIRD, WELCOME TO THE SHOW.

>> GREAT TO BE WITH YOU, WALTER.

>> YOU AND OUR BELOVED LATE FRIEND MARTY WROTE "AMERICAN PROMETHEUS," THE EPIC PULITZER PRIZE-WINNING BIOGRAPHY OF J ROBERT OPPENHEIMER.

NOW IT'S THE MOST ANTICIPATED FILM.

YEAR, OPENING THIS WEEKEND.

TELL US FIRST, WHO WAS JAY ROBERT OPPENHEIMER?

>> HE WAS AN INCREDIBLY FASCINATING AMERICAN PHYSICIST WHO BROUGHT THE QUANTUM PHYSICS, THE NEW PHYSICS TO AMERICA IN THE 1920s BY FOUNDING THE PHYSICS DEPARTMENT IN BERKELEY, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA.

AND HE THEN BECAME -- HE WAS CHOSEN IN A VERY ODD CHOICE BY GENERAL LESLIE GROVES, THE HEAD OF THE MANHATTAN PROJECT, TO BE THE SCIENTIFIC DIRECTOR OF LOS ALAMOS, THE SECRET CITY THEY BUILT IN THE DESERT OF NEW MEXICO TO BUILD THE GADGET, WHAT BECAME THE ATOMIC BOMB.

THEN HE, YOU KNOW, HIS ODYSSEY IS INCREDIBLE.

HE BECOMES AMERICA'S MOST FAMOUS SCIENTIST IN 1945 AS THE FATHER OF THE ATOMIC BOMB.

NINE YEARS LATER, HE IS BROUGHT DOWN IN THIS WITCH HUNT OF A KANGAROO COURT TRIAL IN 1954 AND PUBLICLY HUMILIATED AND BECOMES A NONENTITY.

ITS AN INCREDIBLY COMPLICATED STORY.

>> YOU MENTIONED GENERAL LESLIE GROVES TAPPING HIM TO RUN THE MANHATTAN PROJECT IN LOS ALAMOS.

INTERESTING SCENE IN THE BOOK, IN THE MOVIE, TOO, WITH MATT DAMON PLAYING -- WHO WAS THEN COLONEL LESLIE GROVES.

HE WAS ABOUT TO BE PROMOTED.

>> HE THINKS YOU HAVE INTEGRITY, BUT HE ALSO STRIKES ME AS A GUY WHO KNOWS MORE ABOUT SCIENCE THAN PEOPLE.

>> AND HERE YOU ARE.

YOU DON'T TAKE MUCH TRUST.

>> I DON'T TAKE ANYTHING ON TRUST.

TFRMT WHY DON'T YOU HAVE A NOBEL PRIZE.

>> WHY WEREN'T YOU A GENERAL?

>> THEY WILL MAKE ME ONE FOR THIS.

>> PERHAPS I WILL HAVE THE SAME LUCK.

>> SO HOW WOULD YOU PROCEED?

>> YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT TURNING THEORY INTO A PRACTICAL WEAPON SYSTEM FASTER THAN THE NAZIS.

>> YOU HAVE A 12 MONTH HEAD START.

>> 18.

>> HOW COULD YOU POSSIBLY KNOW THAT?

>> JET SEN SAYS, I DON'T TAKE ANYTHING ON TRUST, HOW IN THE WORLD DID HE PICK J. ROBERT OPPENHEIMER TO RUN THE MANHATTAN PROJECT?

>> IT WAS THE MOST UNLIKELY CHOICE.

OPPENHEIMER AND HE WERE LIKE OIL AND WATER, PARTICULARLY POLITICALLY SPEAKING.

OP BY WAS A MAN OF THE LEFT.

GENERAL GROVES WAS CONSERVATIVE, GRUFF, HARD WORKING.PIE WAS A MAN OF THE LEFT.

GENERAL GROVES WAS CONSERVATIVE, GRUFF, HARD WORKING.

DETERMINED GENERAL WHO WANTED TO BUILD THIS WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION, AND OPPENHEIMER IS A NERDY PHYSICIST.

BUT GROSS SEES IN OPPENHEIMER THAT HE IS A SYNTHESIZER, THAT HE IS SOMEONE WHO CAN ACTUALLY SPEAK IN PLAIN ENGLISH.

HE IS A POLYMATH.

HE IS NOT ONLY A PHYSICIST, HE LOVES FRENCH POETRY AND THE NOVELS OF ERNEST HEMINGWAY.

HE CAN EXPLAIN THINGS.

AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT GROVES APPRECIATES AND HE CAN SEE THAT THERE IS SOMETHING IN OPPENHEIMER THAT IS BOTH CHARISMATIC IN A YOUNG MAN FILLED WITH AMBITION AND IT TURNS OUT TO BE A BRILLIANT CHOICE.

>> YOU DESCRIBE HOW HE BECOMES A PUBLIC POLICY FIGURE, TALKING ABOUT THE NEED FOR ARMS CONTROL.

THERE IS A GREAT SCENE IN THE MOVIE WITH ONE OF MY FAVORITE HISTORICAL CHARACTERS, NEYLES BORE, THE GREAT PHYSICIST WHO UNDERSTANDS AT UP FOR THE FIRST TIME.

AND HE SAYS, YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH THIS ONCE IT'S ALL OVER.

LET'S SHOW THAT CLIP.

>> I AM NOT HERE TO HELP, BROTHER.

>> I KNEW YOU COULD DO THIS WITHOUT ME.

>> WHY DID YOU COME?

>> TO TALK ABOUT AFTER.

THE POWER YOU ARE ABOUT TO REVEAL WILL FOREVER OUTLIVE THE NAZIS.

AND THE WORLD IS NOT PREPARED, YOU COULD LIFT THE STONE WITHOUT BEING READY FOR THE STAKE SNOWFLAKE.

>> WE HAVE TO MAKE THE POLITICIANS UNDERSTAND, THIS ISN'T A NEW WEAPON.

IT'S A NEW WORLD.

I WILL BE OUT THERE DOING WHAT I CAN, BUT YOU, YOU ARE AN AMERICAN PROMETHEUS.

A MAN WHO GAVE THEM THE POWER TO DESTROY THEMSELVES.

AND THEY WILL RESPECT THAT.

>> YOU LOVE THE PHRASE HE USES, YOU ARE AN AMERICAN PROMETHEUS.

OF COURSE, THE TITLE OF YOUR BOOK.

TELL ME, WHY BEING A PROMETHEUS DOES THAT TURN HIM INTO SOMEBODY WHO FIGHTS IN PUBLIC POLICY FRONT.

>> WELL, PROMETHEUS, OF COURSE, IS THE GREEK GOD WHO GIVES FIRE TO MAN, STEALING IT FROM ZEUS, GIVING IT TO MAN, AND THEN ZEUS PUNISHES HIM FOR DOING THIS.

AND THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED TO OPPENHEIMER OF HE GAVE MANKIND ATOMIC FIRE AND THEN NINE YEARS LATER HE WAS PUBLICLY HUMILIATED AND SORT OF TARRED AND FEATHERED IN THIS KANGAROO COURT BECAUSE OF HIS POLICY DIFFERENCES WITH THE DEFENSE ESTABLISHMENT.

>> SOMETHING POIGNANT AT THE END.

MOVIE, SORRY ABOUT THE SPOILER ALERT, BUT AFTER THEY TEST IT AND IT WORKS, OPPENHEIMER STARTS TO THINK, MAYBE WE WERE RIGHT.

WE SET OURSELVES ON A PATH TO DESTROY THE WORLD.

WHAT DID HE MEAN BY THAT?

>> WELL, HE MEANS THAT HE HAS GIVEN US ATOMIC FIRE.

AND THE STORY IS NOT FINISHED, YOU KNOW.

WILL HUMANITY SURVIVE THE ATOMIC AGE?

WE ARE NOT SURE.

WE STILL HAVE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION.

WE ARE STILL COPING WITH LIVING WITH THE BOMB.

JUST LOOK AT THE WAR IN UKRAINE.

MR. PUTIN HAS THREATENED TO USE TACTICAL NUCLEAR WEAPONS.

SO IT'S A QUESTION MARK.

I THINK THE STONE IS SO VERY RELEVANT TO OUR TIMES.

>> IT'S PARTLY RELEVANT TO OUR TIMES BECAUSE WE KEEP UNLEASHING NEW TECHNOLOGIES AND WE DON'T WORRY ABOUT THEM QUITE AS MUCH AS OPPENHEIMER AND EINSTEIN WORRIED ABOUT HAVING UNLEASHED THE BOMB.

FOR EXAMPLE, THIS COMES JUST AS WE'RE DEBATING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE.

DID YOU THINK THERE WAS SOME CONNECTION TO SORT OF HOW WE ARE GOING TO DEAL WITH OUR TECHNOLOGIES?

>> OH, ABSOLUTELY.

AND, YOU KNOW, WE ARE A SOCIETY DRENCHED IN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY.

AND YET, WE DON'T SEEM TO HAVE MANY SCIENTIFIC GURUS AROUND.

SCIENTISTS WHO ARE PUBLIC INTELLECTUALS, WHO CAN GET UP AND EXPLAIN IN PLAIN ENGLISH THE CHOICES, THE POLICY CHOICES.

WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO INTEGRATE THESE TECHNOLOGIES, PARTICULARLY SOMETHING AS REVOLUTIONARY AS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, INTO A HUMANE SOCIETY.

AND I THINK PART OF THE OPPENHEIMER STORY, AND IT COMES ACROSS IN THE FILM BRILLIANTLY, IS THAT WHAT HAPPENED TO OPPENHEIMER IN 1954, THE PUBLIC HUMILIATION OF AMERICA'S GREATEST SCIENTIST, SENT AN UNFORTUNATE MESSAGE TO ALL SCIENTISTS OF BEWARE OF BECOMING A PUBLIC INLEXTUAL.

BEWARE OF GETTING OFF YOUR NARROW LANE, TALKING ABOUT POLITICS OR POLICY BECAUSE YOU COULD BE TARRED AND FEATHERED LIKE ROBERT OPPENHEIMER WAS IN 1954.

>> LET'S EXPLAIN WHAT THAT PROBLEM WAS IN TERMS OF THE LOYALTY AND THE SECURITY CLEAR EBBS.

IT WAS BECAUSE PEOPLE WERE VERY AFRAID THAT THE RUSSIANS HAD SUDDENLY GOTTEN THE BOMB AND ACTUALLY CORRECTLY -- THEY HAD GOTTEN IT FROM A SPY AT LOS ALAMOS.

NOT SOMEBODY OPPENHEIMER HIRED.

BUT THIS WAS A REAL SCARE AND POSSIBILITY.

OPPENHEIMER HAD BEEN -- HIS BROTHER HAD BEEN IN THE COMMUNIST PARTY.

HE HAD BEEN GENERALLY SYMPATHETIC, NEVER A MEMBER.

EXPLAIN THAT.

>> IT'S COMPLICATED.

THEY USED THE FACT THAT HE HAD BEEN A MAN OF THE LEFT, HE HAD BEEN SORT OF PINKO BUT NOT RED.

HE HAD BEEN SYMPATHETIC TO SOME OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY'S ACTIVITIES LIKE DESEGREGATION OF THE PUBLIC SWIMMING POOL IN BERKELEY AND RAISING MONEY TO SEND AN AMBULANCE TO THE SPANISH REPUBLIC CAUSE DURING THE SPANISH CIVIL WAR, AND SO THEY USED THE FACT THAT HE HAD GUCHB MONEY TO THE COMMUNIST PARTY, ALTHOUGH HE NEVER JOINED IT HIMSELF, TO BRING HIM DOWN IN 1954.

BUT THE REAL CONCERN WAS NOT THAT HE WAS A SECURITY RISK OR EVEN A SPY.

THERE IS NO REAL EVIDENCE OF THAT.

BUT THE REAL CONCERN WAS THAT HERE THE FATHER OF THE ATOMIC BOMB BEGINNING IN 1945, JUST MONTHS AFTER HIROSHIMA, HAD BEGUN SPEAKING OUT AGAINST RELIANCE ON THESE WEAPONS.

SPECIFICALLY, AFTER 1949 WHEN THE RUSSIANS ACQUIRED AN ATOMIC BOMB, HE SPOKE OUT AGAINST THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE HUD GENERAL BOMB, THE SUPER BOMB.

THIS WAS A THREAT TO THE BUDGETS OF THE DEFENSE DEPARTMENT, TO THE BUDGET OF THE AIR FORCE AND THE NAVY WHO WANTED TO SPEND MORE MONEY ON THESE WEAPONS.

SO THE FATHER OF THE ATOMIC BOMB, OPPENHEIMER, WAS BECOMING A THREAT TO THEIR BUDGETS, AND THIS WAS THE REAL MOTIVATION TO BRING HIM DOWN.

HIS POLICY DIFFERENCES WITH THE NATIONAL SECURITY ESTABLISHMENT.

>> ONE OF THE MOST INTERESTING SCENES, BOTH IN YOUR BOOK AND IN THE MOVIE, AND I'LL SAY IN THE MOVIE IT'S EXACTLY THE WAY IT IS IN YOUR BOOK, IS WHEN OPPENHEIMER DECIDES HE HAS TO GO SEE PRESIDENT HARRY TRUMAN.

AND HE SAYS, I'VE GOT BLOOD ON MY HANDS.

OPPENHEIMER SAYS.

AND TRUMAN GETS MAD.

EXPLAIN THAT TO US AND WHAT TRUMAN ENDS UP SAYING.

>> WELL, OPPENHEIMER WENT INTO THE OVAL OFFICE WITH AN AGENDA.

HE WANTED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS ONE MOMENT, HIS MEETING WITH THE PRESIDENT, TO EXPLAIN HIS WORRIES ABOUT THE BOMB AND HOW TO CONTAIN IT.

HE WANTED TO MAKE THE ARGUMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL CONTROL OR COMING TO SOME KIND OF ARMS CONTROL AGREEMENT WITH THE RUSSIANS AND NOT TO HAVE AN ARMS RACE.

AND BEFORE HE COULD MAKE THE ARGUMENT REALLY, TRUMAN INTERRUPTS HIM AND SAYS, SO, DR. OPPENHEIMER, WHEN DO YOU THINK THE RUSSIANS ARE GOING TO GET THIS WEAPON?

AND OPPENHEIMER REPLIES, WELL, I AM NOT SURE, BUT IN A FEW YEARS.

AND TRUMAN AGAIN INTERRUPTS AND SAYS, NO, I KNOW, NEVER.

THEY ARE NEVER GOING TO GET IT.

AND AT THAT MOMENT OPPENHEIMER UNDERSTANDS THAT THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES DOES NOT UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE NO SECRETS.

THAT THE PHYSICS IS KNOWN BY EVERYONE AND THAT IT'S A SIMPLE ENGINEERING PROBLEM AND THAT NEW COUNTRY, HOWEVER POOR, WITH WHATEVER RESOURCES, CAN INDEED PILED THESE WEAPONS AND OF COURSE THE RUSSIANS ARE GOING TO GET IT.

YOU KNOW, THEY DID HAVE AM SOME SPIES AT LOS ALAMOS WHO HELPED THEM ALONG EARLY ON.

BUT AT SOME POINT THE RUSSIANS ARE WERE GOING TO DEVELOP THESE WEAPONS.

SO OUT OF FRUSTRATION OPPENHEIMER TURNS TO HARRY TRUMAN AND SAYS, SIR, YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND.

I HAVE BLOOND MY HANDS.

AND OF COURSE THIS IS THE EXACTLY THE WRONG THING TO TELL HARRY TRUMAN, THE MAN WHO MADE THE DECISION TO DROP TWO SUCH WEAPONS ON TO JAPANESE CITIES.

AND SEW BECOMES VERY OFFENDED.

THE MEETING ENDS ABRUPTLY, AND AS OPPENHEIMER WALKS OUT, AND AS YOU SEE THIS IN FILM, AS IT'S PORTRAYED FROM THE BOOK, TRUMAN SAYS TO ONE OF HIS AIDES, I DON'T WANT TO EVER SEE THAT CRY BABY SCIENTIST EVER AGAIN, AND HE NEVER DID.

>> TELL ME ABOUT OPPENHEIMER'S CONFLICTED FEELINGS ON WHETHER OR NOT WE SHOULD HAVE DROPPED THE BOMB AND WHETHER OR NOT YOUR FEELINGS -- I READ ABOUT YOU OVER THE YEARS, DEALING WITH THIS ISSUE, WHETHER DROPPING THE BOMB BY HARRY TRUMAN, BUT ALSO ALL THE SCIENTISTS THERE, WAS THE RIGHT DECISION.

>> SO, OPPENHEIMER, HE DIDN'T ACTUALLY SELECT THE TARGET OF HIROSHIMA OR NAGASAKI, BUT HE KNEW THAT THE WEAPON WAS SO LARGE THAT IT NEEDED -- THAT THE ONLY -- IT NEEDED A LARGE TARGET.

AND THAT MEANT A CITY.

NOT A MILITARY INSTALLATION.

NOT A BATTLESHIP.

IT NEEDED A WHOLE CITY.

AND HE WAS VERY AMBIVALENT.

ON THE ONE HAND, HE WAS EXTREMELY AWARE OF THE TRAGIC HUMAN CONSEQUENCES THIS IS GOING TO BE USED AND -- ON WHOLE CITY WHICH MOST OF THE VICTIMS ARE GOING TO BE CIVILIANS.

AND YET, HE WAS CONVINCED OF NIELS BOHR'S ARGUMENT WHEN HE ARRIVED IN LOS ALAMOS IN THE LAST DAY OF 1943.

NIELS BOHR, THE GREAT DANISH PHYSICIST SAID, ROBERT, I HAVE ONE QUESTION FOUR S IT BIG ENOUGH?

IS THE BOMB BIG ENOUGH SO THAT HUMANITY WILL UNDERSTAND THAT IT CAN NO LONGER FIGHT SFWHARS WILL IT END ALL WARS?

AND OPPENHEIMER CONVINCED HIMSELF THAT, YOU KNOW, THE WEAPON HAD TO BE DEMONSTRATED IN THIS WAR ON A TARGET SO THAT PEOPLE WOULD UNDERSTAND ITS HORRIBLE DESTRUCTIVENESS AND, THEREFORE, THE NEXT WAR WOULD NOT BE FOUGHT BY TWO ADVERSARIES, BOTH OF WHOM WOULD BE ARMED WITH NUCLEAR WEAPONS, AND THAT WOULD OF COURSE BE ARMAGEDDON.

SO IT'S A VERY COMPLICATED, EVEN PHILOSOPHICAL ARGUMENT.

>> HOW DO YOU FEEL NOW, BECAUSE IT'S BEEN ALMOST 80 YEARS, AND IN SOME WAYS THE NIELS BOHR/OPPENHEIMER ARGUMENT, IF WE USE IT, IT WILL BE TO TERRIBLE, WE WILL NEVER USE SOMETHING LIKE THIS AGAIN, HAS HELD TRUE FOR 80 YEARS?

WE WAKE UP IN THE MORNING AND THINK, MAYBE PUTIN'S GOING TO DO SOMETHING.

HOW DO YOU FEEL THE RESOLUTION IS SO FAR?

>> WELL, IT'S A GAMBLE, ISN'T IT?

AND, YES, IT'S TRUE.

WE HAVE NOT FOUGHT A WAR LIKE WORLD WAR II.

WE HAVE FOUGHT LITTLE WARS LIKE VIETNAM AND KOREA WITH GREAT CASUALTIES, BUT WE HAVEN'T USE NUCLEAR WEAPONS AGAIN.

WE HAVEN'T HAD TOTAL WARFARE AS WE DID IN WORLD WAR II.

SO MAYBE NIELS BOHR AND OPPENHEIMER WERE RIGHT.

ON THE OTHER HAND, IN THE COURSE OF HUMAN HISTORY, IT SEEMS THE ODDS ARE THAT THESE WEAPONS WILL BE USED AGAIN UNLESS WE DO WHAT OPPENHEIMER SUGGESTED, WHICH WAS TO ESSENTIALLY BAN THEM AND CREATE AN INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC AUTHORITY THAT WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO MONITOR AND INSPECT EVERY LABORATORY, EVERY FACTORY EVERYWHERE IN THE WORLD TO MAKE SURE THAT NO ONE IS BUILDING THESE WEAPONS.

YOU KNOW, HE WAS TRYING TO MAKE THE ARGUMENT THAT WE NEED TO CONTROL THIS TECHNOLOGY.

SO, COMING BACK AGAIN TO ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, I THINK IF HE WAS WITH US TODAY, HE WOULD BE MAKING THE SAME ARGUMENT, THAT WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE CONSEQUENCES SOCIALLY FOR SOCIETY OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND REGULATE IT, AND HE WOULD BE MAKING THE SAME ARGUMENT TODAY.

HE WOULD BE APPALLED THAT WE HAD AN ARMS RACE.

HE WOULD BE APPALLED THAT MR. PUTIN IS THREATENING TACTICAL NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN THE UKRAINE.

AND HE WOULD BE VERY FEARFUL, AS I AM TODAY, THAT SOMEDAY WE MIGHT ACTUALLY SEE ANOTHER NUCLEAR WAR FOUGHT.

MAYBE NOT BETWEEN RUSSIA AND AMERICA, BUT BETWEEN PAKISTAN AND INDIA.

YOU KNOW, THEY ARE BOTH NATIONS WHO ARE ENEMIES AND THEY ARE BOTH ARMED WITH NUCLEAR WEAPONS.

SO I DON'T KNOW.

THE STORY IS NOT OVER, AND IT COULD STILL END BADLY.

>> KAI BIRD, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

>> THANK YOU, WALTER.

>>> AND FINALLY, AFTER FIVE MONTHS RAISING BABY SEAHORSES, MARINE SCIENTISTS HAVE SUCCESSFULLY RELEASED A RECORD NUMBER OF THE ENDANGERED SPECIES INTO SYDNEY HARBOUR.

380 WHITE SEAHORSES WILL NOW BE MONITORED AND LIVE IN THEIR CUSTOM SEAHORSE HOTEL AT CHOWDER BAY.

YES, THERE IS SUCH A THING.

MALE SEAHORSES CAN BIRTH UP TO 2,000 BABIES AT A TIME, BUT HAVE A VERY LOW CHANCE OF SURVIVAL.

THE SCIENTISTS WERE ABLE TO ACHIEVE A 90% SURVIVAL RATE BY SETTING THE TEMPERATURE ABOVE 73 DEGREES FAHRENHEIT AND FEEDING THEM BRINE SHRIMP.

JUST WATCH THIS VIDEO ALL DAY.

AND THAT'S IT FOR OUR PROGRAM TONIGHT.

IF YOU WANT TO FIND OUT WHAT'S COMING UP ON THE SHOW EACH NIGHT SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR WATCHING "AMANPOUR & COMPANY" ON PBS.

JOIN US AGAIN TOMORROW NIGHT.

♪♪ >> "AMANPOUR & COMPANY" IS MADE POSSIBLE BY CANDACE KING WEIR.

THE FAMILY FOUNDATION OF LAYLA AND NIKKI STRAUSS.

JIM AT WAD AND LESLIE WILLIAMS.

MARK J. BLECHNER.

SETON J. MELVIN.

CHARLES ROSENBLUM.

QUEUE AND PATRICIA YUEN, COMMITTED TO BRIDGING CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN OUR COMMUNITIES.

BARBARA HOPE ZUCKERBERG.

WE TRY TO LIVE IN THE MOMENT, TO NOT LET MISS WHAT'S RIGHT IN FRONT OF US.

AT MUTUAL OF AMERICA WE BELIEVE TAKING CARE OF TOMORROW CAN HELP YOU MAKE THE MOST OF TODAY.

MUTUAL OF AMERICA FINANCIAL GROUP, RETIREMENT SERVICES AND INVESTMENTS.

ADDITIONAL SUPPORT PROVIDED BY THESE FUNDERS AND BY CONTRIBUTIONS TO YOUR PBS STATION FROM VIEWERS LIKE YOU.

THANK YOU.

♪♪ >>> YOU'RE WATCHING PBS.