Read Full Transcript EXPAND
CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CHIEF INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Hello, everyone, and welcome to “Amanpour and Company.” Here’s what’s coming up.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: Gaza is a tragic — it is a tragedy. It’s a tragedy. And he wants to get it solved and I want to get it solved.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: But still, no ceasefire and Israeli strikes have killed hundreds more in recent days. The U.N.’s James Elder tells me about Gaza’s critical
conditions.
Plus, Galia David desperate for her son’s release from there. He is still being held hostage by Hamas.
And —
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER: We’ve gotten closer to it. And I hope we can cross the line.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: — what is Israel’s big strategy? I asked former Israeli military intelligence chief Tamir Hayman.
Also, ahead —
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOV. ANDY BESHEAR (D-KY): This is a direct attack on rural America that’s going to make it so much harder for struggling Americans to get by.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: — Michel Martin speaks to Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear about the impact of Trump’s sweeping domestic policy bill in his state.
Welcome to the program, everyone. I’m Christiane Amanpour in London. Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, is in Washington for what’s
now an extended visit with President Trump. But their talk of an imminent ceasefire has yet to come to fruition Instead, Israel’s renewed offensive
in Gaza has killed hundreds more in recent days, according to authorities there. Even distributing aid meant to save lives has resulted in evermore
deaths.
Last week, more than 240 NGOs called for an immediate end to the controversial Gaza Humanitarian Foundation and its operations saying that
Palestinians, quote, “face an impossible choice, starve or risk being shot while trying to collect food.” On top of this, now, Israel’s defense
minister is proposing to move 600,000 Palestinians into a concentrated area of Rafah in the south of Gaza.
While ceasefire talks continue in Doha, Qatar, let’s get a sense of the situation and the urgent need in Gaza. James Elder has just returned from a
recent trip there for UNICEF, and he’s joining me here in the studio. Welcome back.
This is your first trip since before winter, right? I think since November. What can you see on the ground that has changed then and now?
JAMES ELDER, GLOBAL SPOKESPERSON, UNICEF: I thinkl, Christiane, three things struck me really vividly. One is that previously I would see, you
know, the level of injuries onto children, the level of trauma onto children. I’d never seen that until I went to Gaza, you know, in November,
2023. This time I was not just seeing children with those horrific wounds of war, the burns, the shrapnel wounds, I was hearing them, I would hear
girls and boys, the screams, because the lack of painkillers is just so, so prevalent. So, very hard to see girls and boys in that situation, but also,
to hear them.
Lack of water. I expected things to be worse. They always are in Gaza. But now to see the deprivation of water, there’s no one in Gaza that’s getting
the basic emergency level of water. Now, when a child is deprived food and a child is deprived water, that is a collision on a child’s body, which is
lethal.
And then, the third thing was to see just how much damage GHF is doing to people, to an aid structure. So, I — yes, I knew it would be that bad. I
was not prepared for just how bad it would be for Palestinians.
AMANPOUR: There a couple of things I want to drill down on. Can you explain, because I understand what you’re saying, there’s not enough clean
potable water. How do 2 million people survive when there isn’t? I mean, what is the physical state? How much do they drink? I mean, there has to be
some water, otherwise they’d all be dead.
ELDER: Yes. There is some water. And it depends on the family, it depends on where they are. It depends on if that desalination plant is still able
to produce water. It depends if that truck had fuel that particular day. So, it might be several liters. A lot of people are drinking brackish
water. A lot of families know their children are getting unwell, but they can’t access a hospital. Nasser Hospital in the south, Christiane, serves a
million people, but it’s in an evacuation zone. So, you can’t get there.
Now, water’s really important because we’ve had so many arguments around all this, you know, claims around misuse of humanitarian aid, and UNICEF
has been very clear about the last mile distribution we do. I’m very lucky I get to see our nutritional food in the mouth of a child. I understand the
checks and balances we put in place.
Nonetheless, there are allegations made about aid diversion. None of them have evidence, but there are. OK, but water —
AMANPOUR: Aid diversion?
ELDER: Aid diversion.
AMANPOUR: Oh, allegations by the Israeli government that Hamas is diverting —
ELDER: Exactly.
AMANPOUR: Yes. So, that’s one of their claim.
ELDER: That is a constant claim. It’s an allegation as to why GHF exists, even though during this —
AMANPOUR: So, GHF, let’s just go back, is the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation created to essentially subvert the actual operating group, which was a U.N.
group UNRWA.
ELDER: Yes, exactly. And now, the entire system. So, if you just look at water, whatever allegations you have, utterly unproven, water goes from the
source to the recipient. There can be no diversion. So, it’s so troubling to see that level of deprivation because it’s — this is political. This is
not logistical. You turn on a power supply, you allow fuel in and you change the water scenario within 24 hours for a population.
AMANPOUR: So, they’re not turning the power on?
ELDER: Yes. And the power’s been turned off. UNICEF managed to lobby late last year extensively to get that turned on, but it was turned off again
during the ceasefire.
AMANPOUR: Now, in your experience, and Gaza is a war zone and frankly, it has been a war zone for a long time. There’ve been many, many you know,
war, counterwar, all the rest of it. What is the point of turning off the electricity and turning off the clean water? What is the strategic point of
that from an Israeli perspective, would you say?
ELDER: Well, I mean, for me, of course, as a humanitarian, Christiane, it’s difficult to have a position on that.
AMANPOUR: But when you asked them, what do they say?
ELDER: Well, they made statements very clearly after the horrors of October 7 that this would be the stated intention. So, you don’t need to —
AMANPOUR: But why water? I don’t understand it.
ELDER: Well, I think that the argument would be made from some senior Israeli — some senior officials, U.N. officials, is that, you know, there
is an entire population is somehow at fault here, which of course is abhorrent because I walk the corridors and see those children now with
humanitarian aid. We talk about that Gaza Humanitarian Foundation.
You know, the United Nations works in many, many difficult places. This is not the first time we’ve worked in a place that doesn’t have law and order,
and we don’t have to look at other conflict zones. We don’t have to look to Ukraine. We don’t have to look to Afghanistan or Sudan. We can look to two
months ago and 400 distribution points. Humanitarian aid.
It’s so important that you work on two things. One is going to where people need it, moms, the elderly, children. And that’s 400 distribution points
versus four. The other is you’ve got to use an evidence base. So, you’ve got to make sure the humanitarian aid you are supplying is reducing
malnutrition, is increasing access to water. Those things aren’t happening. And again, the stated intention of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation is to
push your population to the south and sideline a humanitarian system. And we’re seeing that, and that is lethal for moms and children.
AMANPOUR: And why do you think they’re trying to put them? And actually, Israel Katz, who’s their defense minister, said that they are — let me
just get this straight, has laid out plans to force all Palestinians in Gaza into a camp on the ruins of Rafah. They want to call it a Humanitarian
City. They want to say that Israel forces will police it from afar, but not inside.
600,000 and maybe more. But what — I mean, that international officials, according to Blueprint for Crimes against Humanity. But also, it means that
they — what? That they were — what? I mean, what would happen in that?
ELDER: Well, exactly that — it’s interesting, isn’t it? The statements made around international humanitarian law are so grave, I almost find
myself sometimes moving on because it seems that people have dismissed international humanitarian law, the principles, which is very dangerous for
all other conflicts where children are involved.
But let’s focus just on the practical level. You know, if you are creating any zone, you can’t forcibly push people into it, but you must also have
food, water, medicine, that is a legal requirement. None of those things are there. So, you’re putting a very, very exhausted vulnerable population
in a cage within a cage.
At a time when you and I speak that meningitis is on the rise. That’s on the rise because of a lack of sanitation, a lack of medical supply. So,
polio, we are still fearful of a polio outbreak. It still exists within Gaza. So, all we will see happen in those spaces is expedite a humanitarian
catastrophe from the ground for a population — I mean, as you and I speak, I’m not even mentioning that, you know, we’re still at a point — reports
of 17,000 girls and boys killed. That’s a child killed in Gaza every single hour since the horrors of October 7th, every hour. And the world has
somehow just moved on.
AMANPOUR: And — well, they say they’re trying to come to a ceasefire, but we don’t know. And obviously, to release the hostages as well. But your —
I believe it’s UNICEF says that actually 50,000 children in Gaza have been killed and wounded.
ELDER: Yes.
AMANPOUR: So, the numbers are huge. And to your point about the hospitals, one of the directors says, if fuel isn’t made available in the next few
hours, the Al-Shifa Hospital will get out of service in the next few hours. This will lead to a high number of deaths. And other hospitals are saying
the same thing.
You visited Nasser Hospital. And you posted a video, and it’s actually quite emotional and I want to play it and have you talk about it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ELDER: I think of little Rehab (ph) I met who said, and I’ll read it, they killed my mother. I used to be beautiful. Now, I cannot wash. What do you
want me to say? What is there to say in the face of such pain? Oh, such pain here in Gaza and such impunity everywhere else. Oh, sorry. I — maybe
that’s it. Sorry.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: It is very powerful, very dramatic. And talk me through, what had you been seeing that day? You’re sitting in what looks like a blown-out
part of the hospital on rubble.
ELDER: I’m seeing it now. It’s uncomfortable because, you know, here I sit now in London and there are children, little girls who’ve been there for
640 days and there I am having a moment exhausted by the horrors.
I’ve never been somewhere, Christiane, where every single hospital room has many, many children. And so, that particular hospital room, I sat with a
little girl who was 11 years old, who had a leg amputated. But because of lack of medical evacuation and denial of medical care in there, they had to
amputate her other leg. So, you’re watching children disassembled.
Next to her in the bed was a little girl, Jenna (ph), who when an airstrike hit her shelter, her school, she was paralyzed from the hips down and —
but she wasn’t unconscious. So, as she lay on the ground, she watched her friend die in front of her. These are children and this graciousness of
parents to tell their stories because they’re so hopeful that something will happen about it.
And as I walked out of that room with my young Palestinian colleague who sees all of this and is 25 and somehow keeps pushing through to tell
stories on behalf of people for UNICEF, as I walked out, a mother just grabbed me and was utterly distraught, Christiane, saying she’d spent nine
years conceiving and her child — her only child and her husband had just been killed. And that level of despair.
So, there — you know, there is no time for despair for UNICEF. We have colleagues on the ground in unprecedentedly dangerous places. But yes, that
was a moment of just — of, I think, a bit of despair and a little bit of anger for the amount of impunity that still exists for 21 months of these
horrors against children and their parents.
AMANPOUR: I want to ask you about something that’s just really egregious and really controversial. There are many, many reports and there are more
and more, not only of the number of Palestinians who are being killed just trying to come and get food, but, you know, so many reports of gunfire,
drone attacks on those.
A former Gaza aid contractor told the BBC that he saw a guard from a watch tower open fire at women and children. He was told by a team leader, quote,
“If you feel threatened, shoot, shoot to kill and ask questions later.” Now, the GHF, as we’ve talked about, says this is categorically false. But
what are you hearing? And we can see it. We can see the number of people who’ve been killed just trying to get food.
ELDER: You know, I made a real point of going in and sending as many testimonials as I could. And then I was finding, Christiane, that I’d go
and see a family who was getting cash from UNICEF and I would suddenly meet three young guys who had been there. So, it wasn’t seeking out
testimonials. So, those three young men, for example, in their 20s, they’d been there seven times. They’d never been successful in getting aid.
I met a young guy who spoke perfect English, whose family did not want him to go because they were well aware of the dangers. And he said he got
there, he did everything he was told, he was corralled into a cage-like area and then, suddenly, he said there was a drone overhead shooting
people. James, why did they do that to us? Now, I can’t give him an answer to that.
On the very first day, Christiane, I met a little boy who’d been given money by his dad to go and buy bread. Albed al Rakman (ph). He was 13. But
he wanted more than that. He’s looking — he’s watching his mom, you know, he’s watching his mom, quite literally level of malnutrition leading to the
point of starvation. He wants more than bread. And he sees a flood of people heading to one of these sites. So, he went, you know, he just — and
he told me the story, you know, from a hospital bed. As he told me, his father was in tears, because he was almost apologizing to his dad. And this
boy was in immense pain and he went — same thing, firing, shooting.
He didn’t get any aid. It’s survival of the fittest. It’s the same. People get supplies all the time, Christiane. Instead, he got shrapnel from a tank
shell into his pancreas, into his stomach, and he sat up in the hospital bed. I’ll never forget this little boy, he sat up wanting to tell his
story, his own dignity, even though he’s only 13-year-old.
And on the day I left Gaza after two weeks, I got a message that, you know, he died of those injuries, died trying to get food for his family because a
perfectly well-functioning humanitarian system, again, UNICEF as a part of 400 distribution sites, is being deliberately sidelined. And this is the —
this is what people are being pushed into.
The last story, if I may, Christiane, was a. 23-year-old woman, terrible wounds from wire — from barbed wire and so on. But she even said, I will
go back. She got nothing. I’ll go back, James, because I’m the eldest in my family. My dad’s got a heart condition. These are the choices, you hear
sentences you never imagine people would say, which is, in her case, please just don’t let me die an empty stomach. So, she will return. It’s — these
are —
AMANPOUR: To the GHF?
ELDER: To the GHF. Yes.
AMANPOUR: Which is just a horribly impersonal acronym anyway. And as you say — I just want to read Tom Fletcher, the humanitarian, you know, head
of the U.N. said a while ago, we are seeing foods set on the borders and not being allowed in when there is a population on the other side of the
border that’s starving. And we’re hearing Israeli ministers say that is to put pressure on the population of Gaza.
How do you — what can you do? Because you can almost not get into to deliver. Even this GHF. Has it got enough food to —
ELDER: No. And that’s a great question. So, first, you know, four distribution points. So, again, if you are disabled or a single mom or the
elderly and you’re my age or above and you’re 35 miles away, it’s absolutely impossible. If you are fit and healthy and close by, then you go
and it’s survival of the fittest and the same people taking sugar and oil because they’re more valuable. So, no. So, for and —
AMANPOUR: So, taking sugar and oil because they’re more valuable to use or to sell?
ELDER: To sell. And this is the thing, the idea that, you know —
AMANPOUR: So, some of these gangs?
ELDER: Yes. Now, the idea of, you know, circumventing an aid system because of looting. Now, U.N.’s been very clear on looting. I think Tom
Fletcher was right here in this — on your show that looting is the economics of scarcity. You know, if you close off a part of London for two
and a half months and then allow a few trucks down at one point, that will happen.
But within five days of the ceasefire, there was no looting because there was no black market. So, you know — and right now there are — there is
food in trucks across a border for a million people for four months. Now, for UNICEF, I mean, I’ve seen those moms, I see the moms and the grandmoms.
I was at a nutrition point getting that malnourished food. So, we know I. What’s not being done?
We are fortunate because we do trauma work, we do education work. It’s not all supply driven. But my goodness, for colleagues, the level of
frustration when you see malnourished children with grandmothers with that denial of food is heartbreaking and beyond.
AMANPOUR: Well, we are pleased that you’re here to tell us about it. James Elder, because people have to know and try to do something to make it
different. Thank you very much for being here.
ELDER: Thank you.
AMANPOUR: Thank you. So, as long as there is no ceasefire, not only no aid for Gaza, but no respite either for the hostages who are still held there
by Hamas or for their families. Evyatar David is one of them. He was taken by Hamas from the Nova Music Festival on October 7, 2023. For his mother
Galia, it has been 641 days of anguish and dashed hopes, as she told me here in the studio.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
AMANPOUR: Galia, thank you very much for coming in. And it’s extraordinary to think that it’s more than 640 days since this atrocity happened and your
son was among those kidnapped and held hostage. Do you think that this time, as they talk about hostage release and potential ceasefires, do you
have any extra hope or have you been this route too many times?
GALIA DAVID, MOTHER OF HOSTAGE EVYATAR DAVID: This is the first time that I really have hope, because in the last deal when it’s began, it was just
the first phase.
AMANPOUR: Tell me what happened. He was taken from the Nova Festival.
DAVID: Yes, yes. A festival of love. A music festival. And he was with three friends. One of them, Guy Gilboa Dalal, was kidnapped with him. And
other two were brutally murdered.
AMANPOUR: Which is horrible. Did the one who was kidnapped with him, he’s come out, right?
DAVID: No.
AMANPOUR: No. He’s still there?
DAVID: He is still there.
AMANPOUR: But you have heard about your son.
DAVID: I heard the testimonies from —
AMANPOUR: Others who were with him being held.
DAVID: Yes. For a long period of time.
AMANPOUR: And what do they say about how he’s doing, how their conditions were?
DAVID: Very bad. Very bad condition. Right now, at this time, at this minute, they’re under tortures, physical and mental tortures. They are
underground right now, in a narrow tunnel and one meter wide and 10-meter long with a hole for the needs. They barely have food or water to drink and
all medicine care. And —
AMANPOUR: How do you think — you know your son. How do you think he’s holding up?
DAVID: My son is very modest. And also, you have strong personality. But I hope that he is still know that we are doing everything to bring him from –
AMANPOUR: Bring him back.
DAVID: — this hell. Yes.
AMANPOUR: So, I know you’re not a political person, but you have endured and all the Israeli families have endured, you know, 20 months of this and
of not knowing when you’re going to see your relatives back. And I wonder if you have a message for your prime minister now who seems to have put
defeating Hamas above bringing back the hostages. Do you feel that way?
DAVID: I think that he’s talking different in the last two weeks. And I hear that he changed the priority of the war. And I hope that at the end,
and it’ll be soon, peace will achieve. And it’s — it can be possible just after all the hostages will come home.
AMANPOUR: There was a video of your boy, Evyatar, kind of in the background when others were released. You saw that. And —
DAVID: Of course.
AMANPOUR: — that must have been just hellacious to see your son having to endure other people’s freedom and not be able to get out then.
DAVID: It was, first of all, a torture for him, a sadistic one. And for me, it was a sign of life. But very tough one, because the look in his
eyes, his body language, his gestures, this is not my boy. This is not my son. Imagine after 505 days they brought Evyatar and Guy Gilboa Dalal out
from underground and they just forced them to watch to see. And they’re begging for their life. And after that, they closed the door, the van door
and took them back underground.
AMANPOUR: This time you hope though things might be a little different. Do you think the prime minister maybe — you think the negotiations are closer
than they’ve ever been?
DAVID: I hope so.
AMANPOUR: How do you get through the day, every day and the night?
DAVID: Barely eat, barely sleep. And I’m trying all the time to make Evyatar’ voice, because he just can’t speak for himself. So, I must do it.
AMANPOUR: Well, you’re an eloquent voice, and people will relate as they have done to the pain of the hostage families and of all the hostages. So,
thank you, Galia, for coming in.
DAVID: Thank you very much. And I hope we will receive good news as soon as possible.
AMANPOUR: I do too.
DAVID: And all this — the war will finish. And first of all, all of the hostages must come home and the war also must be finished.
AMANPOUR: Thank you.
DAVID: Thank you very much.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
AMANPOUR: We’ll have more perspective on this right after a break. Stay with us.
AMANPOUR: President Trump this week touted the success of the 12-day war between Israel and Iran, and teased the possibility of expanding the
Abraham Accords, a set of agreements which saw Bahrain, Morocco, Sudan, and the UAE normalize relations with Israel during Trump’s first term. But the
assessments of the actual damage inflicted on Iran are ongoing, and there are still questions like, why Israel chose to bomb Iran’s notorious Evin
Prison, resulting in dozens of deaths there.
So, as talk increases of a ceasefire in Gaza, let’s examine Israel’s aims and its strategic goals with Tamir Hayman, who was the IDF intelligence
chief from 2018 to 2021, and who’s now the head of the influential Israeli think tank, The Institute for National Security Studies. He’s joining me
from Tel Aviv. Mr. Hayman, welcome to the program.
Can I first start by asking you whether you know much more than we do about what’s happening in the talks in Doha, in the talks in Washington? And
whether you think like, Galia David, the mother of Evyatar, who’s still a hostage, that this time there appears to be more hope for a ceasefire and a
hostage release and prisoner exchange?
TAMIR HAYMAN, FORMER IDF INTELLIGENCE CHIEF AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, INSTITUTE FOR NATIONAL SECURITY STUDIES: Yes. Thank you, Christiane. And
the only — the good news is that there’s no news. There’s silence. Nobody talks about that. No Hamas not leaks from the press, from the Israeli side
or the Palestinian or the Qatari. And in that aspect, the no news is a good news.
And according to what is being declared by from the White House, it seems like it’s all comes down to one single point of disagreement that is now
being negotiated, which is, where are the lines that Israel were going to withdraw during the temporary ceasefire, and what will be the distribution
of the humanitarian aid available in those area?
And this is a very crucial step because we are not talking about a single stage deal. There is this two-stage deal. We have still 20 living hostages,
and in the first stage, only 10 of them are going to be released. So, Israel must keep some leverage to the second stage negotiation, which will
be the more crucial one. Because this is the last stage and the last remaining leverage of Hamas in order to ensure its existence in Gaza.
AMANPOUR: So, sorry, what will the second stage look like then?
HAYMAN: Well, this will be the final stage and it will be crucial. From Hamas side, they will insist of full withdrawal from Gaza and assurances
that the war has ended and there will not be a renewal of hostilities. From the Israeli side, we must release all of the living hostages and the dead
one. And it will be very hard negotiation because it’s a matter of lack — complete lack of trust between those two negotiating parties.
In order to create that kind of trust, there need to be a third party assurances, and that’s probably will be the Trump effect. And he — if he
will ensure to both sides that they will keep their red lines, there might be hope, but it will be certainly very, very complicated.
AMANPOUR: Can I just pick up on what you said, the two main issues, at least, you know, one huge issue as you articulated in your first answer,
was the humanitarian situation? And you also talked about Israel, you know, needing its leverage. I don’t know whether humanitarian aid is used as
leverage as you say, but you have heard some very, very serious and compelling testimony from a UNICEF official. You’ve heard it from the head
of the U.N., you’ve heard it from people all over on the ground in Hamas who can get the word out. You’ve seen the number of Gazans who’ve been
killed trying to come to this weird creation of some apparently not very functional distribution center.
I mean, I want to know your point on this. What is the point of starving or reducing the amount of food and water to a population? How does that serve
your strategic goals, and do you think it’s in Israel’s interest?
HAYMAN: It’s not the Israeli interest and it’s not the Israeli goal. It’s not the Israeli method. There’s no intention to inflict some pressure on
the humanitarian, on the civilians. The pressure that I referred to is Hamas. Hamas leverage over the civilian is taking control of humanitarian
aid.
What Hamas does, in the formal way of distribution, it took control the humanitarian convoys, raided them, and then resell the supply in a very,
very expensive prices to the civilians. By that, he insured two things. One, funding money that he gained in order to recruit new recruitment into
(INAUDIBLE). And secondly, the authority, the sovereignty of the — over the aid.
What the IDF is trying to do and Israel is trying to do is circumvent Hamas and directly deliver the humanitarian aid to the civilians. There is no —
any effort to starve or —
AMANPOUR: Well —
HAYMAN: And by doing that, with two different methods that you have criticized, but it’s a matter of major attempts to circumvent Hamas and
reach to the final — to the civilians.
AMANPOUR: Yes. You know, I understand what you’re saying, but it just doesn’t appear that way. And you know that your own prime minister has —
you talk about people stealing food, but your own prime minister has enabled a whole another group to circumvent Hamas in what he might think is
a strategic, you know, win for him. But clearly, that’s just adding fuel to this gangland of fire. And you know, that when the U.N. was doing it, they
were able to make sure that they had the security and the ability.
So, what I just want to know from you is, really is it in Israel’s interest to become a global pariah in the eyes of many people for forcibly, you
know, restricting food and clean water just by not turning the electricity on? It’s called collective punishment. I just don’t understand after 20
months, whether — you are a strategist, do you think this should go on?
HAYMAN: No. Of course, Israel has no interest on blackening its name and becoming a pariah state. And some facts need to be added to this
conversation. First of all, water. You have asked very perfectly good questions. So, let me deliver part of the answer.
As we speak right now, there are three pipes of water that delivers clean water from Israel to the Gaza Strip, one directly to Gaza Strip — to Gaza
City, one to the Mawasi area where most of sanctuary for Palestinians there. And the third one goes to the central camp. As we speak right now.
Secondly, there are three distribution methods that being implemented as we speak. One, convoys, trucks full of humanitarian aid that entered the
enclave from the north directly to the civilians. By the way, those are being raided by Hamas as we speak, but in order to relieve the pressure of
the Gaza Strip in the north, we are continuing to do that.
Secondly, the GHF, which tries through this four distribution points to deliver the aid directly to the civilian, they have already distributed
more than 1 million and a half packages for families. And the third method, which you describe differently than I — what I would’ve described it, it’s
what is trying to achieve in the southern part of Gaza Strip in the former city of Rafah, where a local warlord, he’s a warlord. He took control of
this area and we hope that civilians that will choose to go south to the former city of Rafah, will receive all the necessity, all of the
humanitarian aid available to achieve.
AMANPOUR: OK.
HAYMAN: This is what’s happening right now. And it’s slightly different than the descriptions.
AMANPOUR: Yes. You know, I’m relying on the people who’ve been there. But you’ve just said a warlord, voluntary, and he’s going to be in charge of
it. It doesn’t sound great to me. I want to ask you something though, because you’ve written serious papers about this.
You have said that there’s a contradiction, if I’m reading you right, between Israel’s two central goals, securing the release of the hostages
and eliminating Hamas’ fighting capability. Can you — what is the contradiction? And do you think that Netanyahu’s maximalist goal that he
keeps saying, destroy, eliminate, all those maximalist words about Hamas, is possible to achieve?
Because the U.S. believes — what Biden administration believe that Hamas’, you know, capabilities that you’re trying to end, you had done it last
summer. So, what is the point of this continuing war?
HAYMAN: If you are presenting it like sometimes my prime minister says, as a zero-sum game, it’s contradiction. It’s a full contradiction. Because if
you say to Hamas that I — my aim is eventually eradicate you, obliterate you from the face of the earth, he will not let go of the only insurances
for its survival, which is the — which are the hostages?
In order to omehow balance the — or get those two contradictional objectives, you must, first of all, replace Hamas as a ruling entity by a
third element, maybe along the lines of the Egyptian-Arab proposal combined with the Palestinian Authority in some manner. And that is the only way
that Hamas will be able or accept to release the hostages.
And what will happen with Hamas? Because Hamas is the entity that’s responsible for all the misery that we are seeing right now by launching
this massive attack on October 7th. Well, my answer to those who ask these questions, that it’ll be a long attrition war. Beneath the level of a full-
scale war, like we have done in the West Bank in the second Intifada, and it’ll take years.
But first of all, we must replace it as a ruling entity, release all the hostages, declare the war ended, and continue gradually eroding its
capability till the end, till we are finalized and achieved this mission.
AMANPOUR: I think you guys call that mowing the lawn, this endless, trying to — you know, this attrition. And actually, I asked you that in relation
also to the Iran 12-day strikes between Israel, the United States, and Iran.
This is what the Pentagon spokesman said about the assessments. I’m just going to read it because we don’t have that much time. But he said that,
you know, allies and intelligence around the world share sentiments that the degradation of Iran’s nuclear program is probably one to two years.
That’s the initial assessment.
Now, that, I’m telling you, and you know, is much shorter than what the JCPOA and the Iran nuclear deal had guaranteed. They had guaranteed a much
longer degradation of the abilities. So, I guess my question to you is, A, do you think you’ve done what you wanted to do in Iran? And B, do you think
there too, you’ll continue this mowing the lawn, war of attrition every time anything pops up? How do you think this is going to end?
HAYMAN: First of all, moving out of the JCPOA was a mistake. I agree with you. If we would’ve continued the path of the JCPOA, we weren’t being in a
such crucial situation like we were just before the 12 days war. The situation was that Iran was a threshold nuclear state, and there was
dramatic achievements done in Iran, and they have promoted themself in the threshold nucleus stage to a situation where they again added advantage
over Israel capability in the future. They might have got this advantage. So, Israel had to act.
Eventually, what is being achieved right now, what is achieved that Iran is no longer a threshold nuclear state. And delaying that for a year or two
year enables Israel to intervene in the future if they would’ve decide — if they will decide differently.
AMANPOUR: OK. All right.
HAYMAN: And along this path, there is the path of pressuring for a new nuclear deal, which we hope that this pressure that we have inflicted will
help us in achieving a better deal than before.
AMANPOUR: Tamir Hayman, thank you very much indeed for joining us. And we’ll be right back after this short break.
AMANPOUR: Turning now to the United States President Trump’s sweeping domestic policy bill is signed into law. Millions of people on Medicaid are
set to lose their health insurance. Michel Martin speaks with the governor of Kentucky about the real-life effect this could have on rural communities
like his own.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MICHEL MARTIN, CONTRIBUTOR: Thanks, Christiane. Governor Beshear, thank you so much for speaking with us.
GOV. ANDY BESHEAR (D-KY): Thanks for having me on.
MARTIN: So, you — let’s just go right to it. You called the president’s tax and spending bill, which he and his Republican allies have called the
one big beautiful bill, the worst legislation you’ve seen in your lifetime. As briefly as you can, tell us why.
BESHEAR: This is the most destructive bill I’ve seen in my lifetime. In Kentucky, it’s going to kick 200,000 people off their healthcare coverage.
That’s going to include kids and seniors. It’s going to include people who need cancer treatment and who will lose their lives without that coverage.
On top of that, it’s going to fire 20,000 healthcare workers from all around Kentucky, and it may shutter up to 35 rural hospitals.
So, whether you are on private insurance or on Medicaid, if you are a rural American, you’re going to have to drive hours just to see a doctor. And
then, what it does to our rural economies is going to be incredibly painful, because if you remove hundreds of doctors and nurses and orderlies
from that rural hospital, that’s typically the second largest employer in that community, everybody feels the pain, the coffee shop, the restaurant,
the bank. I mean, this is a direct attack on rural America that it’s going to make it so much harder for struggling Americans to get by.
MARTIN: Let’s just talk about the patients themselves. One of the arguments for this bill that its supporters keep insisting on is that it
will shore up the finances of Medicaid in particular so that in particular children, in particular people who are the most vulnerable, people who are
disabled, that it’ll stabilize the finances of Medicaid so that these people, in particular, will continue to get care. You’re saying that’s just
not true?
BESHEAR: It’s not, because if it was, they would’ve exempted them from large parts of the bill. The way they’re going to get their, quote/unquote,
“savings” is by increasing the level of paperwork, making you prove your eligibility multiple extra times when there are already so many checks in
there. And so, what happens when a family has a child with a severe disability that is covered by Medicaid doesn’t check a certain box once or
twice a year, that family could lose coverage for up to six months.
It is mean, it is cruel. Think about that senior, because 70 percent of our long-term care costs in Kentucky are covered by Medicaid. That senior who
is already getting significant care, whose family probably has to fill out those forms, if it’s not done right now, that person loses that long-term
care coverage. And so, that family has to take them back into their home, try to cover those expenses, which is likely impossible, probably can’t go
to work because of the full-time help that’s needed. This is the damage it’s going to cause to people’s life, and they’re going to know exactly who
did it to them, President Trump and the Congressional Republicans.
MARTIN: Talk a little bit, if you would, about the impact on rural hospitals and the financing and why you’re so convinced that it’ll have
such a devastating effect on rural hospitals in particular, because, again, the administration and their allies say that there’s a fund specifically
set up to support rural hospitals. So, tell us why you say that you think this many hospitals will close and why it’ll have such a severe impact.
BESHEAR: The way I know that rural hospitals are going to get hit hard and many are going to have to close is that they are not only telling me,
they’re telling the country. The Kentucky Hospital Association is a pretty conservative group, but they have been out with these projections saying,
please do not do this to one of the fastest growing sectors of the economy. And they’ve been very clear about the numbers.
This is over a trillion-dollar cut to the healthcare industry. That’s a trillion dollars of revenue that supports these rural hospitals. And there
is a $50 billion fund to help rural hospitals. The reason it won’t work is math. It is grossly insufficient.
And when you look at rural hospitals, the reason they get hit more is that there is a larger Medicaid population than others. And there are fewer
people that may be traveling to them. But what it means is you’re going to have to drive hours just to see your family practitioner, you’re not going
to have the same specialties.
Think about OBGYNs, 40 percent of all births in Kentucky are covered by Medicaid, and that’s an area that hospitals struggle on the finances. What
you’re going to see is in rural America having to drive hours just to get to a big city to even give birth. It’s going to have massive implications
for our country and for urban America too. But just — I mean, this is a punch in the face of rural America and my state.
MARTIN: Governor, your congressional delegation is weighted toward Republicans. Your delegation was kind of split. Your senators split. One
voted for the bill, one voted against the bill. Rand Paul voted against the bill. Mitch McConnell, who is the longtime Republican leader in the Senate,
voted for the bill in the House. The one Democrat in the congressional delegation voted against it along with one Republican Thomas Massie.
I was just curious what you make of that. Like why do you think that they split, which they all normally don’t?
BESHEAR: Well, I’m going to do something that people probably don’t expect, and that’s to give Thomas Massie and Rand Paul some credit. And I’m
willing to do that because my job isn’t to be the best democratic governor of Kentucky, it’s just to be the best governor of Kentucky for my people.
Rand Paul and Thomas Massie are just about the only two individuals, save a couple others, that were willing to stand up for the president. And I’ll
give them credit for standing up on fiscal grounds because this is a hugely fiscally irresponsible bill, maybe one of the most fiscally irresponsible
bills I’ve ever seen. It’s going to add trillions to the national debt and it’s going to push hundreds of millions of dollars of new costs on states
blowing up our otherwise balanced budget.
But what I won’t give them credit for is that they are not fighting this bill because it hurts people, and it does. It hurts people in kicking them
off their healthcare and firing healthcare workers and closing rural hospitals, but the cuts to SNAP also mean that seniors and children are
going to go hungry at night, are going to wake up with hunger pains. And in my faith the miracle of the fishes and the loaves is one of the only
miracles in every book of the gospel. What it means is, in a country that grows plenty of food enough for everyone, nobody should starve.
MARTIN: One of the arguments that they make is that this bill will somehow generate enough economic activity. That it’ll make up for the loss of, I
don’t know, spending, I guess. I guess that’s the argument, that it’ll sort of generate this explosion of economic activity. And you are convinced that
that’s wrong.
BESHEAR: Yes, that ain’t going to happen. This bill —
MARTIN: How do you know? Yes. How do you know?
BESHEAR: This — because they’ve cut a trillion dollars of revenue out of one of the fastest growing industries in America. If you cut a trillion
dollars out of the economy, out of healthcare, then you are not going to generate extra dollars out of it.
And then on top of that, you have a tariff policy that is destructive, that is slowing our economy. We’re seeing fewer projects move forward, and we’re
seeing small businesses lay people off. But here’s another point about this bill, it’s going to hurt worker productivity. Because if you are a worker
in rural America that concurrently go see a doctor in your community in the morning, but now, you have to drive several hours, you got to take the
whole day off of work.
But then, if your parent comes back into your home, you’ve got to get them to their doctor’s appointment two hours away. So, you take another day off
work. And let’s say you have two kids. Hopefully, you can get their appointment on the same day. You’ve got to take yet another day off work.
Or if you lose your coverage, you get sick more often and you miss more days of work. That makes our country and our workforce less productive.
MARTIN: And I’m just curious why, if this is so obvious to you, it wasn’t as obvious to the other people who represent your state? And I’m just
wondering why you think you see it so differently?
BESHEAR: You know, what I see are people who lack the courage to do the right thing and have abdicated their oath of office. They were elected to
be the best senator or congressman for their constituents not to do the bidding of the president. And they’re more concerned with seeing the
president’s smile at them than whether or not they have a rural hospital open in their district, or whether people are or are not starving in their
district. This was a test of basic humanity and those that voted for this bill failed.
MARTIN: But then again, these — I mean, presumably these are the same people who voted for President Trump, and his argument is that this is what
they voted for.
BESHEAR: I don’t think anybody voted to lose their job. I don’t think anybody voted to lose their healthcare coverage. I don’t think anybody
voted to have their rural community and economy hit and impacted, potentially even destroyed.
You know, President Trump is president because he convinced the last group of movable voters that he was more focused on helping them pay the bills at
the end of the month and that the vice president was distracted on a whole lot of other issues.
But everything in his term is making it so much harder. Seeing the doctor is going to be harder. Paying the bills under tariffs are going to be
harder. And people are starting to feel betrayed. And certainly, if you voted for President Trump and you lose your job because of this bill, you
are being betrayed.
MARTIN: Well, except that the way this bill is structured, you know, Governor, is that the tax cuts come in sooner and the spending cuts come in
later. And it was structured that way. The tax cuts come in before the midterm elections where presumably if people experience what you say they
will, they could hold people accountable for their votes. But the tax cuts come in before the midterms and most of the spending cuts come in the out
years after the midterms. So, given that reality, how do you persuade people that this is what you say it is?
BESHEAR: You’re going to see the pain and you’re going to see it earlier than they think. Because if you are a business and you know you’re going to
lose a lot of revenue in two to three years, you don’t wait until that moment and fall off the cliff. They’re having to make plans now on what
lines to cut, on what services to provide, on what hospitals might have to be closed. Those that thought, just pushing this off would prevent people
from seeing it, first, that’s really wrong. We’re going to do something really painful, but we’re going to put it until after the next election so
that you reelect us. I mean, that’s wrong. That’s not what public service is supposed to be about.
But they also don’t understand how these businesses work when the decisions are going to have to be made. These hospitals are going to have to
rightsized their budgets before the full cut comes.
MARTIN: There are provisions that are meant to be attractive to lower- income people or middle-income people like the tax on tips. The — this was another one of the president’s campaign promises saying that he was going
to add a new tax. And also, he’s promising that, you know, most seniors won’t see taxes on their social security. But I am wondering whether you
think that that would be — that those provisions will be enough to make it attractive to people, even though you say it will be more harmful than it
will be beneficial?
BESHEAR: It won’t be attractive to people. And this is why you don’t put this much stuff in one bill, and including some provisions that appear to
just be buying off someone for a vote here or a vote there, sending something to their state. The people you’re talking about that rely on
taxes and tips are the people that live on the margins and how they get their healthcare. Many of them may be getting it through the state-run
exchanges, which are going to take a beating as well. Many of them are the working poor that are otherwise covered on Medicaid or they have a family
member at home who are covered on Medicaid. They are the people working in that rural restaurant that now are going to have fewer people coming in
because so many people that have affordable income have lost their jobs.
And when you think about the tax cuts, yes, a tax cut — it would be really nice for a doctor if they still had a job. But if they lose their job
because of this bill, they have no income and there’s no tax cut.
MARTIN: So, before we let you go, and you know, I kind of hate this game that we have to play, you know, where you’re going to run for president,
you’re not, you know, you know what I mean? But you have to be thinking about it. I mean, you have to be thinking about if you feel that the
situation is as dire as you say that it is. So, would you at least tell us whether you’re thinking about it?
BESHEAR: Yes, if you’d asked me a couple years ago whether I was considering this, I’d say no. My family’s been through a lot. I love this
job and it is more than enough to be able to serve the people of your state for eight years. But I do not want to leave my kids a broken country. So,
this year and next year in my job as governor, I’m going to be working to create jobs and try to expand healthcare, what I can with this bill, to
build safer roads and bridges, improve our public schools, and make sure everybody feels safe in their community.
Next year, I’m the head of the Democratic Governor’s Associations. And we’re going to be planning in a lot of states where the Republican
governors have said nothing about this big ugly bill and their people are suffering.
And then after that, when I sit down and think about it, my question is going to be, am I a person that can repair what’s broken? Am I a person
that could heal this country? Because we can’t go on with the us versus the thems. We can’t go on divided when our pledge says we will keep our country
indivisible.
So, if I’m that candidate, I’ll think about it. If someone else is, I’ll be fully behind them, because I care a lot more about this country and its
future, for everybody’s children than I do about what role I might play.
MARTIN: Governor Andy Beshear of Kentucky. Governor, thank you so much for talking with us once again.
BESHEAR: Thanks for having me again.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
AMANPOUR: And that’s it for now. Thanks for watching, and goodbye from London.