Read Full Transcript EXPAND
BIANNA GOLODRYGA, ANCHOR: Hello, everyone, and welcome to “Amanpour.” Here’s what’s coming up.
Gaza’s hunger crisis deepens while Israeli fire kills dozens more aid seekers, according to the health ministry there. We have the details on
this desperate situation. Also, a ceasefire deal ends days of fighting in Syria, but will it hold? The Atlantic Council’s Ibrahim Al-Assil joins me
from Damascus to explain what this means for the nation’s fragile new leadership.
VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT (through translator): A meeting at the level of leaders is needed to truly ensure peace, a lasting peace.
Ukraine is ready for such a meeting.
GOLODRYGA: But is Russia? As Putin steps up his summer offensive, I speak to military analyst Franz-Stefan Gady, about what he saw near Ukraine’s
frontlines and what options the country still has left.
And later —
JENNIFER SENIOR, STAFF WRITER, THE ATLANTIC: 30 to 35 percent of Americans report, at least temporarily, some form of insomnia.
GOLODRYGA: — “Why Can’t Americans Sleep?” Atlantic staff writer Jennifer Senior lays out the solutions for insomniacs. And tells Hari Sreenivasan
why she believes this is a public health emergency.
Welcome to the program everyone. I’m Bianna Golodryga, New York sitting in for Christiane Amanpour.
The people of Gaza are facing an impossible choice right now, trying to survive starvation or risk their lives to find food. On Sunday, more than
70 people were killed by Israeli gunfire while trying to access food in one of the deadliest days for aid seekers yet, that is according to the Gaza
Health Ministry, which says more than 1,000 Palestinians have been killed while trying to receive aid since late May. The IDF says that it is
investigating the latest incident.
Now, 25 nations, including the U.K., Canada, and France, have united to condemn what they call the, quote, “drip feeding” of aid and the inhumane
killing of civilians, and to appeal for an end to the war. But for many, it’s already too late, as Paula Hancocks reports. And a warning, this
report contains some disturbing images.
PAULA HANCOCKS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Four-year-old Razan Abu Zaher
was hospitalized with malnutrition more than one month ago.
Malnutrition has caused her to suffer from a mobility disability, her mother says. Her health was good before the war, but there is nothing to
strengthen her no milk in the hospitals or pharmacies. Sunday, Razan became the latest child in Gaza to die of hunger. Her skeletal body laid out on a
slab of stone, painful proof of the famine the U.N. and others have long warned about. It is shocking, but should not be surprising.
In the space of 24 hours, 18 deaths were caused by famine, according to the Ministry of Health in Gaza.
Yasser Ahmed (ph) was waiting at this soup kitchen since 6:00 a.m. desperate to take something home to his family of 12. Flour is expensive,
he says, everything is expensive. Where can we get food from? We don’t know what we’ll do in the end, eat each other.
When his turn comes, the amount poured into his bowl is minimal. He walks the four kilometers back home. When his wife sees how little is in the pot
she starts crying.
Is this enough for 12 people she asks? Is it enough for a woman who is seven months pregnant, even a one-year-old child wouldn’t be satisfied by
this?
Pouring the watery soup into one bowl, the family eats together. The father allows himself just one spoonful, leaving the rest for his children and
grandchildren. After this, he says he will go to another soup kitchen to see if he can keep starvation at bay for one more day.
Israel says the military is working to allow and facilitate the transfer of humanitarian aid into Gaza, including food, adding there are trucks yet to
be picked up by aid groups.
The U.N. says Israel often denies permission to move aid or approves routes too dangerous to travel. Thousands across Gaza risk their lives every day
in the search for food. At least 73 people were killed Sunday by Israeli gunfire or trying to access aid according to the Palestinian health
ministry.
The IDF says it, quote, “fired warning shots” in order to remove an immediate threat posed to them. It cast doubt on the death toll. The U.N.
says accessing aid has become a death trap. The U.N. World Food Programme says Gaza’s hunger crisis has now reached new levels of desperation.
Hospital officials say they’re seeing an unprecedented number of starving citizens arriving at emergency departments, a man-made catastrophe that has
been continuously warned about. No one can say they didn’t see this coming.
GOLODRYGA: Our thanks to Paula Hancocks for that incredibly disturbing and important report.
Well, for more on the situation in Gaza, let’s bring in Jeremy Diamond in Tel Aviv. And, Jeremy, you and I spoke in the last hour, and we’ve said
scenes like this have become all too familiar, and also reporting of civilians being killed as they’ve massed to gather food over the last
several months, in particular, being injured, being stampeded, being shot at, and killed. What are officials saying in response to these continuous
headlines?
JEREMY DIAMOND, JERUSALEM CORRESPONDENT: Well, listen, you know, what’s so devastating about the humanitarian situation in Gaza right now,
Bianna, is not just the starvation that we are seeing, the lack of sufficient food and medical supplies and just really basic necessities
entering the Gaza Strip, but it is also the violence that has taken place near these aid distribution points with near daily occurrences now of
Israeli troops opening fire on crowds of hungry Palestinians trying to make it to these aid sites.
And whereas, you know, a month and a half ago when these shootings first began, we had denials from the Israeli military and, you know, we did an
investigation at the time that showed that it was very likely the Israeli military that had opened fire. Now, we are in a situation where the
military really doesn’t even deny that this is taking place. They quibble with the figures of deaths that are taking place, they refer to those shots
that they’re firing at crowds as warning shots, but they effectively acknowledge that they are, on a regular basis, opening fire on these crowds
of people trying to approach these aid distribution sites.
And we are now seeing how much this is leading to growing isolation for Israel on the world stage as a number of western countries now, led by the
United Kingdom, France, Canada, Australia, but you also have a number of other countries, including Norway, Sweden, for example, also chiming in on
this saying that Israel is responsible for this humanitarian crisis in Gaza, which they say is reaching new depths.
They blame this aid distribution model that is run by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, but effectively stemmed from ideas from inside of Israel. And
they are also talking about this, quote, “inhumane killing” of Palestinians trying to reach those aid distribution sites. And really, the only thing
that’s going to change any of this at this point, it seems, Bianna, is if a ceasefire deal can indeed be reached.
GOLODRYGA: Yes, and it was last month that the Israeli military said that they would change the way it operates and add signs and fencing to avoid
some of these scenes that we’ve seen, particularly around the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation food distribution sites. And not sure if any of
that has been implemented as of yet.
I do want to ask you before we get to ceasefire talks about a new military operation that the IDF has just embarked upon in Gaza. The first time
they’ve actually been in Deir Al Balah. This as the ceasefire talks are ongoing. What message is this sending? Is this based on any sort of
intelligence, about potential hostage whereabouts, or is this Israel putting more pressure on Hamas perhaps to agree to a deal now?
DIAMOND: Yes, this is one of the areas of Gaza where we haven’t previously seen ground operations. And today, there have been numerous sightings of
Israeli tanks in this area. You know, it seems to be yet another effort by the Israelis to try and put further pressure on these negotiations, to get
Hamas to agree to the latest ceasefire proposal that is on the table. But there are also concerns from the families of Israeli hostages about these
operations because it’s long been believed, Bianna, that one of the reasons why Israeli tanks and troops haven’t ruled into this part of Central Gaza
was because that could be where some Israeli hostages are held, and that having Israeli troops in that area could put those hostages in danger.
It was, you know, just less than a year ago that Hamas executed six Israeli hostages because Israeli troops had closed in on that area and were
approaching, and Hamas feared that they would be captured and chose to kill them instead.
And so, we’ve heard today from the Hostages and Missing Families Forum, which expressed concern about this latest move, and called on the Israeli
government to explain how this latest defensive would not put those hostages in danger.
GOLODRYGA: It was American hostage Hersh Goldberg-Polin. Quickly, can you give us an update on these ceasefire hostage negotiation talks that are
happening now?
DIAMOND: Well, whereas last week, a lot of the focus was on Israel, on the pressure that the United States was bringing to bear on Israel to drop its
objections to withdrawing Israeli troops from a key corridor in the southern part of the Gaza Strip. That has now happened. Israel has indeed
withdrawn. Those objections will withdraw Israeli troops if the ceasefire proposal goes through from that Morag Corridor in Southern Gaza.
And now, I’m told that the focus is on Hamas. It has been nearly a week since the updated ceasefire proposal was sent to Hamas by the mediators.
And we are now still waiting for a response from Hamas. I’m also told by two sources familiar with the negotiations that Khalil al-Hayya, Hamas’
leader outside the Gaza Strip, who has been the key negotiator for Hamas of throughout this entire war, that he has said privately that he is inclined
to respond positively to this latest proposal, but he is waiting for a response from Hamas’ leaders in Gaza, and it is that lack of response from
those leaders within the Gaza Strip that seems to be holding up a potential deal at this moment.
It’s not clear if that’s due to a difficulty of communications or reservations on the part of those Hamas leaders inside of Gaza, but their
agreement is indeed critical because they would be the ones to actually implement this on the ground.
The sources that I have talked to, Bianna, have said that if those leaders do respond positively to this latest proposal, then they believe that a
deal could quickly follow thereafter. Bianna.
GOLODRYGA: It can’t come soon enough. Jeremy Diamond in Tel Aviv, thank you so much. Well, now, to another fragile ceasefire in Syria, which
appears to be holding after a week of clashes that left hundreds dead in the southern city of Suwayda. Syrian government forces intervened in an
attempt to quell the violence between Druze groups and Bedouin tribes, which only escalated tensions further, prompting Israel to carry out
airstrikes on Damascus, and what it claimed was an effort to protect the Druze. It’s only the latest surge of sectarian violence since the Assad
regime collapsed, but presents perhaps the biggest test so far for Syria’s new president, Ahmed al-Sharaa.
Ibrahim Al-Assil is a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, and he joins me now from Damascus. Ibrahim, thank you so much for joining us today. As
we note, to you are in Damascus. It is seven months since the surprising ouster of Bashar al-Assad and as-Sharaa incoming with his government now.
And as we noted, a big test for al-Sharaa. The last time we saw sectarian violence of this scale was back in March, and that was against the Alawite
community. Now, we have reports of hundreds, if not thousands killed in Suwayda. What is the update? How, in your view, long lasting can the
ceasefire be?
IBRAHIM AL-ASSIL, SENIOR FELLOW, ATLANTIC COUNCIL: Thanks for having me. These ceasefires, they are only holding for a few hours and sometimes even
shorter than that. But it’s also important to highlight that the ongoing fighting inside Syria is happening also at different parts in the governors
of Suwayda where the Druze are in Southern Syria. So, some places the ceasefire is holding, in other places it holds for probably a couple of
hours and then it’s breached again. And we are watching what’s — and how these events will unfold.
To the other section of your question about the bigger picture of what’s happening in Syria, this violence is not only disturbing, it’s also
revealing a lot about the internal dynamics inside Syria. It shows also how fragile, not only the ceasefires are, the daily ones we’re talking about,
but also the whole transition inside Syria. And now, there are many question marks about the ability of the Syrian government and about Syrians
as a society and also as many neighbors of Syria, including Israel and other regional players, if all of them are capable of taking Syria into a
more stable and peaceful place.
GOLODRYGA: As it relates to Suwayda, we know that this began between — with clashes between the Bedouins there and the Druze community, and it was
the Syrian forces that then got involved and as — at least per some reports, only exacerbated the situation. How complicit are the Syrian armed
forces in this latest round of violence? Are they actually trying to quell it? I mean, what — when — what does that say about al-Sharaa’s standing
and his hold over the country?
AL-ASSIL: That’s a very important question and a very difficult question to answer because also the government in Damascus, they don’t really
control all their fighters. So, even if the leadership wants to control them, that’s a big question if they can. And that’s also another big
question mark next to the government to actually be the government across Syria.
But they are very legitimate reports that many parts and many groups and many fighters that belong to the government ranks, they’ve been involved in
these violations and this killing against the Druze now in the south and also against the Alawites on the course.
It’s very difficult to have a blanket description on the government to say they are actually part of this problem, or they are the ones who we should
blame or they are innocent. I think all sides in this violence event, they bear some responsibility. And certainly, the government bears the biggest
part of the responsibility because they assumed this government and they said, we can move Syria into a more peaceful place. That was the promise of
Ahmed al-Sharaa to Syrians and to also the regional players, and all of that is being tested now.
GOLODRYGA: Yes, he promised to protect all minorities in the country there, and it’s proving to be a very, perhaps ambitious promise at that no
matter how determined he is to honor that pledge. U.S. Envoy Tom Barrack, who’s also the ambassador to Turkey in an interview with the AP, said that
the killing, the revenge, the massacres on both sides are intolerable, but that the current government of Syria, in his view, has conducted themselves
as best as they can, as a nascent government with very few resources to address the multiplicity of issues that arise in trying to bring a diverse
society together.
He went on to say Syrian forces if there’s evidence that they committed crime should be held accountable. But the biggest takeaway here is that
from the U.S. perspective in policy, there is no plan B to al-Sharaa. How is that being interpreted?
Ibrahim, can you hear me? I believe we may have a technical issue. We’re going to go to break, try to work that out and come back with more of our
conversation.
GOLODRYGA: All right. As we work out our technical difficulties on our conversation about Syria, we are going to turn to Ukraine now and Kyiv,
which has once again been bombarded by drones and missiles, even as Russia tries to claim it’s open to peace. And as President Trump’s 50 day deadline
counts down, President Zelenskyy has made a fresh offer for talks, including with Vladimir Putin.
So, what is the reality on the frontlines right now? Franz-Stefan Gady studies all of this closely and is the author of “How the United. States
Would Fight China.” He is just back from Ukraine and was close to the frontlines in Southern Donetsk and joins us now.
Thank you, Franz, for taking the time. So, what surprised you most from your recent visit, which I believe was just days ago to the frontlines
there in Ukraine?
FRANZ-STEFAN GADY, MILITARY ANALYST AND ADJUNCT SENIOR FELLOW, CENTER FOR A NEW AMERICAN SECURITY: Well, first of all, thank you very much for the
invitation. What surprised me the most perhaps is the tenacity and the courage of the Ukrainian armed forces fighting after really four bloody
years against this Russian onslaught. And that morale among the Ukrainian forces remains high. But of course, there are obvious signs of exhaustion
after all the years of fighting.
I think from an operational level analysis, the front, by and large, remains stable with the exception of Southern Donetsk where the main axis
of advance of the Russian armed forces currently lies. There Ukraine may have to conduct some tactical withdrawals in the not-too-distant future.
Overall, though, the frontline is not in danger of collapse, and it’s also unlikely that Russia is going to make any significant operational
breakthroughs in the not-too-distant future.
What is interesting there are some worrisome trends that I’ve noticed over the last couple of days traveling in Ukraine. One pertains really to the
drone fight between Russia and Ukraine. Here, for the longest time, throughout 2024 and for a couple of months now into 2025, Ukraine has held
an advantage, and this advantage is now in danger of slipping away along some of the axis of advance of the Russian armed forces.
And this should be concerning because the entire Ukrainian defensive system, in essence, is built around superiority in drone warfare. So, this
is something that I think should not be underestimated here.
GOLODRYGA: Yes, we’ve spent a lot of time talking about the innovations and why their impressive nature in which Ukraine has taken on in-drone
warfare here and becoming really a domestic issue of theirs in terms of producing their own drones and becoming quite nimble at it and effective in
use in inside Russia. But it’s important to note that Russia has also increased and developed their drone technology as well.
The Financial Times today reporting that their swarm tactics against Ukraine are also increasingly cutting through Ukraine’s defensive case
capabilities and at a rather alarming rate. Ukraine’s Air Forces their data suggested about 15 percent of the drones are now being penetrated through
their defenses on average between April and June. That’s just from five – that’s up from just 5 percent they were able to penetrate some months
earlier.
So, as we hear about the U.S. sending in more weapons, more defensive weapons in particular, Patriot missiles don’t really defend against drones.
So, how can Ukraine most effectively respond to these new tactics by Russia?
GADY: Well, the good news here is that Ukraine is actively working towards finding some technology solutions to address this problem. The big question
for Ukraine is always, can Ukraine actually scale up these technical technological solutions that is, for example, can they produce enough
interceptor drones that take down Shahed drones, right?
And in many ways here, I think, Ukraine is addressing the threat. And one should never forget in war, in warfare there’s always adaptation and
counter adaptation, right? So, in the sense, Ukraine now needs to adapt due to this growing Russian aerial threat.
You are absolutely right that Patriot interceptors are not the right weapons of choice to shoot down drones. They’re way too expensive, cheaper
means unnecessary. And this is what Ukraine is currently working on. And I do think in the not-too-distant future, over the next couple of months,
perhaps we will see a reduction in the impact of Shahed drones and other Russian drones when it comes to the strategic strike campaign.
But I think we should not lose focus also what’s happening on the frontline. And here, Ukraine is really getting or — getting closer to a
disadvantage vis-a-vis Russia. And I think this should be concerning. It doesn’t mean that Ukraine has lost air superiority on the frontline, but I
think Russia has been very successful in implementing certain tactics and implementing operations at scale where the Ukrainian armed forces are
really struggling now at the frontline, perhaps 12 to 14 miles behind the frontline where Russian forces are increasingly targeting Ukrainian UAV
drone teams and the logistics of Ukrainian drone teams.
And this is something that I also took away from my recent trip to Ukraine, that Ukraine also needs to find countermeasures to essentially balance this
growing threat on the frontline out in addition to attacks on Ukrainian cities where Ukraine is — excuse me, that Russia is targeting Russian —
Ukrainian critical infrastructure, the defense industrial base. But it should also be noted that Russia is obviously targeting the civilian
population in order to break the will of Ukraine to resist.
GOLODRYGA: Right. And also exhausting their defensive capabilities and weaponry, having to really choose what it is they protect, whether it’s
their soldiers on the frontline, whether it’s their civilians in major cities, whether it’s their infrastructure and grid and electricity, all of
these are tactics used by Russia.
If you talk about — and I’ve heard you in interviews and read a number of your reports, if the main issue though, and setback for Ukraine is one of
manpower, how does Ukraine make up for that? Because if it’s a game of numbers and it comes down to the manpower that Russia has at its disposal,
not to — you know, let’s not even factor in North Korean troops assisting them, what more can be done? Is it about lowering the conscription age,
which I know is not very palatable for most Ukrainians at this point?
GADY: Well, I think you say it rightly. I think the major issue that the Ukrainian armed forces and Ukraine as a whole is facing in this war
attrition as is the lack of manpower, that’s the reason why they implemented in 2024 a defensive system essentially that’s built around
unmanned systems, drones, essentially, superiority in drone warfare that was meant to compensate for the lack of manpower.
Now, this system is under threat, right? Currently. And this is a rather daunting challenge for Ukraine. Ukraine, obviously, needs to build up
additional reserves, manpower, reserves. But it is a challenge. So, I think in my opinion, in the short to medium-term, the solution can’t just be
expanding the manpower base of the Ukraine armed forces. I think the solution will need to be unmanned. That is technological solutions at
scale, additional intercepted drones, additional other military capabilities to scale up the production of unmanned systems.
And I’m not talking about drones that fly in the air. I’m also talking about additional ground systems, for example, that also increasingly are
becoming more relevant to this was where — what — for example, pertains to logistics where ground robots essentially are supplying Ukrainian
forces, which on occasion are trapped for 80 to a hundred days or more without rotating at the frontline because of the lack of manpower, but also
because of the increasing Russian drone threat. And these forward position soldiers are being resupplied by essentially ground robots.
GOLODRYGA: That’s fascinating.
GADY: So, this is also part of a solution. Yes.
GOLODRYGA: That is fascinating. And you talk about the innovative ways that Ukraine is making up for its manpower, shortage and shortcomings. And
you described in a recent interview about speaking with a brigade commander who was holding a 900-meter stretch of the frontline with only an eight-man
squad.
Just give us more insight into the reality now that so many of these commanders are facing when it comes to their ability to see more of their
fighters actually holding the line.
GADY: Well, I think one issue with the infantry fight, so to speak, that a fight soldier against soldier is because of the pervasive nature of the
drone threat that these soldiers very often can’t really engage opposing forces, right? So, they need to hide on the battlefield because if you’re
detected, most likely you are going to get hit, perhaps killed and wounded, right.
So, in a way, the soldiers, the infantry has somewhat of a passive role on the battlefield these days. That’s why I’m emphasizing really the drone
fight over the next couple of months. I do have to say that infantry is still very important on the battlefield. Artillery, in addition, is
extremely important on the battlefield. It’s the combination of artillery with drones essentially that causes the high number of drone casualties on
the battlefield because, the artillery essentially is analyzing Russian attacks. It’s also suppressing Russian attacks. And only once the artillery
has done its work, it can drones essentially move in and pick off their targets, so to speak.
So, the character is changing in this fight every couple of months, and that’s the reason also why we — the team that I’m with need to go back and
forth every couple of months to ascertain what’s really happening on the battlefields in Ukraine.
GOLODRYGA: And how quickly the dynamics are shifting. And I guess my final question to you is what lessons longer-term, bigger picture, not just
involving Russia and Ukraine, but the future of warfare perhaps, and also, you know, as the U.S. is eyeing China, a war that began three years ago
with the focus o on tanks and aircraft now quickly shifting to that of drones and robots suggest what about the future of warfare? What should the
United States and its allies be taking away from this?
GADY: Well, one important takeaway is that we focus way too much on individual weapons systems and platforms. We focus way too much on
technology, technological solutions alone, and forget that we need the organizational capacity within our armed forces to essentially scale up
technological solutions. We need to have innovative tactics, how we use these new emerging technological capabilities on the battlefield. And it’s
a combination of all these different aspects, right?
And it’s the integration of different weapon systems, artillery, infantry and drones, for example, a so-called combined arms approach, that is really
the future of warfare, and that has been also always the case in terms of combat effectiveness that you need to be able to conduct combined arms
operation.
This is something that not a lot of European militaries can do at this stage and where the United States even is struggling. So, that’s probably
my main takeaway when it comes to the future of warfare and lessons learned from the war in Ukraine.
GOLODRYGA: How closely is China watching this as well?
GADY: China is exceptionally closely watching this ongoing fight. And I’m sure it’s drawing some lessons from it as well. And I think we would do
well, we the west, not to be, yes, out lessened, so to speak, by the Chinese and the People’s Liberation Army, particularly concerning any
potential future confrontation with the People’s Liberation Army in East Asia.
GOLODRYGA: It’s fascinating. We just saw President Zelenskyy post on X yesterday that he’s actually been speaking with President Trump about
cooperating more on drone technology between the two countries as this clearly is a pivotal moment in defensive structure and artillery and
weapons use and technology as well. Stefan Gady — Franz-Stefan Gady, thank you so much for the time.
Well, returning now to one of our top stories, the recent clashes in Southern Syria. Let’s bring back in Ibrahim Al-Assil who joins us from
Damascus. Apologies there. I know you have been having some technical difficulties.
I do want to pick up where we left off, and that was Tom Barrack, the U.S. Envoy saying that he believes that the new government has conducted itself
the best that it could, given its resources. Obviously, those committing crimes need to be accountable. But his biggest takeaway is there’s no plan
B from the United States’ perspective as to who’s in charge in Syria. Is that worrisome to you or do you think that’s the most realistic outcome
right now?
AL-ASSIL: I think, and I hope I, I heard all the question, and sorry about the bad connection. But also, this, when usually we’re asked about how is
Syria, this is part of the reflection of Syria, like even internet, electricity is one to two hours a day. And all of that, of course, reflects
on the transition and the ability of society and government.
For the question on the U.S. government, and I think the U.S. government is very worried about where things are going because it revealed the fragility
of the transition at large inside Syria. But it also shows that probably its time for the United States also to pause a little bit and reassess the
policy, not the general policy to give Syria a chance and to support the transition, I think that’s absolutely correct and in the right direct
direction, but about the tools and the strategy, like how can the United States help Syrian rebuild and regenerate legitimacy for the government,
and also to build a model of power sharing inside Syria that could actually help Syrians avoid such cycles of violence.
GOLODRYGA: How is Israel’s role in all of this really in an unprecedented nature intervening here? Israel says they’re doing it to protect the Druze
minority. Obviously, they have a very important Druze community in the country itself. But also many are interpreting this as Israel really
flexing its muscles now following its successful operation in Iran, trying to prove itself as a regional superpower. Some reporting that the United
States is quite uneasy about Israel’s actions. How is that complicating perhaps the situation?
AL-ASSIL: It is complicating the situation very much, and indeed, it shows also divergence between the U.S. policy and the Israeli policy. The United
States wants to help Syria in this transition, wants to help the government in unifying Syria and wants to see Syria stable and peaceful. From the
Israeli side, they want to keep Syria fragmented, and they want to keep Damascus weak. They don’t trust the government and they think that this
helps them in the regional order they are trying to build.
I think this complicates the situation inside Syria and this an area where the United States could —
GOLODRYGA: And I believe we’ve had more technical issues there with Ibrahim’s internet. Apologies for that. We’ll be right back after this
short break.
GOLODRYGA: Now, we know we all need our beauty sleep, and there’s nothing more frustrating than tossing and turning in bed and able to drift off.
Well, millions of Americas suffer from insomnia, including our next guest, the Atlantic staff writer Jennifer Senior. She speaks to Hari Sreenivasan
about her recent piece on the struggle for some shuteye and why she believes it’s becoming a, quote, “public health emergency.”
HARI SREENIVASAN, INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Bianna, thanks. Jennifer Senior, thanks so much for joining us. You wrote an article for The
Atlantic recently, “Why Can’t Americans Sleep?” My first question is how big of a problem is sleep that it requires this much attention?
JENNIFER SENIOR, STAFF WRITER, THE ATLANTIC: I feel like that story — the name is a little deceptive.
SREENIVASAN: Yes.
SENIOR: Really, it should have been called, don’t feel bad if you can’t sleep. I was trying very hard not to write a scary sleep story, but I
definitely wanted to convey the scope. Yes, because so many people have trouble.
So, the answer is 30 to 35 percent of Americans report, at least temporarily, some form of insomnia, which is to say either they can’t fall
asleep, they can’t stay asleep, or they wake up far earlier than they would like. 12 percent of Americans at least report this as a complete — as an
(INAUDIBLE) enduring condition. That number pops up to 15 percent if you’re a millennial. And another way to think about this, which I think is very
interesting, is that 18.4 percent of Americans take some medication to fall asleep either every night or some nights.
And when I mentioned this to a giant in this — the field, this woman named Suzanne Burtish (ph), she wrote back to me, that’s impossible. The number
has to be much higher, which makes you wonder, are people under reporting? Are — I guess they’re ashamed. Do they not consider melatonin a drug? Do
they not consider weed a drug? I mean, I don’t know.
SREENIVASAN: You share a lot about how this is such a personal story for you because you said, then one night, maybe two months before I turned 29,
that vaguening sense that normal sleepers have when they’re lying in bed, their thoughts pixelating into surreal images, their mind listening toward
unconsciousness, completely deserted me. How bizarre, I thought. I fell asleep at 5:00 a.m.
And this was — do you remember that kind of transition from a person who got great sleep to just, you know, no longer having it?
SENIOR: It’s such a good question and it’s so visceral when I even think about it. I was just thinking the other day that that sensation that you
have, not just of like the pixelating stuff, you know, but the — that sense that you cannot stay up another minute. You just have to roll over
and you’re out, I used to have that every night at one 1:00 on the nose. I haven’t known that sensation for over 25 years. And I still know what it —
I can still remember what it felt like. That tug into unconsciousness. There’s such a giant discontinuity in my personality or my body between
then and now.
But yes, I do remember that transition and it was abrupt. It was terrifying. I mean, at first it was just weird, but in short order, you’re
thinking something broke. Was I poisoned? Like, what happened?
SREENIVASAN: What are some of the reasons that we haven’t been able to get a handle on this?
SENIOR: I mean, some of them are — I mean, a lot of them are things that are intuitive, but a lot of them, the numbers are really fascinating. You
can start with the fact that electrification, the laid waste to our circadian rhythms —
SREENIVASAN: Yes.
SENIOR: Right? That was the first thing. So, that midnight was no longer mid night, you know, something, a lot of us stayed up until. But let’s see,
16.4 percent of Americans work non-standard hours, which is to say really night shift work. So, they’re driving home during the day, which is
confusing their internal clock, they can’t really — right. So, that’s part of it. People work second jobs. That’s part of it.
There — if you’re working — if you’re white collar, you are going to have these constant kind of like woodpeckering incursions from your bosses and
your colleagues and everyone else asking you about work. There’s no such thing — you know, the boundary between home and work has completely
dissolved.
SREENIVASAN: Yes.
SENIOR: Adolescents, they socialize online. They do homework online. We read online. The blue light online does everything. I mean, it’s horrible.
I could go on, but those are —
SREENIVASAN: You talked about cognitive behavioral therapy in this article, and there’s this idea of sleep restriction. Explain what is
happening for our audience.
SENIOR: I will. It is really one of the main pillars of cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia. It kind of is the pillar and it’s really
hard. I couldn’t swing it. I couldn’t hack it. But if people can hack it, it is supposed to work.
OK, so what do you do? Let’s — you keep your sleep diary and — or your — you have your wearable, right, and it tells you how much you sleep. And you
discover that you go to bed at, let’s say, 11:00 and you wake up at 8:00 and you’ve only slept five out of those nine hours. You compress all of
that sleep into a five-hour block. This is a discipline you do. And — which means, let’s say you want to still choose 8:00 as your wake-up time,
you have to go to bed at 3:00, and that’s it. You are allowed only those five hours in bed. That is it.
And once you have slept a majority of those hours, you still have to do it two more nights. And only after you’ve done it for three nights, then you
can reward yourself with 15 more minutes of sleep. And you have to do that for three nights. And then you get to continue — you add 15. So, it’s
really hard.
Because your sleep doesn’t just contract obligingly like an accordion into a case. This is just — it’s really hard to do. And it makes you really
hysterical with exhaustion if you can’t pull it off.
SREENIVASAN: Well, you know, as you describe this process, I can hear people in the audience who have trouble sleeping saying, oh, my god, that
sounds like the most anxiety inducing things on earth. Because part of the problem so many people have falling asleep is when they don’t fall asleep,
they’re thinking about not falling asleep, and then, all of a sudden, they’re checking their watch, oh, my God, it’s not five hours. Now, it’s
four and a half. Oh, no, I only have. Three hours left. How am I going to – – and then they’re thinking about their next day and how their life is going to be a wreck.
And I mean, there’s just — so, I wonder how much of sleep is our physiological need to rest, right? And then, our sort of managing all the
psychology around it to allow our brain to relax.
SENIOR: You are exactly right. In fact, you have isolated what basically keeps insomnia airborne, if that’s the right way. It doesn’t matter what
loft it is. I mean, at a certain point, whatever the precipitating factor, if you can even figure out what it is, kind of becomes beside the point
because you start doing insomnia, math, as you’ve said, oh, my god, now I’ve got five hours, now I’ve got four, I’ve got three.
And part of what the behavioral component of cognitive behavioral therapy is, is to not look at your watch. What they sometimes say when you’re doing
sleep restriction is you take a medication in order to make sure that you do fall asleep at the prescribed hour. And people are often very reluctant
to do that. But if you only take it for a short period of time, it’s pretty easy to — I mean, you can wean. In fact, you can wean at any time really.
You know, you just have to taper slowly and under the supervision of a doctor. And the idea is that you build up enough sleep pressure if you do
this. So, that is one.
I refused to take sleep medication. I was so afraid of it, and it just made me worse. For all the reasons you said, right. So, you have to manage your
actual anxiety about sleeping and fact check your beliefs. I mean, will you really not function the next day? Will you really get fired or will you
just be really bad at your job for a day or two? You know what I mean? You have to sort of right size your beliefs.
SREENIVASAN: And I also wonder whether there’s this sort of connection, which way the connection is between the anxiety that the lack of sleep is
giving you and depression, because there’s a lot of overlap for people who seem depressed. They say, well, I can’t sleep because of the depression.
And then, some people are like, well, I don’t, I think I’m getting depressed because I can’t sleep. Which way is it?
SENIOR: I’m so glad you asked that. That is one of the things I found most fascinating that about my research on this. The most recent wave of studies
seems to suggest that actually, of course, they’re bidirectional as any analyst or clinician would say. But it used to be that if you fell asleep
for some kind of mysterious reason, just this idiopathic onset of sleeplessness, they would say, oh, it’s depression in disguise. You’re
probably depressed and you don’t know it. This is how it’s manifesting, it’s what I was told.
And I kept looking at people and saying, you don’t understand, my day, my week is no different from the week, month, two months I’ve had before.
There’s nothing different. And everyone said I was depressed. Now, the thought is actually that sleeplessness more often causes depression than
vice versa. Now, depression can certainly cause sleeplessness, but there’s a thought that in more often is the reverse. It certainly predicts
depression in a way that depression is not quite depress — predict sleeplessness as consistently.
SREENIVASAN: Maybe in America we are in a place where there’s a larger conversation about mental health. There’s maybe a little less stigma around
taking antidepressants. Have we been kind of scared away from pharmacological solutions around sleep?
SENIOR: So, I’m very glad you asked that because I do think that unlike people are very free with saying that they’re on their Prozac or whatever,
but people don’t like to talk about whether they take things for sleep. And a lot of people do. And the question is why there’s so much shame around
it, when, as you said, with some lifestyle alterations, perhaps people wouldn’t need statins, maybe they wouldn’t need their Ozempic, which
everyone considers miraculous. They wouldn’t need their hypertension drugs, and no one says that they’re addicted to them.
But people say that they’re addicted to their sleeping pills and they call them drugs as opposed to medication. Often there’s this kind of stench of
stigma surrounding it, and I think some of it is cultural. And also, there’s a difference between dependence and addiction. People are taking
this because they’re seeking relief. And contrary to what most people think, most people don’t go beyond their prescribed doses, even though
they’re on it for years. A Danish study showed only 7 percent. That’s not much.
SREENIVASAN: We have heard for so long, you need eight hours of sleep, right? As you went and talked to all these different researchers, I mean,
what were the kind of things that they said, yes, you don’t have to worry about that thing that. That you’ve heard for 20 years, that’s not supported
by the science that I’m doing or maybe you should think about this or that more.
SENIOR: Right. So, I asked every single researcher I interviewed, tell me the dogma about sleep that you think ought to be debunked or that you think
is just totally wrong. And eight hours came up the most. So, it’s — I’m glad you mentioned it because there is actually — there are a number of
analyses, many that say that really the right amount is 6.5 to 7.4, and it’s tricky to do because what it is, is those numbers are associated with
the best health outcomes.
But what that means, you don’t know why people are sleeping more. Maybe it’s because — you can’t — you can only control for the things you can
control for. You can control for age, for weight, for, yes, I’m trying to think besides own sex, you know, all the — do you smoke?
But you know, the preexisting conditions that you might know of, it’s hard to control for all of them. So, it’s a little hard. But there are many
studies that say seven. There are many that say seven. Also, this is going to change over the course of a lifetime. Older people don’t sleep as well
as younger people. They just don’t, and they have more broken sleep. They just do.
So, when people who are 75 come into a sleep clinic and say, I’m not sleeping eight hours, the clinicians have to look at them and say, well, I
hate to break it to you, but at this age, you’re probably not going to.
SREENIVASAN: OK. So, here you are 25 years later, you have literally thrown the kitchen sink at this. You’ve tried acupuncture and acupressure
and cognitive behavioral therapy and drugs and everything else. So, what’s your suggestion for who to reach out to? Because you know, as you describe
in this story, I mean the infrastructure is uneven and the experts might differ in their opinions.
SENIOR: Right. It’s a great question. And certainly, some people need sleep studies overnight. Maybe they have apnea. There’s all sorts of things
that they could — you’re right. I would say to people, number one, if it’s been a persistent condition, get yourself on a list for a sleep clinic to
see, yes, if they can give you cognitive behavioral therapy. If you feel like you’re taking meds and they’re raging out of control, they may be able
to help you manage them, taper them, reassess what you’re taking. See if it’s conflicting.
There are apps. There was two developed by the DOD and the VA that are quite — one is kind of — and one doesn’t include sleep restriction and
one does. I can’t remember what the name is, but if you just type in cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia on Google and you write
Department of Defense and Veterans Affairs, you’ll find two apps and you’ll be able to see very quickly which one has the draconian sleep restriction
one, and it is in fact the one you want. And that will be available to you immediately. Acupuncture is great. It doesn’t — it just relaxes you. I
would say that meditation does help.
SREENIVASAN: Yes.
SENIOR: It does.
SREENIVASAN: Jennifer Senior, this has been fascinating conversation. Thank you so much for, well, one, you know, turning your personal nightmare
into something that people can learn from and writing about this. And thanks so much for your time.
SENIOR: Thank you. Thanks for the great questions.
GOLODRYGA: And now, before we go, Donald Trump is officially six months into his second term and they’ve certainly been busy. Kevin Liptak has more
from the White House.
KEVIN LIPTAK, SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: President Trump is looking to celebrate his six-month mark in office. And certainly, I think
everyone would agree that it has been an eventful half a year for the president. He’s got some significant wins in Congress, at the Supreme
Court, on the world stage, but polls do show that Americans are starting to sour on some of his biggest priorities. And this matter involving the
Jeffrey Epstein files has, in a lot of ways, overshadowed the president’s accomplishments, at least over the last week.
Members of the president’s political base agitating for the administration to release more information and the president working to tamp down on the
discontent.
Now, earlier Sunday, the president chose to mark the moment by writing on Truth Social, wow. Time flies. Today is that six-month anniversary of my
second term. Importantly, it’s being hailed as one of the most consequential periods of any president. In other words, we got a lot of
good and great things done, including ending numerous wars of countries not related to us, other than through trade and/or in certain cases,
friendship. The president concludes, happy anniversary.
So, the president clearly eager to make the most of the day. He also, in an earlier post, referenced that Jeffrey Epstein matter saying that since that
controversy began bubbling up, that his approval ratings among his supporters had actually been increased.
Now, according to a CNN poll that was released last week, the president’s approval among Republicans stands at 88 percent. But overall, the
president’s numbers remain underwater. He’s at 42 percent approval overall. And when you look at some of the critical issues that have been central to
the president’s six months in office, the poll finds that more Americans disapprove of the president’s handling than approve.
So, on taxes, which is critical, the president passing that enormous bill that extends the tax cuts he assigned first term in office, he’s at 44
percent. On immigration, of course, the president pursuing a hard-line immigration agenda, the president stands at 42 percent. On the economy,
he’s at 40 percent and on foreign affairs also at 40 percent.
And so, while the six-month mark is a moment to look back, it’s also a moment to look forward. And this week the president will continue pursuing
a number of issues that are critical to his agenda. At some point, he will sign that bill that was passed by Congress last week, that clause back
funding for certain public broadcasters and on foreign aid.
The president will host the Philippine president, Ferdinand Marcos Jr., here at the White House. On Monday, there’s a critical hearing in
Massachusetts on the administration’s attempts to strip federal funding from Harvard. The president continues to pursue his trade agenda. He’ll be sending out more of those tariff letters to U.S. trade partners as we approach that August 1st deadline to strike new deals.
And then, at the end of the week, the president will be in Scotland visiting his golf courses, but also meeting with the British prime minister, Keir Starmer, in part to discuss the trade deal that they struck earlier this year.
And so, clearly the president a lot on his plate at the six-month mark, but the president also looking forward to the next 42 months that he has left in office.
Kevin Liptak, CNN, the White House.
GOLODRYGA: Our thanks to Kevin for that report. And that is it for now. Thank you so much for watching, and goodbye from New York.
END