June 18, 2025

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CHIEF INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Hello, everyone, and welcome to “Amanpour and Company.” Here’s what’s coming up.

An exclusive from Tehran. As Trump weighs joining Netanyahu’s war, I reach Iran’s deputy foreign minister talking to the Western press for the first

time and vowing not to surrender.

Then amidst the turmoil in the Middle East, the Ukraine war keeps raging on, and I talk to the Russian ambassador to the U.K. Andrei Kelin.

Plus, as Gaza descends further into hell, Palestinian American poet Hala Alyan talks to Michel Martin about identity, motherhood, and the experience

of exile.

Welcome to the program, everyone. I’m Christiane Amanpour in London.

I may do it, I may not do it. President Trump urged on by Israel’s prime minister is bringing the United States to the edge of war with Iran. But

whether he decides to actually pull that trigger, nobody knows. Residents of Tehran called upon to evacuate are afraid, mired in traffic gridlock

without enough gasoline for their vehicles as Israel continues to sow chaos and destruction even amongst the civilians who are desperate to figure out

what’s happening. Also, hitting leadership targets and nuclear sites.

Iran’s Supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, rejected Trump’s call for unconditional surrender in a taped video message aired on state TV.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

AYATOLLAH ALI KHAMENEI, IRANIAN SUPREME LEADER (through translator): Surrender to what? The Iranian nation cannot be surrendered. We have not

been subjected to anyone, and we will not accept any kind of submission.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: So, now a rare chance to hear from a high level Iranian official. Majid Takht-Ravanchi is the deputy foreign minister and is a key

player in the nuclear negotiations that were. He joined me for an exclusive interview from Tehran, and it is the first time an Iranian official —

government official has spoken to a U.S. network or to a Western network since these strikes began. Here’s our interview.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

AMANPOUR: Deputy Foreign Minister Ravanchi, thank you for joining us on the program.

MAJID TAKHT-RAVANCHI, IRANIAN DEPUTY FOREIGN MINISTER: Thank you. Good to be with you.

AMANPOUR: OK. Tell me what is going on, what has been damaged? How close to your headquarters? What can you tell me exactly about what’s happening

right now?

TAKHT-RAVANCHI: We have been witnessing an act of aggression, a clear case of naked aggression against Iran and the Iranian people since five, six

days ago. We were about to start new rounds — new round of talks with Americans on Sunday, that was 15th of June, and two days before we were

attacked by the Israelis in the middle of the night. They attacked residential areas. They attacked paramedics. They attacked, you know,

citizens who are just sleeping in their homes. They attacked our university professors. So, this is a crime against humanity. Pure and simple.

AMANPOUR: OK. So, Mr. Ravanchi, they also attacked your military leadership, your intelligence headquarters, we understand now has been hit

for the domestic control. They’ve attacked and tried to take out and damage your important nuclear sites, these centrifuge sites, the uranium

enrichment sites and others. They are causing a lot of hardship and damage to your regime. Do you believe that? It seems that from here.

TAKHT-RAVANCHI: No. As I said, they have been involved in an act of aggression, and they have, you know, martyred our military people as well,

you know, along with many Iran citizens. And they have no boundaries. They attacked everywhere.

So, you mentioned attacking against our nuclear facilities. These are safeguarded places. It is a crime, in accordance with the international

law, to attack, you know, a place which is safeguarded on their IAEA rules. So, unfortunately, the Americans and some Europeans have shielded the

Israeli regime not to be criticized at the board meeting, the Board of Governors, IAEA Board of Governors meeting, and also at the U.N. Security

Council. So, it’s a shame to all those who are protecting this regime.

AMANPOUR: OK. Let me get to a few things. Clearly you must be concerned. You must be worried that more leadership targets will be hit. You have —

what we — the supreme leader, your ruler there, Ayatollah Khamenei, the ayatollah, has come out and said that they will — you will never surrender

in response to Donald Trump.

But I understand also that things are pretty bad for you and that you have tried to reach out to the U.S. and to Israelis to try to get some kind of

negotiation track — back on track. Is that true?

TAKHT-RAVANCHI: No, that’s not true. I do not share your assessment. We are not reaching out to anybody. We are defending ourselves. Although, we

have always promoted diplomacy, but we cannot negotiate under the threats. We cannot negotiate while our people are under bombardment every day. So,

we are not begging for anything. We are just defending ourselves. And we have an experience of eight years of war against Saddam’s aggression back

in ’80s. And now, we are defending ourselves against Israeli regime, which is being helped by Americans, which is being protected by Americans and

some others.

AMANPOUR: As you know, the Israelis are much more sophisticated and powerful than Saddam Hussein ever was. That was some 40 years ago. This is

a much bigger order of magnitude. As you know also, President Trump is publicly weighing whether to join the strikes and whether specifically to

hit, for instance, the very deeply buried Fordow facility with the very big bombs.

Do you — what do you think? What are you reading? Do you think the Americans will get involved and what would your response be?

TAKHT-RAVANCHI: We don’t know. If the Americans get involved, you know, directly, definitely we — our hands will not be tied. We’ll do whatever

necessary to protect our people and our interest. The Americans have been collaborating with the Israelis. Although, they have said it that they do

not have anything to do with this conflict, which is not true. But if they decide to be engaged militarily, direct military involvement in this

massacre, definitely we will do whatever necessary to protect ourselves.

And by the way, Fordow is another protected site based on IAEA rules. So, that will be another instance of, you know, a crime which is being done

unfortunately by Israelis and Americans, which is prohibited under international law.

AMANPOUR: I’m going to get to that in a moment because the Israelis say their intelligence said that you were moving towards weaponization and they

had to act now. But I’m going to ask you that in a moment.

But first, do you believe that what is happening is regime change targeting or regime destruction targeting? How do you assess the removal of a big

layer of military commanders and what President Trump said about Ayatollah Khamenei, that he would be an easy target if they were to decide to take

him out? How do you interpret this? Is this about regime change?

TAKHT-RAVANCHI: I don’t know about their intention. Just ask them what the intention is. But we will do whatever necessary to protect ourselves. And

we have the experience. As I said, eight-year of war during Saddam’s era, when everybody was helping Saddam. So, you say that you should not compare

Saddam and Israeli regime, but do not forget the fact that all the world were behind Saddam at that time, and we were the ones who resisted.

And now, there is a very strong cohesion within the Iranian society to resist aggression, to resist foreign interference in our domestic affairs.

So, you ask the people who are in Tehran, ask the embassies, ask the people who live in Tehran these days. And ask them the morale of the people, and

you will understand that the Iranians are behind their government because they are facing a foreign aggression, which we’ll be resisting.

AMANPOUR: I’m going to get to that in a moment, because you all were very surprised when Assad fell. You didn’t know that he was that unpopular with

his people and he fled at the last minute. I’m going to get to that in a moment.

But first and foremost, I want to ask about the negotiations. President Trump has apparently told allies and friends that he felt he was being

played by the Iranian government. That there was no, you know, willingness or immediate prospect of you agreeing to the conditions of — you know, of

a negotiation. He said he gave you 60 days. And on day 61 you still hadn’t come. Why? Why didn’t you agree to the terms and do you believe you had a

60-day deadline?

TAKHT-RAVANCHI: No, nobody can put any deadline on us. You know, when we negotiate something, you know, the two sides have to agree on the timetable

of the negotiations. This is point number one. Number two is that we really doubt the sincerity of the Americans in the course of five rounds of

discussions that we had. We had good discussions. And at the last round, we were given, you know, some document by the foreign minister of Oman. And

apparently, both sides felt that that was a good document to be worked on for the next round.

But before the next round started, two days before the next round started, the aggression took place. So, this is a betrayal of diplomacy. This is the

betrayal of our trust to Americans. We should be the ones who should criticize the way that we were treated by the Americans, not vice versa.

AMANPOUR: OK.

TAKHT-RAVANCHI: In fact, no deadline is going to affect our way of negotiations. And then, we’ll do whatever necessary to protect ourselves.

AMANPOUR: You know, this is obviously a very fluid situation. The Israeli airstrikes continue. America is weighing — or Trump is, whether he will

get involved. He’s now saying that, you, the Iranians have suggested that you come to the White House to negotiate. They — he says you’re totally

defensive — defenseless. You have no air defense whatsoever. He says, next week will be big. And he says that unconditional surrender means that I’ve

had it. Your reaction?

TAKHT-RAVANCHI: You know, there is a famous saying that nobody can threaten Iranians. They should not dare to threaten Iran. We will do

whatever necessary. Although, there are hardships, no doubt about it. But Iranians are known to be very hard at defending their territory, and this

is exactly what we are doing.

AMANPOUR: Did you ask —

TAKHT-RAVANCHI: If the Americans decide —

AMANPOUR: Did you ask to go to the White House? Has your government asked for access?

TAKHT-RAVANCHI: Not — Christiane, not at all. Not at all. We are not begging for anything. What we are saying is that stop this aggression, then

we will have time to do whatever needed. As long as the aggression continues, as long as this brutality continues, we cannot think of

engaging.

AMANPOUR: OK. So, let me ask you this, because it is clear and we can see it, that a lot of your military capability has been degraded. It is clear.

They say that they have control of the skies, and they’re even reporting that fewer and fewer missiles are getting in to Israel. There — even the

defense minister is saying that they might, you know — as he says it, release the population to go back to work and to come under — out of their

shelters.

But I want to ask you this, why did you surge production of 60 percent uranium to the point that you have right now between Trump’s inauguration

and now? Back then you had maybe a five-to-six-weapon capacity if you had decided to, now a 10-weapon capacity with these 400 kilos of 60 percent

uranium. Why did you do that?

TAKHT-RAVANCHI: You know, we were acting based on our rights within the NPT. We didn’t have anything wrong. IAEA inspectors were present in Iran,

you know, different reports of IAES testified the fact that we have been very, you know, straightforward in our next year program. So, there is no

ban on 60 percent enriched uranium, which are being used, you know, in different places for peaceful purposes. But to use that as a pretext to —

you know, to use aggression against Iran, that is something that we (INAUDIBLE).

AMANPOUR: OK. But even the IAEA says, and they put out a public statement shortly before these strikes began, that they had never before seen that

amount of stockpile of that much enriched uranium by any country that does not have a nuclear weapon. So, that’s a fact. And I want to know whether

you guys were negotiating and do you feel you’ve been out negotiated or you miscalculated? If Trump says he thinks you are playing him, maybe you’ve

been played.

TAKHT-RAVANCHI: No, no. That — as I said, we were negotiating in good faith with Americans, five rounds of negotiations. And apparently, both of

us were happy with the, you know, ongoing negotiation. But all of a sudden, two days before, you tell me that he gave us 60-day deadline. And on day

61st — 61 they attacked us. But what was — what was about to happen on day 63?

So, the American president should respond to this question. If he knew that the attack was about to happen two days before the next round, why did he,

you know, acted like — why did he act like this? In fact, as far as NBC report is concerned on June 8th, Defense Department, Pentagon briefed the

president about the attack. So, he didn’t say anything. In fact, it is a sort of collaboration between Israelis and Americans and the division of

labor between the two.

AMANPOUR: Mr. Deputy Foreign Minister, I want to ask you some more things. Again, I referred to your surprise, and I know this because I was in Doha

when Assad fled and I was meant to be interviewing your foreign minister. He had to rush back for emergency session in Tehran because your key ally

in the region collapsed and fled. And it was a so total surprise to you.

And now, the aftermath, an Iranian general was quoted in The New York Times, as you probably know, General Esbati. He had made a speech in a

mosque in December. And he made a sobering assessment of your military capability. He said, you know, when he was asked if is if Iran would

retaliate again for various killings like Hassan Nasrallah of Hezbollah, he replied that Iran already has done and that the situation couldn’t

realistically handle another attack on Israel right now. In other words, that your capacity has been diminished and degraded. Do you agree with

that?

TAKHT-RAVANCHI: So, you do not expect me to reveal, you know, military secrets. What we are — what our military people have been doing is exactly

based on the calculated, you know, things that they have in mind. So, they are doing based on the plan that they have, you know, prepare for

themselves.

So, don’t, you know, mix things with each other. One night or one day, the military might decide to do in one direction, another day they might go to

another direction. That doesn’t mean anything. So, you are just referring to, you know, the reports coming out of America or —

AMANPOUR: No, no, no. I’m referring to an Iranian general. Sorry. I am. But I also want —

TAKHT-RAVANCHI: No, no, no. No, I was referring to the fact that you said that some Israelis are saying that Iran is in short of missile or American

military, you know, people are saying that Iran has shortcoming and this and that. So, do not look at this information at face value. We have other

things in mind when they have interviews and make propaganda against Iran.

AMANPOUR: OK. Still quoting an Iranian general here. Clearly, they believe, and I assume you believe, that if you attack, and you might call

it retaliation, whatever, if you strike any U.S. bases or U.S. personnel, the reaction will be humongous. Are you — can you say that you would not

do that even if America joins? Are you — in other words, are you trying to make sure that America doesn’t come into this?

TAKHT-RAVANCHI: No, we have not acted against anybody than the Israelis.

AMANPOUR: I’m saying if America comes in.

TAKHT-RAVANCHI: But I’m just responding to you, Christiane.

AMANPOUR: Sorry.

TAKHT-RAVANCHI: If the Americans decide to get involved militarily, we have no choice but to retaliate wherever we find the targets necessary to

be acted upon. So, that is clear and simple. Because we are acting in self- defense. If, you know, another country joins the fight, so that is another instance for our self-defense. You do not expect Iran to be — to not use

its right of self-defense based on Article 51 of the U.N. Charter.

AMANPOUR: About regime change or regime destruction. Again, after the fall of Assad in December, there were many reports from — you know, coming from

inside Iran, how pundits were talking on state television, on Telegram, on all sorts of chats how Iran had misjudged the dynamics, particularly, you

know, in your closest ally.

There you were propping him up. You were the ground forces. You were his ally. And he fell and it took you all by surprise. So, do you believe that

you have a handle on what your own people are feeling? What if you are taken by surprise and they take this as an opportunity to demonstrate their

anger and their impatience with what they have had to go through for many decades?

TAKHT-RAVANCHI: No, as I said before, come to Tehran. Come to different cities in Iran and see for yourself what is the cohesion within the Iranian

society in resisting aggression. Iranians have always been famous for the steadfast against aggression, against foreign intervention. Do not compare

Iran for any other country. I do not have any other country by name in my head. But Iran speaks for itself.

You have been in Iran before. You are familiar with the mentality of the Iranians. Different walks of life, with those who are critical of the

government, with those who are supporting the government. They have one voice. They resist the aggression and time will show that we are right.

AMANPOUR: And finally, Israel says that it believes you were on the verge of deciding to make a nuclear bomb. Now, Trump is moving in that direction,

even though his intelligence chief said that’s not the case in terms of their assessments. But do you now think that this clear attack on all of

your facilities and your conventional weapons, if you survive, will Iran decide to become a nuclear weapon state?

TAKHT-RAVANCHI: No, we will survive. That is for sure. This is the point that I need to emphasize. The other point is that we do not believe in

nuclear weapons. There is no place in our, you know, defensive doctrine. Nuclear weapons have no place in our defensive doctrine. In fact, we

believe that the world will be a better place without the nuclear weapons.

But who has the nuclear weapons in the Middle East? The Israeli regime. Who has the weapons — you know, the most sophisticated weapons, nuclear

weapons? The Americans. So, they are the ones who should be responsible for all the chaos that are going on in different parts of the world as a result

of, you know, desire for achieving nuclear weapons.

AMANPOUR: Deputy Foreign Minister Majid Takht-Ravanchi, thank you very much indeed for joining us and we hope that we can talk to you again.

TAKHT-RAVANCHI: My pleasure. Thank you, Christiane.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

AMANPOUR: Really revealing conversation. And of course, we continue to ask both us and Israeli government officials to come on this show and speak

about their new Middle East war.

Now, stay with us. We’ll be right back after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

AMANPOUR: Now, Russian President Vladimir Putin is calling on President Trump not to join Israel’s war on Iran. Warning that it could lead to,

quote, “a nuclear catastrophe.” All a bit rich, say many analysts given Putin’s own war on Ukraine and the very real risk of nuclear catastrophe as

their reactors are targeted.

28 people were killed earlier this week in Kyiv, in the deadliest Russian strikes the capital has seen in almost a year. Before abruptly leaving the

G7 meeting in Canada, President Trump stood against his allies and refused more sanctions on Russia, following a lengthy call with Vladimir Putin.

Now, joining me here in the studio is Russia’s ambassador to the U.K. Andrei Kelin, and he’s with us for an exclusive interview.

Welcome to the program. It’s quite rare to get an official Russian voice. So, we’re glad that you came in. Now, on this war, President Putin has

weighed in today urging the United States not to get involved. Tell me where you are, because Iran is your ally and Iran sends you a lot of

weapons, which you’re using in Ukraine.

ANDREI KELIN, RUSSIAN AMBASSADOR TO THE U.K.: Well, first of all how we look at it, and I think that how the world look at it, this is an

unprovoked strike, a military aggression in fact by a state, Israel, which always denied to take any obligations under non-proliferation of nuclear

weapon regime against Iran, which is stake, which is a member, part of NPT treaty and which is under the IAEA —

AMANPOUR: IAEA.

KELIN: — system of safeguards and which totally is obedient to it. And I would like also to point out to the conclusion of Intelligence Community of

the United States, which states that since 2003 Iran does not develop nuclear weapon in spite of outside push, which pushes him to do so.

AMANPOUR: Now, you heard deputy Foreign Minister Ravanchi continue to say that that is not their doctrine. They will not go for a nuclear weapon.

Obviously, others like Israel disputes that. But can I ask you from your own Russian perspective, because you were also part of the JCPOA. In fact,

I think Russia took a lot of the enriched uranium under that deal, right? What does Russia say about Iran test — you know, pushing the limits? I

mean, that is high, 60 percent enrichment at that quantity according to the IAEA. What do you make of that? Why do you think Iran is doing that?

KELIN: We are not engaging at this platform, I will say that. And well, none (INAUDIBLE) is engaged in a conversation. This a very specific

conversation. But we do believe Iran, it has no purpose of developing a nuclear weapon. It has a purpose of developing it for a domestic

consumption, for domestic needs, for energy.

And what is going on, it is a terrible escalation because it is very dangerous from our point of view and everybody who is in the region because

we can get a contamination, this strikes against nuclear facilities. And we also have over there an atomic power energy facility over there, which have

constructed for Iran,.

AMANPOUR: The Bushehr facility.

KELIN: Bushehr.

AMANPOUR: Yes, I’ve been there in ’95. Yes.

KELIN: Bushehr. Yes. Bushehr. So, we do believe that it is — one should be very careful about that. We can get a contamination of the region and

even beyond the region. So, that’s — ‘

AMANPOUR: So, it just strikes me that the nuclear deal that was signed in 2015 is possibly the first and the only agreement that I can conjure up in

my head right now that the entire U.N. Security Council voted for, Russia, China, the U.S., you know, the permanent members who are always at log

ahead, who never all vote on the same thing, all voted for this.

Iran is also your main ally now, one of them in your — yes, in your fight against Ukraine. What would you do without Iranian drones, Iranian — all

the stuff that they’re sending you? The Shahed suicide drones, which are causing so much destruction in Ukraine.

KELIN: No, no, no. The — we — it was an initial phase of the special military operation.

AMANPOUR: Are you still not calling it a war?

KELIN: — the Iranian drones as (INAUDIBLE). And since that time, we have constructed a lot of facilities on our soil that is producing much more

advanced weaponry, including these, as you call, Shahed — well, unmanned blank objects, which is now in place, but it is our own production.

AMANPOUR: So, are you saying you don’t need Iranian weapons anymore?

KELIN: I do not know. That is beyond my competence to speak about that. But as I understand, the production in Iran was very limited on it. They do

have facilities, but since that time, we have developed our own industry in all branches necessary to supply for the special operation in Ukraine.

AMANPOUR: Is Iran still an ally? I mean, I feel like you’re dropping them with this statement.

KELIN: No, never.

AMANPOUR: Is it still an ally?

KELIN: It is. Of course, an ally. We have a treaty that just has been ratified by Iranian parliament and by Russian parliament on that subject.

We do — we are not allies in military terms. We do not have such an obligation.

AMANPOUR: But you are, you may not have it written down, but you were.

KELIN: No, no. We do not have such an obligation, but we have a lot of cooperation. We develop it in many areas, and I can prove it because since

we have evacuated a lot of cultural delegations and scientific delegation right now from Iran. An orchestra and a big cinema production capacities

over there now, which under (INAUDIBLE) was ahead of it, an orchestra. I mentioned at scientific — big scientific —

AMANPOUR: You’ve just evacuated a whole bunch of Russians?

KELIN: Yes, yes, yes.

AMANPOUR: Because of this war?

KELIN: That included also scientific people, politicians and all of that side.

AMANPOUR: Can I ask you something? Because it’s very — you know, we all know that Benjamin Netanyahu had a pretty close relationship with President

Putin. He didn’t come to the aid of Ukraine and he needed Putin’s, whatever, acquiescence, permission, whatever, to bomb targets inside Syria

while you were supporting Assad. Now, of course, Assad has fallen. Israel has quite — you know, quite control of the skies over Syria as well, and

continues to bomb there.

Does Putin have any influence with Israel or Iran if he doesn’t want, you know, this to continue. Has he been asked?

KELIN: That’s a good question. And I think that he does. He did talk to Netanyahu. He did talk to Iranian leadership. He talked to Trump, who has

just confirmed it. And actually, we have connections with all our players in the area, in the region. And we can offer some mediation efforts on that

subject if it’ll be required. And I know that there are players — important players in the area and outside of the area that will welcome

this mediation efforts.

AMANPOUR: Let’s get to Ukraine, because whatever you say about what Israel has done to Iran, you have done that for three years plus in Ukraine. You

violated a sovereign country. You are attacking their civilians. You’re also targeting and attacking various reactors there. So, potential of a

nuclear catastrophe.

Trump has said he doesn’t necessarily want to put any more sanctions on. Do you feel any leverage? What is it going to take to get you, the Russians,

to actually be serious about a ceasefire or not? Or are you playing Trump? Because he thinks —

KELIN: About what?

AMANPOUR: All of that, a ceasefire and stopping this war.

KELIN: Christiane, this is not our first conversation, I guess on this subject.

AMANPOUR: Right, but it’s carrying on.

KELIN: Our goal is an overall comprehensive agreement on the situation with elimination of ground rules (ph) of the conflict. We would like to do

it once and forever. We do not want to have a pause that will serve Ukraine to regroup its forces and so on.

There are two ways of doing this. One is just to move ahead or you have a situation of complete impasse on the field and then you enter the

negotiations or — but this is different. We are now in offensive and Ukraine is in retreat, in a quick retreat.

In May, we have taken about 600 square kilometers of the territory of Ukraine, and we continue to do that with even more scale. So, we do not see

any necessity to stop.

AMANPOUR: Because you think you’re winning? Do you think you’re winning?

KELIN: Yes, of course we do. Yes. We continue to acquire more and more grounds. And for Ukraine there is a choice, either they will take our

conditions right now and it’ll be a permanent ceasefire and comprehensive settlement of the situation or we will continue this drive and Ukraine will

have to surrender under much worse conditions than the — that we are proposing right now.

AMANPOUR: That’s pretty aggressive. I mean, it really sounds like you’re doubling and tripling down. It have to surrender. It needs to take our

terms or else. That’s not a negotiation, Ambassador.

KELIN: It is not — ‘

AMANPOUR: That’s a capitulation.

KELIN: No. We are in the process of studying the negotiations. We have had two rounds of negotiations with Ukraine and we achieved some — a lot of

agreements, I will say, important agreements, humanitarian side, exchange of prisoners, exchange of bodies, exchange of young soldiers who are

prisoners and all others. So, this needs also in exchange. And we are planning the third round of negotiations after the 22nd of June. The date

is not yet fixed, but it is in the plans.

So, this is stage by stage negotiations because it’s a complicated conflict.

AMANPOUR: Oh, yes. Oh. yes.

KELIN: Very much.

AMANPOUR: But it’s not actually because you invaded your neighbor and violated international law. So, that’s clear. So, the question is, you

know, you don’t want them to have any NATO stuff, no real army. I mean, those are the conditions that Putin said from the very beginning. Can you

confirm that those are still the conditions? You don’t really want an independent sovereign Ukraine.

KELIN: There are — no, we have never said that. There are —

AMANPOUR: You have.

KELIN: But there are two major issues. One is known that Ukraine should not be part of NATO because it is very threatening to us. It is damaging

our security. And the second is reestablishment of normal human rights on the territory of Ukraine for everybody. That should include Russians,

Hungarian living on the territory of Ukraine and — which is now very detrimental and the situation of minorities in Ukraine.

AMANPOUR: But you also want — you’re asking for territory that you haven’t even occupied yet. But let’s move on —

KELIN: We would like —

AMANPOUR: — because that —

KELIN: It will come.

AMANPOUR: What? It will come?

KELIN: Of course.

AMANPOUR: You really are confident?

KELIN: All the territories.

AMANPOUR: Where are you going to get all these soldiers? I know you have a bigger population, but can you explain to me why your soldiers are — or

the families — what’s going on? You pay them, don’t you? Yes, we do pay our soldiers. Yes, but I mean extra to recruit them.

KELIN: Yes, we do pay the soldiers.

AMANPOUR: Yes. But I mean, extra to recruit them? What are the families in Russia saying about this war?

KELIN: Well, more —

AMANPOUR: It’s a meatgrinder for them.

KELIN: I will tell you about the — what experts, outside experts are saying that the — this is not a war, in fact. War is being done with the

full capacity with state. It needs to provide about 40 percent of its national income for the war. This is not the case. We have only 5 to 7

percent of our budget, which is allocated to the war. We have a much smaller army than Ukrainian one over there engaged. It’s about as experts,

I think it’s about around 600,000 against a million of Ukrainian army, as they claim to be.

AMANPOUR: Well, Western intelligence says you are getting many more casualties, up to a million casualties.

KELIN: Well, it is up to believe. Like your Iranian collocutor has said, you do believe calculations of Western countries. We have our own

calculations. We have different experts, independent as well. And we are not speaking about casualties. What’s your next question?

AMANPOUR: Speaking about casualties. Actually, I was speaking about how you managed to keep recruiting them.

KELIN: I’m not a specialist in this area, but as I understand, we have 50,000 to 60,000 a month of those volunteers who are coming to recruit.

Posting and they would like to get engaged into this thing.

AMANPOUR: Where do you think this will be, as you just mentioned, on June 22nd? Because as you know, again, President Trump feels that he’s thought

he had a relationship with Putin that would lead Putin to actually be serious about a ceasefire and a negotiated deal. I’m talking about Trump

now. He also has been telling people that he feels like he’s being played by Vladimir Putin and he says he’s losing patients. And that you’re both

like children in a kindergarten, both sides, and they have to — and you have to fight until some —

KELIN: I have seen the statement but —

AMANPOUR: So, what — how do you —

KELIN: I have seen this statement by President Trump, of course, about children playing in the — kindergarten. But we are not in a situation like

they have been in Canada now, where is — where it was a — as some people are saying, one plus six meeting. So, they — yes.

AMANPOUR: You mean a G7 in Canada?

KELIN: Yes. G7 characteristic, one plus six. I think that it was one of the best thing which I have heard. We do have conversations between our two

presidents on equal footing. I will tell you. And since I can’t follow what they tell to each other. So, that is a conversation, very polite between

two leaders who understand what they do, with a lot of trust and a lot of understanding of each other’s position.

AMANPOUR: OK. But not yet closer to ending the war. Ambassador Kelin, thank you very much indeed.

KELIN: Thank you.

AMANPOUR: And we’ll be right back after this short break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

AMANPOUR: Now, hundreds of Palestinians in Gaza have been killed mostly around controversial aid distribution sites, including scores today,

according to officials there. And with attention turned to Iran, their plight risks, in fact, is being forgotten. And many are warning that the

conflict threatens to erase Palestinian history, culture, and identity. Meaning, storytelling itself becomes a form of survival.

Our next guest, the Palestinian American writer Hala Alyan is doing what she can to preserve that. Her new memoir, “I’ll Tell You When I’m Home,” is

an exploration of motherhood, exile, and her own family’s displacement during the 1948 Nakba. Alyan is joining Michel Martin to discuss how the

stories we inherit shape the ones we tell.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MICHEL MARTIN, CONTRIBUTOR: Thanks, Christiane. Hala Alyan, thank you so much for joining us once again.

HALA ALYAN, AUTHOR, “I’LL TELL YOU WHEN I’M HOME”: Thank you so much for having me.

MARTIN: You know, you are a woman of many lives. You are a clinical psychologist. You are a poet. You are the author of many beautiful essays

that just sort of touch people to their core. This book, it’s a memoir, but I also read it, in part some of it reads like poetry. Some of it — they’re

like prose poems. Some of it is a history lesson. How do you describe it?

ALYAN: It’s a good question. I think — I mean, I think in some ways a poet is constantly giving themself away, where like the poetic fingerprints

are kind of on everything I touch. I conceptualize the world very — and through the — you know, in all the different things that I do, sort of

through the prism of fragmentation. I’m really interested in what we do with parts in general as people, which tracks with being a psychologist. It

tracks with being a writer. Just kind of really thinking about how we can take all of these different things that can feel incredibly incoherent,

that oftentimes do feel incoherent for us in the present. And then, through the act of making and remaking and creating, something starts to emerge.

And so, I think this book really is kind of a testament to that making that I was doing and that sort of fumbling in the dark that I was doing. And my

psyche through history, through conceptualizations of fertility, the body, land, exile, displacement, it’s archive, it’s memory, it’s dream work. I

mean, it’s all of those things.

MARTIN: Well, the thing about this book, it braids together some of the most profound experiences that any human being can have. The experience of

infertility, the experience of difficulties in marriage, but also the experience of displacement. I mean, you’re Palestinian. This is something

that you’ve written about. You’ve written about the experience of people who have been displaced through decades across continents, and this figure

— trying to figure out where you fit in the world. What made this the time to write this book?

ALYAN: I think, you know, it’s interesting because I — this book was written pre-October 7th because the editing process, et cetera. You know,

you give it to publication. And I — while I was doing the edits, one of the questions that I had was, is this still going to be relevant? The

urgency of the moment right now with everything we’re seeing in Gaza and elsewhere feels — I feel so completely compelled to put everything down

and just speak about that and just be writing about that.

You know, it was one of those queries I had for myself during the editing process of do we now scrap this? Do we write towards a different ending? Do

we — you know, the storyline as it is in the book ends in 2022 with the birth of my daughter. Do we now write a completely different thing? Do we

add an afterword? Do we, whatever?

And one of the things that was really striking about it was that in the end, it all remained relevant because I had been writing Palestine

throughout it. And writing to your point, the experience of exile and displacement, then there’s a way in which you kind of don’t know the water

you’re swimming in because you’re constantly swimming in it that I felt like there was something I needed to do that was more pronounced with the

narrative, when in fact it’s everything that I’m touching, it’s everything that I’m thinking about and has been for my entire life.

And so, for me, the necessity of this particular narrative for this story is frankly that I just couldn’t get the narrative or the story to work in

any other form.

MARTIN: I’m going to edit what I said earlier. I said, you’re Palestinian. You’re Palestinian American, or you’re an American Palestinian.

I don’t know, however you sort of hear it in your own mind.

ALYAN: Yes.

MARTIN: Right. So, briefly, would you just describe your roots?

ALYAN: Yes. So, we were — my — I was born to Palestinian, Syrian, Lebanese immigrants. So, my parents met and married in Kuwait. My mother’s

background is Lebanese Syrian. Palestinian a little bit. My dad was born in Gaza after being — his family left in a village that was eradicated in

1948 called Eraksvedan (ph).

So, they met in Kuwait. I was born in the States. We were in the States very briefly after my birth and then went back to Kuwait. We were there

until the Saddam’s invasion in 1990, then precipitated our needing to seek asylum, or my parents need. I had a passport, but my parents then sought

asylum in the States. So, then we lived in the Midwest until I was about 12. And then I moved back to the Middle East. From 12 to 22 I lived in the

Arab world. And I did my high school in Lebanon. I did my undergrad in Beirut and then came to New York for grad school and have been there since.

MARTIN: Well, you know, the great African American, you know, writer, sociologist scholar, W. E. B. Du Bois, spoke about that in the African

American experience of the Tunis (ph).

ALYAN: Exactly.

MARTIN: The two warring souls in one dark body. But in your case, your — the two warring souls are at times countries that are literally at war with

each other. And then you talk about the war with your body, not doing what it is that you so want it to do.

ALYAN: Right.

MARTIN: And that is a very interesting thing to sort of compare that to that experience of war. You talk about being exiled from motherhood is

something that you so very much want, but are longing for, but his alluding you. And I just think that’s quite remarkable. And so, that’s where I want

to ask you to read a passage for us. And it’s written as a kind of — it’s written as an address to your daughter. So, would you read a bit for us.

ALYAN: In you is the glittering baud pavement after rain, the ports of Boston. In you are both my grandmother’s rebellious blood following men

escaping wars from one country to another. My mother’s leavings, my aunts, the rage and humiliation and exile. In you is the harm and rejoicing and

help generations of women. In you live the people that made you all of them. I wouldn’t give you another story, even if I could, for this is the

one that bore you and it is heavy and dazzling. And the truth in you is your father’s wanderlust, his father’s loneliness, his father’s father’s

heart giving out on the marble floor. In you is the story of sailors, occupiers, the occupied, the people who never left, and the people who were

made to.

You will learn to live within this as we all do. You come from people that love the way moons pull tides or else the way tides are pulled by the moon.

And someday you will have to reckon with your own unruly heart. I have no advice to give. Save one thing, don’t exile anything. Turn the sun of your

attention briefly, sometimes briefly on all that awakens your love. This is your birth right.

You will have to hunt for many things, excavate them in others or yourself, but not your mother’s truth. I’ll leave that right in the open for you to

see.

MARTIN: There’s so much here. It’s not uniquely women, but it is often women who are sort of asked to choose one or the other, you know, the

personal or the political, right? You’re asked to think about the world or you’re asked to think about the home, or you’re within your — with what’s

within you, and what you’re saying here is, I refuse. I refuse to choose. It’s all within us.

But the other passage that really, really sort of struck me is, in you as the story of sailors, occupiers, the occupied, the people who never left.

The people who were made to. You will learn to live within this as we all do. Do you though? Do we all live with this?

MARTIN: I know what you’re saying. Like there’s a specific experience that’s being evoked here. I mean, I think that’s sort of one of the things

about writing is how to live alongside the particular and the universal and how to — you know, to lean into the specificity. And oftentimes in leaning

to the specificity, you’re calling for something that people can see themselves in.

I think we all live within contradictions, you know, I think we all have to make sense of our — what we inherit and what we would want to leave

behind. You know, whether or not we are mothers or caregivers or whatever in those traditional senses. I think we all, hopefully, are on this planet

to think of ways to show up for each other and care for each other. And I think to do that is to think of the legacy that we come from and the legacy

we’ll leave behind.

MARTIN: So, Hala, after all of this, this very real experience of moving from place to place and also the meditation on moving from place to place,

what does home mean to you now?

ALYAN: It’s a beautiful question. I think on one hand, certainly home, as for many people in diaspora communities has come to mean the idea of the

perpetual hope for return. And in my case, to be able to bring my daughter freely to places in Palestine, to places in Lebanon, to places in Syria so

that she’s able to access her ancestry. She’s able to access her birthright.

I think until that is possible, for me in this present moment, home has come to mean the people that I feel and community with, the people that I

know see me and that I can see with sort of love, with affection, with warmth and with wholeness, to be able to really allow for kind of all the

contradictory parts of our identities, our histories, to show up fully. And so, it’s come to me really more concept and personhood and like how we show

up with each other.

MARTIN: Can I read one passage that really — that struck me? It’s early- ish in the book. You were able to have your daughter. She is here. But after many trials and a lot of interventions and some heartbreaking

miscarriages and painful experience, and you were able to have her through surrogacy. And so, I just want to say that because this is how we help to

set up this passage I want to read.

This story is about waiting. I was terrible at waiting, but used to it, or so I’d thought. But those pink lines meant a different kind of waiting.

Suddenly waiting, had a purpose, a goal. The waiting became tolerable because ostensibly it had an ending. I’d become consumed with leavings,

Johnny’s, my body’s, death, the way places became inaccessible with what wouldn’t stay. No bulldozer cleaved my life in two. It had been just one

noiseless departure after the other. And beneath that pulsing loss an echo of all the vanishings and takings that had come before. But now, there is

something coming. My entire life, I hungered for stories more than anything else. The story inside each war, each arrival.

I’d lie in, bed it as a child, and imagine myself a time traveler returning to my mother’s childhood, my grandmother’s youth, back even farther. All

the women in houses and births and burials, the prayers, the wedding ceremonies, the armies. I was determined of one thing I’d put my weighting

to good use.

And that’s sort of a testimony about story and the importance, you know, of story. And now, that you’ve told this story, you know, I want to ask, do

you feel a wholeness now?

ALYAN: Wholeness is a big word. I think I feel a sense of completion in terms of having tried to tell the story that I was trying to tell. And I

think one of the things that I’ve learned about writing or studying narrative kind of more on a like sociopolitical level is that you’re —

it’s never done. I do feel like I told the story that I wanted to tell.

And I think the timing of it, you know, when this book is being released is really heart wrenching and that it’s a book about really my experience of

motherhood and surrogacy and all those years of infertility has shown me just the absolute value of a life and the pressure of a life and what can –

– what one can undertake to bring a life into this world. And to sort of compare that to the absolute devastation and disregard for life that we’re

seeing, that I think has been — it’s an interesting time to be launching the book. To be really thinking about what it means to be writing about

having brought a — you know, in many ways, like a half Palestinian child to this world.

And to think about how I — you know, I mean, there’s — I do not believe art is a replacement for, you know, policy or the changes that need to

happen on the ground. But I do think there’s something about — I have come to understand narrative making as one of the most powerful tools of

reclaiming and return — as I read in the past — like, you know, return even in imagination, because I do think there’s something that we see where

power often decides when a story begins, you know. So, power, people with power.

One of the biggest receipts of that power usually is the ability to say, we press the tape here, we press start here, we press pause here. And to shape

a beginning is oftentimes to shape an ending. And so, I think in some ways when so much effort is put towards destroying archive it — that does

indicate to me that the archive is actually quite important. That includes Palestinian voices, it includes voices of anybody that’s like, you know,

belongs to a marginalized, oppressed community.

So, I think in that way it’s like I do feel a sense of completion and I also feel like this hopefully is the beginning for myself and for many

other people to really continue to tell the stories of how we get here and how we stay here.

MARTIN: Hala Alyan, thank you so much for talking with us.

ALYAN: Thank you so much for having me. This was such a pleasure.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

AMANPOUR: A really important conversation there. That is it for now. If you ever miss our show, you can find the latest shortly after it airs on

our podcast. Remember, you can always catch us online, on our website, and all-over social media.

Thank you for watching, and goodbye from London.