♪ >>> HELLO, EVERYONE, AND WELCOME TO "AMANPOUR & CO." HERE'S WHAT'S COMING UP.
>> THE STAMINA TO DELIVER JUSTICE, KARIM KHAN, CHIEF PROSECUTOR AT THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT, TALKS TO ME ABOUT THE WARRANT FOR VLADIMIR PUTIN'S ARREST AND HOLDING RUSSIA ACCOUNTABLE FOR ALLEGED WAR CRIMES.
>>> AND -- >> WE ARE NOT GOING TO BACK OFF OUR BELIEF THAT ACCOUNTABILITY FOR THESE WAR CRIMES HAS GOT TO BE HAD.
>> AS XI TRIES TO GIVE PUTIN COVER, I ASK NATIONAL SECURITY SPOKESPERSON JOHN KIRBY ABOUT THE ANTI-AMERICAN AXIS GROWING AND OTHER MAJOR FOREIGN POLICY CRISES, LIKE THE AMERICAN CITIZENS BEING USED AS POLITICAL PAWNS IN IRAN.
MY CONVERSATION WITH NEDA SHARGHI, WHO'S BROTHER EMAD IS CURRENTLY BEHIND BARS IN EVIN PRISON.
>>> ALSO AHEAD.
>> IT'S A 20--YEAR-OLD DRUG THAT'S USED TO SAVE WOMEN'S LIVES.
>> A CRACKDOWN ON ABORTION PILLS IN THE UNITED STATES.
HARI SREENIVASAN TALKS TO NPR CORRESPONDENT SARAH McCAMMON.
>>> "AMANPOUR & CO." IS MADE POSSIBLE BY -- THE ANDERSON FAMILY FUND.
SUE AND EDGAR WACHENHEIM III.
CANDACE KING WEIR.
JIM ATWOOD AND LESLIE WILLIAMS.
THE FAMILY FOUNDATION OF LAYLA AND MICKEY STRAUSS.
MARK J. BLECHNER.
SETON J. MELVIN.
BERNARD AND DENISE SCHWARTZ.
KOO AND PATRICIA YUEN, COMMITTED TO BRIDGING CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN OUR COMMUNITIES.
BARBARA HOPE ZUCKERBERG.
WE TRY TO LIVE IN THE MOMENT, TO NOT MISS WHAT'S RIGHT IN FRONT OF US.
AT MUTUAL OF AMERICA, WE BELIEVE TAKING CARE OF TOMORROW CAN HELP YOU MAKE THE MOST OF TODAY.
MUTUAL OF AMERICA FINANCIAL GROUP, RETIREMENT SERVICES AND INVESTMENTS.
ADDITIONAL SUPPORT PROVIDED BY THESE FUNDERS AND BY CONTRIBUTIONS TO YOUR PBS STATION FROM VIEWERS LIKE YOU.
THANK YOU.
>>> WELCOME TO THE PROGRAM, EVERYONE.
I'M CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR IN LONDON.
THE OFFICIAL CIVILIAN DEATH TOLL FROM RUSSIA'S WAR ON UKRAINE NOW STANDS AT 8,317.
BUT THE REALITY IS THAT NUMBER IS LIKELY FAR, FAR HIGHER.
AND AS THOUSANDS OF FAMILIES ARE TORN APART BY PUTIN'S SALT, UKRAINE IS CALLING FOR MORE ALLIED SUPPORT, JETS, AMMUNITION, AND THE UNITED STATES SAYS IT'S SPEEDING UP DELIVERY OF TANKS AND PATRIOT DEFENSE MISSILE SYSTEMS.
WHILE CONCERNS REMAIN THAT A SO-CALLED ANTI-AMERICAN AX IS O AUTOCRATS MIGHT END UP DELIVER RUSSIA WITH LETHAL AID.
HERE'S SECRETARY-GENERAL JENS STOLTENBERG.
>> WE HAVEN'T SEEN ANY PROOF THAT CHINA IS DELIVERING LETHAL WEAPONS TO RUSSIA, BUT WE HAVE SEEN SOME SIGNS THAT THIS HAS BEEN THE REQUEST FROM RUSSIA AND THAT THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT IS CONSIDERED IN BEIJING BY THE CHINESE AUTHORITIES.
>> MEANTIME, THE U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE, ANTONY BLINKEN, DESCRIBES THE, QUOTE, MASSIVE DEATH AND DESTRUCTION CAUSED BY RUSSIAN WAR CRIMES.
THE STATE DEPARTMENT REPORT ON HUMAN RIGHTS HIGHLIGHTS INDISCRIMINATE ATTACKS ON CIVILIANS AND CREDIBLE REPORTS OF EXECUTION, TORTURE, AND RAPE.
THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT HAS JUST ISSUED A WARRANT FOR PUTIN'S ARREST OVER THE CASE OF FORCIBLY DEPORTED UKRAINIAN CHILDREN.
MY NEXT GUEST, KARIM KHAN, IS THE ICC'S CHIEF PROSECUTOR, AND HE'S JOINING ME NOW HERE IN THE STUDIO.
WELCOME BACK TO THE PROGRAM.
SO WE'VE BEEN TALKING OVER THE YEAR OF THIS WAR ABOUT THE POTENTIAL FOR ACCOUNTABILITY.
ON FRIDAY YOU ISSUED THIS ARREST WARRANT.
WHY NOW?
WHAT WAS THE TIMING?
>> WELL, THE TIMING, CHRISTIANE -- FIRSTLY, THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.
THE TIMING WAS DETERMINED BY THE INDEPENDENT JUDGES OF THE COURT.
MY JOB WAS TO MAKE A DETERMINATION AFTER THE INVESTIGATIONS.
I SUBMITTED IT TO THE JUDGES, AND THE JUDGES ON FRIDAY DECIDED THEMSELVES TO MAKE THEIR ANNOUNCEMENT THAT WARRANTS HAD BEEN ISSUED AND THAT MY OFFICE HAD MET THE STANDARD REQUIRED AFTER THEIR CAREFUL REVIEW TO ISSUE THE ARREST WARRANTS THAT WE ALL KNOW ABOUT.
>> SO IN THIS ARREST WARRANT, IS THERE ACTUALLY A LIST OF CHARGES?
>> IN THE ARREST WARRANT, WHAT'S BEEN DONE, THE DECISION IS SECRET.
I CAN'T SPEAK ABOUT IT BECAUSE OF WITNESS PROTECTION ISSUES AND A VARIETY OF MATTERS.
BY WHAT IS CLEAR IS THAT THE JUDGES FOUND THAT WE'D ESTABLISHED REASONABLE GROUNDS TO BELIEVE THAT PRESIDENT PUTIN AND THE COMMISSIONER FOR CHILDREN HAD COMMITTED WAR CRIMES REGARDING THE DEPORTATION AND UNLAWFUL TRANSFER OF CHILDREN OUT OF UKRAINE AND INTO RUSSIA, OF COURSE.
>> SO WE HAVE BEEN REPORTING A LOT ABOUT THIS, AND IT'S BEEN INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN VERY LITTLE ACTUAL TANGIBLE EVIDENCE THAT, AS REPORTERS, WE CAN GET TO.
WE KNOW THAT THERE IS A SERIES OF CONFLICTING NUMBERS OF WHAT'S HAPPENED TO THESE CHILDREN.
FOR INSTANCE, "THE NEW YORK TIMES" SAYS IN GENERAL, SOME 2.9 MILLION UKRAINIANS, THAT'S NEARLY 3 MILLION, HAVE ACTUALLY MOVED TO RUSSIA.
AMONGST THEM, 700,000 CHILDREN SINCE THE WAR BEGAN.
CHILDREN SEPARATED FROM THEIR PARENTS ARE OFTEN NOT KNOWN, YALE STUDY SIS 6,000.
PUTIN SAYS 2,000 HAVE GONE OPEN THERE, OPENLY ADMITTED.
AND UKRAINE SAYS PERHAPS 16,000 CHILDREN HAVE BEEN FORCIBLY DEPORTED, REMOVED, KIDNAPPED.
WHAT IS THE NUMBER YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT?
>> WELL, THERE'S A SECRET DECISION OF THE JUDGES, SO THE CLASSIFICATION, I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE DETAILS.
BUT EVEN IF ONE TAKES THE NUMBER THAT'S BEEN POSTULATED BY THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION OF 2,000, THE GENEVA CONVENTION MAKES CLEAR AND THE ROME STATUTE, YOU CAN'T DEPORT CIVILIANS TO A FOREIGN COUNTRY.
YOU MUST LOOK AFTER THEM.
IF THEY'RE NOT SAFE, YOU MOVE THEM TO A SAFE PART OF UKRAINE.
IF THAT'S NOT POSSIBLE, A NEUTRAL THIRD COUNTRY.
IT SEEMS TO BE NOT JUST DEPORTATION TO RUSSIAN FEDERATION.
THEY'RE MET BY, YOU KNOW, STRANGERS WHO HAVE NOW SUDDENLY BECOME ADOPTIVE PARENTS, AND THE CHILDREN ARE NOT PROPERTY.
THEY'RE NOT THE SPOILS OF WAR.
>> SO YOU MENTIONED THE OTHER WOMAN AS WELL AS PUTIN WHO HAS BEEN, YOU KNOW, ISSUED WERE THIS ARREST.
SHE IS, AS YOU SAID, PUTIN'S DESIGNATED CHILDREN-SOMETHING OFFICIAL, WHO SITS AND TALKS TO PUTIN QUITE OFTEN.
THEY'RE MANY TIMES -- HERE WE HAVE THE PICTURES THERE.
IN THIS PARTICULAR MEETING LAST MONTH, SHE BASICALLY THANKED HIM OUTRIGHT FOR BASICALLY PROVIDING HER WITH A CHILD.
LET'S LISTEN.
>> Translator: DID YOU ADOPT A CHILD FROM MARIUPOL YOURSELF?
>> Translator: YES, THANKS TO YOU.
15 YEARS OLD.
NOW I KNOW WHAT IT MEANS TO BE A MOTHER OF A CHILD FROM DONBAS.
IT'S DIFFICULT, BUT WE DEFINITELY LOVE EACH OTHER.
>> WHEN YOU SEE THAT, WHAT DOES IT MAKE YOU FEEL?
>> WELL, HOW IT MAKES ME FEEL IS A SEPARATE MATTER, BUT I GO BACK TO THE BASIC POINT.
CHILDREN ARE NOT THE PROPERTY OF A COUNTRY TO BE DISPATCHED BASED ON POLITICS OR SOME IDEOLOGICAL MOTIVES.
IT'S REGULATED BY LAW, AND THAT LAW NEEDS TO BE ENFORCED.
SO WHAT WE'VE DONE IS FOLLOW THE EVIDENCE.
BUT YOU'VE PUT FORWARD ONE EXAMPLE THAT THIS IS NOT AN ALLEGATION THAT IS BEING DENIED.
THIS IS SOMETHING FOR WHATEVER REASON SEEMS TO BE A BADGE OF HONOR.
AND I THINK THIS IS WHY, YOU KNOW, WE NEED THE RULE OF LAW TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS ACCOUNTABILITY.
>> SO PRESIDENT ZELENSKYY SAYS IT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE TO CARRY OUT SUCH A CRIMINAL OPERATION WITHOUT THE ORDER OF THE TOP LEADER OF THE TERRORIST STATE, AS HE CALLS IT.
HOW INVOLVED -- YOU KNOW, YOU'VE DONE SOMETHING PRETTY INCREDIBLE.
YOU'VE ESSENTIALLY SAID THAT COMMAND RESPONSIBILITY GOES ALL THE WAY UP TO PUTIN, AND IT'S QUITE DIFFICULT TO ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, OFTEN TO PROVE THAT IN A COURT OF LAW.
AGAIN, YOU MUST BE PRETTY SURE THAT IT GOES ALL THE WAY UP, THAT THE ORDERS COME FROM HIM.
>> YES.
WE'VE HAD A VERY DILIGENT INVESTIGATION.
I'M QUITE AWARE OF THE DIFFERENT STANDARDS OF PROOF REQUIRED, AND WE'VE DONE IT TO A HIGHEST STANDARD OF PROOF EVEN FOR CONFIRMATION AND BEYOND.
AND YOU'VE SEEN THAT DIRECTLY, THE ACKNOWLEDGE OF WHAT'S TAKING PLACE.
A LAW WAS PASSED IN WHICH, BY PRESIDENTIAL DECREE, SAYING THAT UKRAINIAN CHILDREN CAN BE GIVEN RUSSIAN NATIONALITY AND CAN BE ADOPTED BY RUSSIANS.
AND OF COURSE AT THIS STAGE NOW A WARRANT'S BEEN ISSUED, EVERYBODY IS PRESUMED INNOCENT.
IT'S ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.
BUT, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE WHO SAY THEY'RE INNOCENT NORMALLY GO BEFORE JUDGES AND EXPLAIN THEIR CASE, AND NOBODY HAS CONTACTED ME.
I'VE REACHED OUT TO THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION.
THERE'S A WALL OF SILENCE.
I'VE REACHED OUT TO THE UKRAINIANS.
THERE'S VERY GOOD COOPERATION.
AND I THINK I'LL KEEP ON KNOCKING ON THE DOOR OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION, BUT IT'S FOR THEM.
NOT TO SPEAK PLATITUDES OR INVECTIVE, BUT TO PUT FORWARD THE EVIDENCE THEY SAY THAT ESTABLISHES LEGALITY.
>> THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THAT RUSSIA HAS NOT SIGNED UP TO THE ICC, NOR HAS CHINA.
I SAY THAT BECAUSE XI JINPING, THE PRESIDENT, HAS BEEN THERE AND ACTUALLY NOR HAS THE UNITED STATES.
WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT IN A MOMENT.
BUT WHAT ACTUAL RESULT DO YOU EXPECT FROM THE ISSUING OF THIS WARRANT?
WHO'S GOING TO -- WHAT'S THE NEXT STEP?
>> WELL, WE HAVE 123 STATE PARTIES, MOST OF THE WORLD, THAT ARE REQUIRED AND HAVE AGREED TO COOPERATE WITH THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT.
ALL THOSE COUNTRIES, ALL OF EUROPE, FIJI, LATIN AMERICA, MOST OF AFRICA, WILL BE REQUIRED BY DINT OF THEIR INTERNATIONAL OBLIGATIONS TO COOPERATE WITH THE COURT.
BUT THE ENFORCEMENT IS A SEPARATE ISSUE.
WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE LAW IS NOT PEDESTRIAN.
IT MOVES TO WHERE THE VICTIMS ARE, AND A STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLE THAT I'VE SAID FROM THE BEGINNING.
CHOICES HAVE CONSEQUENCES, AND ONE CAN'T, BY DINT OF OFFICIAL POSITION OR THE POWER OF A BULLET OR THE POWER OF A GUN, COMMIT CRIMES WITH IMPUNITY.
ONE NEEDS TO BE DISCIPLINED OR COMPLY WITH THE LAWS AND CUSTOMS OF WAR THAT HAVE BEEN EMPHASIZED SINCE NUREMBERG AND THE BALKANS AND RWANDA.
AND WE NEED TO SHOW THIS IS NOT JUST A PAPER EXERCISE.
I THINK THIS IS WHY PEOPLE NEED TO REFLECT FOR A MOMENT AND SEE WHAT HAPPENED TO MILL OSEVIC, CHARLES TAYLOR.
>> THESE ARE LEADERS OF CRIMINAL ENTERPRISES WHO WERE ISSUED INDICTMENTS.
>> HEADS OF STATE.
>> HEADS OF STATE.
HE HAD BEEN TOSSED OUT, BUT HE WAS TRIED, AND MANY OF HIS HENCHMEN WERE CONVICTED.
DO YOU THINK IN THE LONG RUN, THAT WILL HAPPEN WITH PUTIN?
>> TIME WILL TELL.
BUT I THINK WHAT WE CAN USE IS THE LEGAL ARCHITECTURE THAT WE HAVE.
THE FIRST POINT I ALWAYS EMPHASIZE, INDIVIDUALS THAT HAVE A GRIEVANCE, THAT THINK THEY'RE UNJUSTLY ACCUSED, APPEAR BEFORE JUSTICE AND PUT YOUR CASE AND TRUST IN THAT PROCESS.
THAT'S THE FIRST POINT.
BUT WHETHER OR NOT INDIVIDUALS APPEAR, WE DO HAVE THE OPTION OF CONFIRMATION HEARINGS IN ABSENCE.
THAT'S PART OF THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE COURT.
>> BUT NOT TRIALS IN ABSENTIA?
>> NO, BUT WE CAN TO A HIGHER STANDARD.
WE HAVE TO PROVE IT IN TERMS OF THE SUBSTANCE GROUNDS TO BELIEVE IS MET.
BUT IT ALLOWS WITNESSES TO COME TO A COURTROOM.
IT ALLOWS EVIDENCE TO BE PRESENTED TO SHOW THE WORLD THAT THIS IS NOT A FLAKY EXERCISE.
THIS IS THE RESULT OF A VERY DILIGENT FORENSIC PROCESS THAT IS TRYING TO GET TO THE TRUTH.
>> YOU MENTIONED FIJI AND OTHER PLACES.
VERY UNLIKELY THAT PUTIN WILL EVER WANT TO TRAVEL TO THERE.
HOWEVER, RIGHT AFTER YOU ISSUED THIS ARREST, HE GOT UP AND WENT TO OCCUPIED CRIMEA.
AND THEN FOR THE FIRST TIME AS FAR AS WE KNOW, WENT TO OCCUPIED MARIUPOL ON THE MAINLAND OF UKRAINE.
I MEAN, HE WAS CLEARLY THUMBING HIS NOSE AT YOU AND THE REST OF THE WORLD.
AND THEN THE VERY NEXT DAY, HE INVITES AND RECEIVES THE LEADER OF CHINA.
>> WELL, THERE'S A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT QUESTIONS THERE.
YOU KNOW, IN THE OCCUPIED TERRITORIES, BY VERY DEFINITION, IT'S WHERE THE POWER OF THE TANK IS TRIUMPHING OVER OTHER NORMS TAKING PLACE.
IN TERMS OF CHINA, YOU KNOW, THERE'S INTERNATIONAL POLITICS THAT GOES ON.
I MEAN I'VE BEEN ENGAGING RE1 RES RESPECTFULLY WITH CHINA FOR QUITE A WHILE, BUT THEY HAVE TO MAKE DECISIONS.
AND THEY'VE SAID REPEATEDLY THEY'RE AGAINST ACTS OF AGGRESSION, AND THEY BELIEVE IN THE RULE OF LAW.
BUT FOR COUNTRIES THAT HAVE SIGNED UP TO THE ROME STATUTE OR BELIEVE THAT THEY WANT TO IMPLEMENT, YOU KNOW, THE NORMS OF NUREMBERG, I THINK THIS IS AN IMPORTANT MOMENT BECAUSE IT'S NOT POLEMICS.
IT'S BASED UPON NOT EVEN ME.
IT'S BASED UPON INDEPENDENT JUDGES EXERCISING THEIR RESPONSIBILITY.
THESE ARE JUDGES IN THE PAST THAT HAVE BEEN VERY TOUGH WITH THE PROSECUTION, RIGHTFULLY SO.
THEY'VE ACTUALLY SAID THE STANDARD HAS BEEN MET, AND I THINK THAT IS A POWERFUL STATEMENT FOR THE RULE OF LAW.
>> I ASKED YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE TIMING, AND I JUST WONDER, YOU KNOW, ARE YOU TRYING ALSO TO STOP THE CONTINUED DEPORTATION AND ABDUCTION OF THESE CHILDREN?
THERE'S A TERRIFYING REPORT IN "THE NEW YORK TIMES" ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING IN KHERSON AT ONE POINT WHEN THE RUSSIANS WERE COMING IN.
APPARENTLY DOCTORS AT NURSES AT THE NEONATAL HOSPITAL BASICALLY SAID ALL THESE KIDS, THESE NEWBORNS, WERE TOO SICK AND TOO FRAGILE TO BE MOVED.
THEY THOUGHT THEY WERE GOING TO BE DEPORTING THE NEWBORNS.
ARE YOU TRYING TO STOP THIS ABDUCTION?
DO YOU THINK IT MIGHT STOP IT?
>> I THINK WHAT THE PRESIDENT OF THE COURT STATED WHEN HE GAVE HIS ORIGINAL STATEMENT IS ONE OF THE FACTORS MILITATING IN FAVOR OF THE PUBLIC STATEMENT FROM THE JUDGES WAS THE ACT OF DETERRENCE AND THE ONGOING ALLEGATIONS HAD BEEN RECEIVED.
SO I THINK IT'S A VERY PROPER PURPOSE OF THE LAW TO ACT IN REAL TIME TO MAKE SURE THAT LINES ARE CLEAR, THAT THE STAMINA WE HAVE TO ENSURE THAT JUSTICE IS FELT IS ONE WHICH WE'RE NOT GOING TO -- IS NOT GOING TO EXHAUST US BUT WE'RE GOING TO DELIVER.
AND THEN HOPEFULLY OTHERS WILL SEE THE MESSAGE THAT THEY HAVE CHOICES.
STICK TO THE LAW.
AND IF YOU DECIDE NOT TO, DON'T THINK THAT CRIMES COMMITTED IN THE DAYTIME WILL ALLOW ONE TO SLEEP WELL AT NIGHT.
>> DO YOU HAVE OTHER CHARGES OR OTHER ARREST WARRANTS PREPARED, MORE CHARGES AGAINST PUTIN OR THOSE AROUND HIM?
>> I THINK OUR JOB -- YOU KNOW, WE FILE ANYTHING BEFORE THE JUDGES OF THE COURT.
I THINK OUR JOB IS TO MAKE SURE THE INVESTIGATION COVERS INCRIMINATING AND EXONERATING EVIDENCE EQUALLY.
AND I'VE SAID THAT UKRAINE'S A CRIME SCENE.
AND THERE'S ALLEGATIONS OF MYRIAD TYPES OF ALLEGATIONS, SEXUAL VIOLENCE, INFRASTRUCTURE, TORTURE, EXECUTION OF SOLDIERS THAT HAVE BEEN SEEN.
AND I THINK ALL OF THAT HAS TO BE THOROUGHLY INVESTIGATED, AND WE WILL NOT HESITATE TO MAKE ANY NECESSARY APPLICATIONS IF THE STANDARDS ARE MET.
>> AND FINALLY, AS I SAID, ONE OF THE BIGGEST AND MOST POWERFUL PARTNERS WOULD BE THE UNITED STATES.
THEY ARE NOT SIGNED UP TO THE ICC.
PRESIDENT BIDEN HAILED YOUR DECISION AS JUSTIFIED.
THERE IS, AS YOU KNOW, AN INTERNAL DEBATE.
THE PENTAGON DOESN'T WANT TO HAND OVER EVIDENCE BECAUSE IT MIGHT REFLECT EVENTUALLY ON TRIALS AGAINST THEIR OWN SOLDIERS AND MILITARY.
WHAT DO YOU EXPECT FROM THE UNITED STATES AT THIS TIME IN SUPPORT OF THIS ARREST WARRANT?
>> I THINK THESE MOMENTS ARE BIGGER THAN THE ICC OR OTHER INSTITUTIONS.
IT'S A MOMENT FOR EVERY COUNTRY, EVERY PUBLIC MEMBER PARTICULARLY, BUT EVERY MEMBER STATE OF THE UNITED NATIONS AND EVERY INDIVIDUAL, EVERY VIEWER WATCHING TO DECIDE ARE WE ON THE SIDE OF HUMANITY OR NOT?
IT'S BIGGER THAN ALL OF US.
NOBODY ANYWHERE WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF THEIR CHILD SIMPLY BEING SNATCHED AND TAKEN AWAY OR THEIR NEIGHBOR'S CHILD BEING TAKEN AWAY OR SOMEBODY IN THEIR COUNTRY BEING SNATCHED AND TAKEN AWAY AND GIVEN AN EDUCATION IN A FOREIGN LANGUAGE AND A FOREIGN PASSPORT.
WE SHOULDN'T ACCEPT IT.
THE LAW SHOULDN'T ACCEPT IT.
THIS IS WHY WE NEED TO COALESCE, I THINK, AROUND SOME BASIC PRINCIPLES.
I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE PURPOSES OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT.
LET'S NOT FIXATE ON THE STRUCTURE OR THE COURT, BUT THE PRINCIPLES OF HUMANITY THAT SHOULD BIND US TOGETHER.
>> KARIM KHAN, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
CHIEF PROSECUTOR OF THE ICC.
>>> TURNING NOW TO IRAN, WHICH IS CELEBRATING AN ANCIENT PERSIAN FESTIVAL ABOUT THE FIRST DAY OF SPRING.
AND AT THE WHITE HOUSE, THE PRESIDENT AND FIRST LADY HOSTED A RECEPTION LAST NIGHT FOR IRANIAN AMERICANS WITH BIDEN HONORING THE BRAVE IRANIAN WOMEN FIGHTING FOR FREEDOM AND EQUALITY BACK HOME.
THAT, OF COURSE, WAS SPARKED BY THE DEATH OF 22-YEAR-OLD MAHSA AMINI IN THE FALL.
EYEWITNESS ACCOUNTS WERE PRESENTED TO THE HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL.
BIDEN ALSO TOOK THE OPPORTUNITY TO SEND A MESSAGE TO THE AMERICANS, THE IRANIAN AMERICANS IMPRISONED IN IRAN.
>> ALL THOSE WHO ARE UNJUSTLY RETAINED IN IRAN OR ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD KNOW THAT YOU ARE NOT FORGOTTEN, AND WE WILL NOT STOP TRYING TO GET YOU HOME.
RETURNING WRONGFULLY DETAINED AND PEOPLE HELD HOSTAGE, PARTICULARLY AMERICANS AND THEIR FAMILIES, IS A TOP PRIORITY FOR THIS ADMINISTRATION.
WE'LL CONTINUE OUR WORK TO BRING HOME ALL AMERICANS HELD HOSTAGE, THAT ARE UNJUSTLY DETAINED.
>> SO THREE U.S. CITIZENS ARE CURRENTLY DETAINED IN TEHRAN'S NOTORIOUS EVIN PRISON.
YOU'LL REMEMBER WE HEARD SIAMAK'S URGENT PLEA TO THE PRESIDENT ON THIS SHOW TWO WEEKS AGO.
NOW I'M JOINED BY EMAD'S SISTER, NEDA SHARGHI, WHO IS JOINING ME LIVE FROM WASHINGTON.
NEDA, WELCOME TO THIS PROGRAM.
I WONDER, FIRST OF ALL, HOW YOU RESPOND TO THE PRESIDENT LAST NIGHT AT THE RECEPTION, WHICH I BELIEVE YOU ATTENDED, PLEDGING THAT THE RETURN OF ALL, YOU KNOW, AMERICAN CITIZENS IN IRAN AND WHEREVER REMAINS HIS TOP PRIORITY.
>> WELL, THAT'S A PLEDGE WE HAVE HEARD OVER AND OVER AGAIN, AND IT'S ALWAYS NICE TO HEAR.
WE ALWAYS APPRECIATE IT.
I DO WISH HE HAD MENTIONED EMAD, MORAD, AND SIAMAK'S NAME.
I THINK THAT WOULD HAVE, YOU KNOW, MEANT A GREAT DEAL.
BUT, YOU KNOW, JEFFERY WOODKE WAS RELEASED FROM WEST AFRICA.
WE'RE ALWAYS APPRECIATIVE OF HIM MENTIONING IT, BUT SAYING THOSE WORDS UNFORTUNATELY ISN'T REALLY ENOUGH.
WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS FIND A TIME TO SIT AND MEET WITH OUR PRESIDENT AND TALK ABOUT HOW URGENTLY WE NEED TO BRING THESE THREE INNOCENT AMERICAN CITIZENS HOME FINALLY FROM IRAN.
>> SO I WANT TO -- BEFORE I ASK YOU WHAT HAPPENED AT THE WHITE HOUSE, I WANT TO REMIND OUR VIEWERS OF THE RISK THAT SIAMAK NAMAZI TOOK TO TALK TO US AND TO MAKE THIS PLEA TO THE PRESIDENT THROUGH CNN.
HERE'S WHAT HE TOLD US A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO.
>> HONESTLY, THE OTHER HOSTAGES AND I DECESPERATELY NEED PRESIDT BIDEN TO HEAR US OUT, TO FINALLY HEAR OUR CRY FOR HELP AND BRING US HOME.
AND I SUPPOSE DESPERATE TIMES CALL FOR DESPERATE MEASURES.
SO THIS IS A DESPERATE MEASURE.
I'M CLEARLY NERVOUS.
JUST LIKE IT'S ODD FOR YOU, IT'S VERY INTIMIDATING FOR ME TO DO THIS.
I FEEL I NEED TO BE HEARD.
I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG I -- I HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL THE WHITE HOUSE UNDERSTANDS THAT WE NEED ACTION AND NOT JUST TO BE TOLD THAT BRINGING US OUT IS A PRIORITY.
>> SO YOU LISTENED TO THAT.
YOU TOLD ME YOU LISTEN TO THAT INTERVIEW REGULARLY.
FUELED BY THAT, WHAT DID YOU DO YESTERDAY WHEN YOU -- YOU KNOW, YOU WERE IN THE WHITE HOUSE.
YOU WERE A STONE'S THROW AWAY FROM THE PRESIDENT, WHO YOU REALLY WISH WOULD HOLD A MEETING WITH YOU ALL.
DID YOU -- WHO DID YOU MEET?
>> SO I DO LISTEN TO THAT INTERVIEW EVERY DAY.
I THINK TO HEAR THE VOICE OF AN INNOCENT AMERICAN CITIZEN PLEADING, RISKING HIS LIFE TO PLEAD TO THE PRESIDENT, IS SOMETHING REALLY THAT FUELS ME.
AND YESTERDAY IT FUELED ME.
I HAD ONE GOAL YESTERDAY IN MY MIND, AND THAT WAS TO GET A LETTER THAT I HAD WRITTEN AND PREPARED FOR PRESIDENT BIDEN, ASKING HIM FOR ONE THING, THE SAME ASK THAT SIAMAK HAD, TO PLEASE MEET WITH US.
PLEASE MEET WITH MY FAMILY, SIAMAK'S FAMILY, AND MORAD'S FAMILY.
AND I WAS SUCCESSFUL IN MY MISSION TO GET THAT LETTER TO HIM.
IT WAS A FORTUITOUS WAY OF DOING IT, BUT I SAW PRESIDENT BIDEN PASSING BY AND WAS ABLE TO GRAB HIS ATTENTION AND PUT THIS LETTER IN HIS HAND.
>> AND I KNOW THAT WE'VE ASKED YOU TO READ SOME OF IT.
SO CAN YOU READ TO US -- BECAUSE YOU O HE OBVIOUSLY DIDN'T READ IT IN FRONT OF YOU.
READ TO US WHAT YOU ASKED HIM.
>> SURE.
DEAR PRESIDENT BIDEN, AS THE CELEBRATION OF SPRING, OF FRESH STARTS, OF HOPE AND OPTIMISM, NOWRUZ SPENT WITH YOU IN YOUR HOME IS PARTICULARLY MEANINGFUL, ESPECIALLY GIVEN MY BROTHER'S SITUATION.
MR. PRESIDENT, AS YOU READ THIS LETTER, I HOPE YOU CAN HEAR THE UTTER DESPERATION IN MY VOICE.
I AM ONLY ASKING FOR ONE THING OF YOU.
PLEASE, I BEG YOU, PLEASE MEET WITH ME ALONG WITH THE FAMILY REPRESENTATIVES OF MORAD'S AND SIAMAK'S FAMILIES.
I LIVE IN WASHINGTON, D.C., ONLY 2.9 MILES FROM WHERE YOU LIVE.
YOU ARE MY PRESIDENT, AND WE WANT YOU TO HEAR ABOUT THE PEOPLE WE LOVE.
WE HAVE ASKED MANY, MANY TIMES TO MEET WITH YOU.
SIAMAK NAMAZI, IN HIS CNN INTERVIEW WITH CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR TWO WEEKS AGO, COURAGEOUSLY RISKED RETRIBUTION FROM HIS JAILERS TO PUBLICLY ASK YOU THE SAME.
WE HAVE SEEN THE COURAGE YOU DISPLAYED IN THE DEALS THAT BROUGHT HOME TREVOR REID AND BRITTNEY GRINER FROM RUSSIA, AND SEVEN AMERICANS FROM VENEZUELA.
WE KNOW THESE DEALS WERE COSTLY, BUT WE KNOW THERE IS NO PRICE WE SHOULD NOT BE PREPARED TO PAY TO RETURN AN INNOCENT AMERICAN TO THEIR FAMILY, THEIR COUNTRY, AND THEIR FREEDOM.
THERE WILL BE TIME FOR PUNISHING THE PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE AND DETERRING FUTURE DETENTIONS, BUT THE URGENCY OF ACTING IS SERIOUS.
MY BROTHER CAME CLOSE TO DYING IN OCTOBER IN THE RIOTS AND FIRES AT EVIN PRISON.
TRAPPED IN HIS CELL AND BREATHING IN TEAR GAS AND SMOKE, HE MANAGED TO MAKE A FRANTIC CALL TO ME TO SAY GOODBYE.
PLEASE MEET WITH US, PRESIDENT BIDEN.
PLEASE.
RESPECTFULLY, NEDA.
>> SO, NEDA, DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA OF WHERE THIS LETTER WILL LEAD?
HAVE YOU RECEIVED -- I KNOW IT WAS JUST LAST NIGHT.
DO YOU THINK IT'S BEEN READ BY THE PRESIDENT?
>> I HAVE NOT HEARD ANYTHING.
I ASKED HIM MANY TIMES TO PLEASE PROMISE THAT HE WOULD READ IT, AND HE PROMISED ME.
AND I BELIEVE THAT GIVEN THE GOOD, KIND PERSON THAT HE IS, HE WILL FOLLOW UP AND ASK US TO COME AND MEET WITH HIM.
I REALLY DO BELIEVE THAT.
I THINK IF WE DON'T -- YOU KNOW, NOW I KNOW THAT HE HAS DIRECTLY HEARD FROM US ABOUT THE MEETING.
THERE IS NO DOUBT IN MY MIND.
I ASKED HIM.
HE HEARD.
HE HAS THE LETTER.
HE PROMISED TO READ IT.
AND SO I CHOOSE TO BELIEVE THAT HE WILL ASK HIS TEAM TO REACH OUT TO US AND MEET WITH US.
>> AND MEANTIME, HOW IS YOUR BROTHER, EMAD?
HOW IS HE?
WE HEARD THE VOICE OF SIAMAK, AND WE COULD GET A LITTLE BIT OF HOW HE WAS, BUT IT'S VERY DIFFICULT OBVIOUSLY TO SPEAK OPENLY FROM INSIDE AND BEHIND BARS.
WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT YOUR OWN BROTHER'S CONDITION?
>>.
>> I KNOW THAT THEY ARE DESPERATE, THAT THEY ARE SCARED, AND THEY FEEL LIKE THEY'VE BEEN FORGOTTEN.
AND I THINK THEY'RE A LITTLE CONFUSED.
I THINK THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THIS CAN BE HAPPENING TO THEM.
YOU KNOW, JUST FOR YOUR VIEWERS, WHEN WE SAY THESE ARE INNOCENT AMERICANS, I'M NOT JUST USING THAT WORD CASUALLY.
THEY HAVE BEEN DETERMINED OFFICIALLY BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE, BY OUR SECRETARY OF STATE, AS HAVING BEEN TAKEN, DETAINED BY THE IRANIANS FOR ONE REASON, AND THAT IS BECAUSE THEY ARE AMERICANS.
AND SO IMAGINE -- I MEAN YOU HEARD SIAMAK SAY, THEY HAVEN'T EVEN AS MUCH AS JAYWALKED, AND THEY HAVE COLLECTIVELY BEEN IN EVIN PRISON FOR 18 YEARS FOR NOTHING.
AND I REALLY DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW -- HOW, YOU KNOW, OUR GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS CAN GO TO BED EVERY NIGHT KNOWING THAT THEY ARE LEAVING THEIR OWN CITIZENS BEHIND FOR DOING NOTHING OTHER THAN BEING GOOD AMERICANS.
>> YOU KNOW, I SPOKE TO GOVERNOR RICHARDSON, THE FORMER GOVERNOR OF NEW MEXICO, WHO I KNOW IS HELPING YOUR FAMILY SPECIFICALLY AND DOING WHAT HE CAN TO LOBBY FOR, YOU KNOW, FOR SOME MOVEMENT.
THIS IS WHAT HE TOLD ME ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION AND WHAT HE WOULD RECOMMEND TO THE PRESIDENT, YOU KNOW, IN LINE WITH WHAT YOU'RE ASKING.
>> YES.
THE PRESIDENT SHOULD MEET WITH THEM, AND THE PRESIDENT IN THE PAST, WITH TREVOR REID AND THE GRINERS CASE, AND OTHER FAMILIES, HAS MET WITH THEM.
I THINK THE PRESIDENT SHOULD MEET WITH THEM.
I THINK IT'S THE RESPONSIBILITY OF EVERY PRESIDENT TO TRY TO GET AMERICAN HOSTAGES HOME REGARDLESS, AND USUALLY IF IT'S A PRISONER EXCHANGE OR IT'S SOME KIND OF DEAL, IT'S WORTHY TO DO EVEN THOUGH IT MAY BE UNSEEMLY.
SO, YES, I THINK THE PRESIDENT SHOULD MEET WITH THEM.
>> AND, NEDA, AS YOU KNOW AND YOU SORT OF REFERRED TO SOME OF THEM, AN AMERICAN WAS RELEASED FROM NIGER AFTER THE SECRETARY OF STATE, TONY BLINKEN, VISITED THE COUNTRY.
A SAUDI U.S. DUAL CITIZEN WAS RELEASED FROM PRISON, THOUGH HE MAY STILL BE BARRED FROM LEAVING THAT COUNTRY.
DO THESE SUCCESSES AND THE FACT THAT PRESIDENT BIDEN MADE THAT STATEMENT AND THAT PROMISE PUBLICLY TO YOU ALL AT THAT EVENT LAST NIGHT -- DOES THAT GIVE YOU HOPE OR WHAT?
>> YOU KNOW, HOPE HAS TO BE FOLLOWED BY ACTION.
WE HAVE HEARD THOSE WORDS NUMEROUS TIMES.
WE HAVE HAD SOME HOSTAGES RETURN HOME.
BUT OUR LOVED ONES IN IRAN HAVE NOT, AND THERE'S NO GOOD EXPLANATION FOR WHY NOT.
WE SAW THE SUCCESSFUL RELEASE OF BRITTNEY GRINER FROM RUSSIA DURING WAR, AND I KNOW THERE ARE OPTIONS.
THE QUESTION IS WHY ARE WE NOT USING THOSE OPTIONS TO BRING HOME INNOCENT AMERICANS?
AND SO, YES, IT GIVES ME HOPE.
BUT THE PROOF IS IN THE PUDDING.
THEY NEED TO BE BROUGHT HOME.
AND, YOU KNOW, I DO WANT TO SAY THAT I SAW ON SOCIAL MEDIA THAT THE CAST OF "TED LASSO" ACTUALLY HAD A MEETING WITH PRESIDENT BIDEN YESTERDAY.
THAT'S WHAT WE WANT.
YOU KNOW, MENTAL HEALTH IS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE.
PRESIDENT BIDEN, YOU KNOW, MADE A POINT OF MAKING SURE EVERYONE KNOWS THAT IT'S AN IMPORTANT ISSUE BY MEETING WITH THIS CAST, SITTING IN HIS OFFICE, HAVING A DISCUSSION, QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS.
YOU KNOW, WHAT IS MORE IMPORTANT, OR WHAT IS JUST AS IMPORTANT AS HAVING INNOCENT AMERICANS BEING DETAINED AROUND THE WORLD JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE AMERICANS?
I WOULD HOPE THAT HE WOULD SHOW IT A PRIORITY AND ACTUALLY HAVE US IN THAT SETTING AND ALLOW US TO DISCUSS THIS.
>> NEDA SHARGHI, THANK YOU SO MUCH INDEED.
>>> ANY DAY NOW, A JUDGE IN THE UNITED STATES IS GOING TO DECIDE WHETHER AN ABORTION PILL WHICH HAS BEEN APPROVED FOR YEARS SHOULD BE COMPLETELY BANNED IN THE UNITED STATES.
IF SO, CRITICS SAY THAT 40 MILLION WOMEN WOULD LOSE ACCESS TO THE DRUG MIFEPRISTONE.
THAT'S ON TOP OF THE NEARLY 25 MILLION WOMEN ALREADY LIVING IN STATES WITH ABORTION BANS.
LAST WEEK, WYOMING BECAME THE FIRST U.S. STATE TO CRIMINALIZE THE PRESCRIPTION AND THE SALE OF ABORTION PILLS WITH A MAXIMUM SIX-MONTH PRISON SENTENCE.
NPR REPORTER SARAH McCAMMON JOINS HARI SREENIVASAN TO DISCUSS THE FATE OF REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS IN AMERICA.
>> CHRISTIANE, THANKS.
SARAH McCAMMON, THANKS SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.
EXPLAIN FOR THE AUDIENCE, BEFORE WE GET INTO WHERE THE LEGAL AND POLITICAL LANDSCAPE IS OVER REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS RIGHT NOW, THE FOCUS SEEM TO BE ON THE PILLS THAT PREVENT PREGNANCY FROM TAKING HOLD.
WHAT DO THESE PILLS DO?
>> RIGHT, AND THAT'S FOR GOOD REASON.
YOU KNOW, MEDICATION ABORTION IS THE DOMINANT FORM OF ABORTION IN THIS COUNTRY TODAY, SO IT IS A BIG FOCUS.
AND THE PRIMARY MECHANISM THAT'S USED IN THE UNITED STATES IN ABOUT 98% OF MEDICATION ABORTIONS, ACCORDING TO THE GUTTMACHER INSTITUTE, INVOLVES A TRO-DRUG PROTOCOL.
THE FIRST DRUG IS THE ONE THAT'S THE FOCUS OF A LOT OF ATTENTION, THE FOCUS OF A FEDERAL LAWSUIT.
IT'S CALLED MIFEPRISTONE.
THOSE REMEMBER BACK TO THE YEAR 2000 REMEMBER, RU-486.
IT'S ONE AND THE SAME.
IT'S A PRO-JESTER OWN BLOCKER.
WHICH IS ESSENTIAL FOR PREGNANCY TO DEVELOP.
AFTER THAT DRUG IS TAKEN, THERE'S A SECOND PILLED THAT HELPS SORT OF BRING ON ESSENTIALLY A CHEMICALLY INDUCED MISCARRIAGE.
BUT MIFEPRISTONE, USING THAT COMBINATION IS MORE EFFECTIVE THAN ANY OTHER PROTOCOL, MOST DOCTORS WOULD SAY.
AND IT'S, YOU KNOW, THE GOLD STANDARD IN THE UNITED STATES.
SO THE FIGHT OVER THAT PILL IS REALLY -- IT'S A LARGER FIGHT.
IT'S ABOUT ACCESS TO ABORTION, OF COURSE.
>> RIGHT.
SO, YOU KNOW, SO MUCH OF THE ATTENTION WAS ABOUT WHERE WOMEN COULD GO TO GET A MEDICAL ABORTION, WHICH STATES WERE ALLOWING THAT, AND NOW IF YOU'RE SAYING THAT THIS IS HOW THE BULK OF ABORTIONS ACTUALLY HAPPEN, THROUGH THESE PILLS, IT SEEMS STRATEGICALLY MORE IMPORTANT TO EITHER OUTLAW OR TO PROTECT ACCESS TO THAT SPECIFIC MEDICATION.
>> RIGHT, AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE PROTOCOL, THE DRUG APPROVED BY THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION REQUIRES A HEALTH CARE PROVIDER TO PRESCRIBE IT, TO CONSULT EITHER IN PERSON OR NOW, THANKS TO SOME RULE CHANGES IN THE LAST FEW YEARS, OVER TELEHEALTH WITH THE PATIENT, MAKE SURE SHE UNDERSTANDS THINGS LIKE HOW FAR ALONG SHE IS IN THE PREGNANCY, WHEN HER MENSTRUAL -- WHERE SHE IS IN HER CYCLE BECAUSE THOSE ARE IMPORTANT FOR A SAFE MEDICATION ABORTION.
BUT WHAT'S ALSO HAPPENING IS THAT THROUGH OTHER MEANS, SOMETIMES THROUGH ONLINE PHARMACIES OR ONLINE PROVIDERS, PEOPLE ARE ALSO GETTING THESE PILLS IN OTHER WAYS, SOMETIMES FROM OVERSEAS.
THE FOCUS OF THE FEDERAL LITIGATION THAT I'VE BEEN COVERING LATELY IS REALLY THIS FDA-APPROVED PROTOCOL.
AND I GUESS ONE OTHER THING THAT'S WORTH UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IF YOU'RE IN A STATE WHERE ABORTION IS ILLEGAL, YOU KNOW, HAVING A DOCTOR PRESCRIBE AN ABORTION PILL IS ALSO GOING TO BE ILLEGAL.
BUT OFTEN EASIER FOR PEOPLE TO TRAVEL, YOU KNOW, MAYBE ACROSS THE STATE LINE, PICK UP AN ABORTION PILL, AND SOON AFTER GO BACK HOME.
IT MIGHT BE PREFERABLE FOR SOME PATIENTS TO DO THAT THAN TO SCHEDULE A SURGICAL PROCEDURE.
AND IT ALSO JUST SORT OF EXPANDS THE BANDWIDTH, SO TO SPEAK, OF WHAT PROVIDERS CAN OFFER THEIR PATIENTS BECAUSE IF THEY'RE JUST LIMITED TO SURGICAL PROCEDURES, WELL, THAT REQUIRES ROOMS.
THAT REQUIRES A CERTAIN NUMBER OF PROVIDERS, AND IT'S JUST -- IT'S A DIFFERENT LEVEL OF RESOURCES THAT'S NEEDED.
>> SO IF THIS WAS ALREADY ILLEGAL IN THE STATES THAT ARE BANNING ABORTIONS OUTRIGHT, WHY WERE THE HEADLINES ABOUT WYOMING LAST WEEK SO BIG?
>> WELL, THE KEY DIFFERENCE WITH WYOMING IS THAT THIS IS THE FIRST STATE LAW, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THAT SPECIFICALLY TARGETS ABORTION PILLS, MEDICATION ABORTION.
IN STATES LIKE TEXAS AND MANY OTHERS, WHERE THERE ARE LAYERS OF ABORTION RESTRICTIONS PROHIBITING, YOU KNOW, VIRTUALLY ALL ABORTIONS FOR ALMOST ANY REASON, MEDICATION ABORTION WOULD FALL UNDER THAT, SO IT WOULD BE INCLUDED IN A BAN.
BUT THIS WYOMING LAW SPECIFICALLY FOCUSES ON ABORTION PILLS.
SO THAT'S THE BIG DIFFERENCE.
THE OTHER LIMITATION THAT HAS EXISTED EVEN BEFORE THE FALL OF ROE V. WADE WITH THE DOBBS DECISION LAST YEAR IS THAT SOME STATES WILL NOT ALLOW ABORTION PILLS TO BE PRESCRIBED OVER TELEHEALTH.
THAT IS AN OPTION THAT GROUPS LIKE THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION AND THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF OBSTETRICIANS AND GYNECOLOGISTS HAVE PUSHED FOR AND SAY IT CAN BE DONE VERY SAFELY IF PATIENTS UNDERSTAND, AGAIN, WHERE THEY ARE IN THEIR CYCLES AND SO FORTH AND IF DOCTORS PROVIDE ADEQUATE INFORMATION.
BUT THAT LIMITATION, NOT ALLOWING THE PRESCRIPTION OVER TELEHEALTH, I THINK OBVIOUSLY MAKES IT MUCH HARDER TO GET THESE PILLS BECAUSE THEN A PATIENT STILL HAS TO GO IN PERSON TO A PROVIDER AND MEET WITH THEM, MUCH AS THEY WOULD FOR A SURGICAL PROCEDURE.
>> YOU AND I ARE TALKING ON A TUESDAY MORNING, AND THERE'S A CHANCE THAT THIS STORY COULD CHANGE BY THE TIME THAT OUR AUDIENCE SEES THIS ON THE AIR.
THE CASE THAT YOU HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING, LET'S TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT.
WHAT IS THE SORT OF CORE CHALLENGE HERE THAT'S IN FRONT OF A JUDGE?
>> SO LAST YEAR, LATE LAST YEAR, A GROUP OF ANTI-ABORTION HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS AND GROUPS, SO A COALITION THAT OPPOSES ABORTION RIGHTS, CAME TOGETHER AND FILED A LAWSUIT IN AMARILLO, TEXAS, IN FEDERAL COURT, CHALLENGING THE FDA'S APPROVAL OF MIFEPRISTONE, WHICH AGAIN GOES ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE YEAR 2000.
THEY'RE CHALLENGING SOME OF THE TECHNICALITIES OF HOW THAT DRUG WAS APPROVED AND SOME OF THE SUBSEQUENT DECISIONS BY THE FDA THAT HAVE FOLLOWED, THINGS LIKE MAKING IT EASIER TO MAIL ABORTION PILLS AND PRESCRIBE THEM REMOTELY, OKAY?
SO THE FOCUS IS ASKING THIS JUDGE TO OVERTURN THE FDA APPROVAL.
THESE GROUPS -- A FULL WIN FOR THEM WOULD BE SEEING MIFEPRISTONE COMPLETELY REMOVED FROM THE MARKET PERHAPS THROUGH A NATIONWIDE INJUNCTION.
ANOTHER THING THAT'S IMPORTANT TO KNOW ABOUT THIS SPECIFIC CASE IS THAT THE JUDGE INVOLVED, JUDGE MATTHEW KAZ MARIC, IS A TRUMP APPOINTEE.
HE WAS APPOINTED BY FORMER PRESIDENT TRUMP, HAS A LONG TRACK RECORD OF CONSERVATIVE ACTIVISM AND ALLIANCES WITH CONSERVATIVE RELIGIOUS GROUPS.
HE WORKED FOR A CHRISTIAN LEGAL FIRM IN TEXAS FOR SOME TIME BEFORE HE BECAME A JUDGE.
AND JUST LAST YEAR, HE RULED IN FAVOR OF A CHRISTIAN FATHER FROM TEXAS, WHO SUED CHALLENGING ESSENTIALLY ACCESS TO BIRTH CONTROL FOR MINORS THROUGH THE FEDERAL TITLE 10 FAMILY PLANNING PROGRAM.
THIS MAN SAYS BECAUSE OF HIS CHRISTIAN FAITH, HE OBJECTED TO HIS TEENAGE DAUGHTERS POTENTIALLY HAVING THE ABILITY TO GET BIRTH CONTROL WITHOUT HIS KNOWLEDGE OR CONSENT.
AND JUDGE KACSMARYK SIDED WITH HIM.
SO THIS JUDGE HAS, AGAIN, A LONG CONSERVATIVE RECORD AND A LOT OF PEOPLE ACCUSE THE PLAINTIFFS IN THIS CASE OF JUDGE SHOPPING AND SPECIFICALLY CHOOSING HIS COURT, HOPING FOR A FAVORABLE RULING FROM HIM.
IT REMAINS TO BE SEEN EXACTLY HOW HE WILL RULE.
BUT IF HE WERE TO ISSUE A NATIONWIDE INJUNCTION, THAT COULD EITHER IMMEDIATELY OR PERHAPS THROUGH A SERIES OF PROCEDURES THAT THE FDA WOULD HAVE TO FOLLOW LEAD TO THIS PILL BECOMING MUCH, MUCH MORE DIFFICULT TO GET ACCESS TO FOR ABORTION, IF NOT IMPOSSIBLE.
>> IF I'M UNDERSTANDING THIS CORRECTLY, IT'S NOT THE SAFETY OF THE PILL.
THAT'S NOT BEING CHALLENGED.
IT'S HOW THE FDA APPROVED THIS PILL, IS THAT RIGHT?
>> IT'S KIND OF BOTH.
YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I WANT TO STRESS THAT MAJOR MEDICAL GROUPS LIKE THE AMA, THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF OBST OBSTETRICIANS AND GYNECOLOGISTS POINT TO YEARS AND YEARS OF STUDIES.
THIS DRUG HAS NOW BEEN ON THE MARKET MORE THAN 20 YEARS.
IT'S BEEN USED BY SOME 5 MILLION PATIENTS, AND IT HAS A VERY STRONG SAFETY RECORD ACCORDING TO THESE HEALTH EXPERTS.
BUT THE PLAINTIFFS, THE ANTI-ABORTION GROUPS WHO BROUGHT THIS CASE, ARE POINTING TO SOME OF THE SIDE EFFECTS THAT DO OCCUR.
AND, YOU KNOW, JUST TO SORT OF STEP BACK FOR A SECOND, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A DRUG THAT INDUCES ESSENTIALLY A MISCARRIAGE.
SO THERE ARE SIDE EFFECTS.
THERE ARE CRAMPING AND BLEEDING.
THAT'S KIND OF THE INTENTION OF THE DRUG, RIGHT?
AND SOME WOMEN EXPERIENCE MORE SEVERE SIDE EFFECTS THAN OTHERS.
SOME NEED FOLLOW-UP CARE FROM THEIR DOCTORS.
FROM MY REPORTING I UNDERSTAND THAT SOMETIMES THAT'S JUST REASSURANCE THAT THIS IS NORMAL, THIS IS PART OF THE PROCESS, AND THAT MIGHT REQUIRE TAKING, YOU KNOW, SOME IBUPROFEN OR USING A HEATING PAD.
OTHER PEOPLE WILL HAVE COMPLICATIONS AND WILL REQUIRE ADDITIONAL FOLLOW-UP CARE, SOMETIMES EVEN A SURGICAL PROCEDURE TO COMPLETE THE ABORTION.
BUT ALL OF THAT IS SORT OF WITHIN A RANGE OF THINGS THAT CAN HAPPEN AND THAT HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS, OBGYNs ARE GENERALLY PREPARED TO DEAL WITH.
>> LET'S TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE POLITICS OF THE CASE HERE.
WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE WAY THAT THE CASE IS BEING PLAYED OUT THAT GIVES PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE OR OF THIS ISSUE GREAT CONCERN?
>> I THINK ONE OF THE MOST INTERESTING THINGS THAT HAPPENED IN THE FEDERAL COURTROOM IN AMARILLO LAST WEDNESDAY WHEN I WAS THERE IS THAT THE JUDGE AND THE ATTORNEYS FOR THE PLAINTIFFS, FOR THE ANTI-ABORTION GROUPS, MORE THAN ONCE TALKED ABOUT THE FACT THAT A GROUP OF 22 REPUBLICAN ATTORNEYS GENERAL FROM RED STATES THAT HAVE TRIED TO BAN ABORTION OR HEAVILY RESTRICT IT SINCE THE FALL OF ROE V. WADE, HAVE WEIGHED IN ON THIS CASE.
THEY FILED AN AMICUS BRIEF ARGUING ESSENTIALLY THAT THE WIDESPREAD ACCESS TO THE ABORTION PILL MAKES IT DIFFICULT FOR THEM TO ENFORCE THEIR STATE LAWS RESTRICTING OR PROHIBITING ABORTION.
AND I THINK THAT'S SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE THAT IS NOT DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE STATED REASON FOR THIS CASE.
AGAIN, THIS CASE IS ABOUT THE FDA'S APPROVAL.
IT'S ABOUT RAISING QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT PROCESS AND ABOUT THE SAFETY OF THE DRUG.
>> MM-HMM.
>> BUT THAT ARGUMENT IS REALLY ABOUT STATE/FEDERAL RELATIONS, ENFORCEMENT OF STATE ABORTION BANS, AND TO WHAT EXTENT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD HAVE TO THINK ABOUT WHAT THESE STATE LAWS SAY.
AND THE RESPONSE IN THAT COURTROOM FROM THE LAWYER ARGUING ON BEHALF OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WAS ESSENTIALLY, THAT'S BESIDE THE POINT.
THE QUESTION HERE IS WHETHER OR NOT THIS DRUG IS SAFE.
IT'S BEEN ESTABLISHED AND DEMONSTRATED AS SAFE OVER MANY YEARS.
AND WHAT STATES DECIDE TO DO, HOW THEY DECIDE TO REGULATE IT THEMSELVES IS A SEPARATE QUESTION.
SO I THINK THAT POINTS TO THE REAL POLITICAL FIGHT OVER ACCESS TO ABORTION THAT UNDERLIES ALL OF THIS.
>> CAN WE ALSO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT KIND OF THE NORMAL PROCEDURE FOR HOW THESE CASES ARE PLACED ON THE DOCKET OR NOT?
I MEAN YOU WERE ONE OF THE FEW REPORTERS WHO WERE ACTUALLY IN THE ROOM.
>> RIGHT.
AND, AGAIN, YOU KNOW, LEGAL EXPERTS THAT I HAVE TALKED TO ACCUSE THE PLAINTIFFS OF SELECTIVELY CHOOSING JUDGE KACSMARYK, HOPING FOR THE KIND OF OUTCOME THEY WANTED.
ONE OF THE SORT OF WRINKLES IN ALL OF THIS HAS BEEN A FIGHT OVER ACCESS TO THE COURTROOM ITSELF THAT EMERGED IN THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS.
THE WEEKEND BEFORE THE HEARING, LAST WEDNESDAY, "THE WASHINGTON POST" REPORTED THAT JUDGE KACSMARYK HAD SORT OF QUIETLY SCHEDULED THE HEARING, HELD A MEETING, I BELIEVE, ON A FRIDAY, SCHEDULING THE HEARING FOR THE FOLLOWING WEDNESDAY, AND ASKED THE JUDGES IN THE CASE TO KEEP IT QUIET.
HE DIDN'T ISSUE A GAG ORDER, BUT HE SAID -- HE CITED SECURITY CONCERNS SURROUNDING PROTESTS AND THAT SORT OF THING AND ASKED THEM TO KIND OF KEEP IT CLOSE TO THE VEST.
ACCORDING TO "THE POST" REPORT, HE WAS NOT GOING TO PUBLICIZE THAT INFORMATION, PUT IT ON THE DOCKET SO THAT THE PUBLIC AND THE PRESS WOULD HAVE KNOWLEDGE OF WHEN AND WHERE THE HEARING WOULD BE UNTIL TUESDAY NIGHT.
NOW, THAT'S FOR A WEDNESDAY MORNING HEARING.
AMARILLO, TEXAS, IS NOT A BIG CITY.
IT'S A COUPLE HUNDRED THOUSAND PEOPLE.
IT'S THE BETTER PART OF A DAY'S DRIVE FROM MAJOR CITIES IN TEXAS LIKE DALLAS AND HOUSTON.
WE ALL HAD TO FLY IN TO GET THERE.
SO, YOU KNOW, HAD IT NOT BEEN FOR "THE POST" SOMEHOW BECOMING AWARE OF THIS, MOST OF THE PRESS WOULD NOT HAVE MADE IT.
AS IT WAS, ONLY ABOUT 19 REPORTERS WERE ABLE TO BE IN THAT ROOM.
THERE WAS NO PUBLICLY AVAILABLE LIVESTREAM.
THERE WAS NO RECORDING, NO CAMERAS.
AND SO REALLY NOBODY KNEW WHAT HAD HAPPENED IN THAT ROOM FOR TWO DAYS EXCEPT FOR THOSE OF US WHO SAT OUT, YOU KNOW, IN THE COLD FOR THREE HOURS WAITING TO GET INTO THE COURTROOM AND REPORTED ON IT.
THE TRANSCRIPT WAS JUST RELEASED LATE LAST WEEK.
WE PUBLISHED THAT AT NPR.
SO THAT IS AVAILABLE NOW.
BUT JUST EVEN GETTING INTO THE COURTROOM, KNOWING WHAT WAS GOING ON, WAS KIND OF A CUMBERSOME PROCESS.
>> SO REGARDLESS OF HOW THIS JUDGE RULES, WHAT'S THE LIKELY NEXT STEP?
I MEAN IS IT JUST GOING TO BE CHALLENGED AT THE HIGHER COURT?
>> ABSOLUTELY.
THE LAWYERS HAVE ALREADY MADE THAT CLEAR, PARTICULARLY THE LAWYERS FOR THE GOVERNMENT, WHO ARE DEFENDING THE FDA APPROVAL OF MIFEPRISTONE.
ONE OF THE LAWYERS SAID IF THE COURTROOM LAST WEDNESDAY, ESSENTIALLY ASKED THE JUDGE IF HE ISSUED AN INJUNCTION OVERTURNING THE APPROVAL OF THIS DRUG TO PLEASE ISSUE AN IMMEDIATE STAY SO THAT THEY'D HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO APPEAL.
THE APPEAL WOULD GO -- AND AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IF THE JUDGE TO RULE AGAINST THE PLAINTIFFS, I BELIEVE THEY WOULD ALSO APPEAL.
SO ANY APPEAL WOULD GO TO THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, WHICH IS KNOWN FOR HAVING A PRETTY CONSERVATIVE REPUTATION.
IT'S UNCLEAR WHAT THEY WOULD DO.
I THINK, AGAIN, IT DEPENDS ON WHAT THE JUDGE SAYS AND HOW THEY FEEL ABOUT IT TO STATE THE OBVIOUS.
AFTER THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, IT'S ENTIRELY POSSIBLE THIS WOULD END UP AT THE SUPREME COURT FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS.
ONE, JUST THROUGH THE NORMAL APPEALS PROCESS.
AND, SECOND, THERE IS ANOTHER FEDERAL CASE OUT THERE THAT WE HAVEN'T EVEN TALKED ABOUT, BUT A GROUP OF 12 DEMOCRATIC ATTORNEYS GENERAL A FEW WEEKS AGO FILED THEIR OWN LAWSUIT IN FEDERAL COURT IN WASHINGTON, ESSENTIALLY TRYING TO PUSH IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION FROM THIS LAWSUIT WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT IN TEXAS.
THEY ARE ARGUING THAT THERE ARE TOO MANY REGULATIONS ON MIFEPRISTONE, THAT AFTER THESE 20 YEARS OF AN ESTABLISHED SAFETY RECORD, THE REGULATIONS -- AND THERE'S A WHOLE REGULATORY SCHEME ABOVE AND BEYOND NORMAL PRESCRIPTION DRUGS FOR MIFEPRISTONE.
THEY'RE ARGUING SOME OF THOSE SHOULD BE REMOVED, AND THEY'RE ALSO -- AND THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT -- ASKING A JUDGE TO BLOCK THE FDA FROM TAKING THE DRUG OFF THE MARKET.
SO EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT THIS TEXAS CASE TRIES TO DO.
IF THEY WIN IN WASHINGTON AND THE ANTI-ABORTION GROUPS WIN IN TEXAS, WELL, THEN YOU HAVE DUELING FEDERAL RULINGS, AND, YOU KNOW, THAT CERTAINLY LOOKS LIKE SOMETHING THAT COULD END UP BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT.
>> KIND OF BACKING UP A FEW STEPS, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THIS DRUG, YOU SEE THAT THIS IS COMMON AS SOMETHING THAT DOCTORS PRESCRIBE DURING MISCARRIAGES.
>> RIGHT.
>> EXPLAIN KIND OF THE SCALE OF MISCARRIAGES THAT ARE HAPPENING THROUGH NORMAL PREGNANCIES BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF OUR AUDIENCE IS KIND OF WELL AWARE OF HOW COMMON IT IS AND HOW THIS DRUG THAT'S KIND OF AT THE CENTER OF THIS DEBATE COULD BE PRESCRIBED AS PART OF THE CARE FOR THAT.
>> THE SAME MEDICAL PROCESSES THAT BRING PREGNANCY TO AN END CAN ALSO HELP TO ESSENTIALLY EXPEDITE A MISCARRIAGE THAT'S ALREADY INEVITABLE AND UNDER WAY.
SO SOMETIMES WHEN A MISCARRIAGE HAPPENS, IT CAN TAKE A WHILE FOR THE PREGNANCY TO FULLY PASS, AND THIS CAN PROLONG, YOU KNOW, THE WOMAN'S PAIN AND SUFFERING, EMOTIONALLY AND PHYSICALLY.
AND SO MIFEPRISTONE HELPS TO BASICALLY COMPLETE THAT MISCARRIAGE ALONG WITH THE HELP OF THE SECOND DRUG THAT'S INVOLVED IN THIS FDA-APPROVED PROTOCOL.
YOU KNOW, I'VE DONE SOME REPORTING ON THIS YEARS AGO, YOU KNOW, IN PLACES LIKE CANADA.
IT'S VERY EASY TO GET ACCESS TO THIS DRUG FOR THIS PURPOSE AND OTHER PURPOSES AS WELL.
BUT IN THE U.S., THE SAME EXTRA LAYERS OF RESTRICTIONS ON MIFEPRISTONE THAT APPLY FOR ABORTION ALSO APPLY FOR MISCARRIAGE.
SO A WOMAN WHO'S MISCARRYING IS TREATED IN THE SAME WAY AS A WOMAN WHO'S CHOSEN AN ABORTION.
THE PATIENT I TALKED TO A FEW YEARS AGO JUST DESCRIBED THE REAL GRIEF SHE WAS FEELING.
THIS WAS A WANTED PREGNANCY.
IT WAS NOT -- A MISCARRIAGE WAS NOT WHAT SHE WANTED OBVIOUSLY.
BUT TAKING THIS DRUG HELPED HER TO SORT OF GET THROUGH THAT PROCESS A LITTLE MORE QUICKLY.
SOMETIMES AVOIDING SURGERY IS THE GOAL.
IN SOME CASES WITH A MISCARRIAGE, IF IT DOESN'T COMPLETE NATURALLY, A DOCTOR WILL HAVE TO PERFORM ESSENTIALLY AN ABORTION PROCEDURE TO REMOVE THE REST OF THE TISSUE, AND THAT'S SOMETHING ELSE THAT MIFEPRISTONE CAN PREVENT AND HELP WITH.
>> NPR CORRESPONDENT SARAH McCAMMON, THANKS SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.
>> THANK YOU.
>>> AND NOW FROM THE WAR IN UKRAINE TO CHINA AND RUSSIA AND IRAN STRENGTHENING TIES, THERE'S A LOT TO CATCH UP WITH NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL JOHN KIRBY, WHO JOINS ME LIVE FROM THE WHITE HOUSE.
WELCOME BACK TO OUR PROGRAM.
CAN I START BY ASKING YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT IRAN BECAUSE IT WAS, YOU KNOW, NOWRUZ, THE NEW YEAR.
THE PRESIDENT AND FIRST LADY HAD THEIR WHITE HOUSE CEREMONY FOR IRANIAN AMERICANS.
I WONDER BECAUSE THE PRESIDENT SAID THAT THOSE DETAINED IN IRAN ARE STILL VERY MUCH TOP OF HIS PRIORITY, CAN YOU UPDATE US ON ANY DEALS THAT MAY BE IN THE WORKS?
YOU KNOW WE HEARD LAST WEEK -- I KNOW YOU ALL SHOT IT DOWN, BUT THE IRANIANS SAY THERE IS A DEAL IN THE WORKS.
CAN YOU TELL US IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT THE PRESIDENT OR YOU ALL ARE WORKING ON TO GET BACK YOUR CITIZENS, THE THREE OF THEM THERE?
>> WHAT I CAN TELL YOU, CHRISTIANE, WITHOUT DOUBT IS THAT WE HAVEN'T FORGOTTEN THEIR CASES OR ANY OTHER AMERICANS WRONGFULLY DETAINED AROUND THE WORLD, AND WE'RE WORKING ON THEM EVERY SINGLE DAY.
NOW, I DON'T HAVE PROGRESS TO SPEAK TO TODAY OR SPECIFIC BACK-AND-FORTH THAT WE MIGHT OR MIGHT NOT BE HAVING.
I THINK YOU CAN UNDERSTAND WE WOULDN'T WANT TO MAKE THAT PUBLIC WHILE WE'RE CONTINUING TO TRY TO GET THESE AMERICANS HOME.
BUT THEY'RE NOT EVER, EVER FAR FROM PRESIDENT BIDEN'S MIND OR FROM THIS TEAM'S MIND.
AND WE'RE WORKING ON IT EVERY SINGLE DAY.
>> DO YOU AGREE WITH WHAT SOME OF THEM SAY, AND THAT IS -- AND INCLUDING GOVERNOR RICHARDSON, WHO IS, YOU KNOW, WORKING ON BEHALF OF ONE OF THE FAMILIES OF THE DETAIN, THAT, LOOK, AS UNSEEMLY AS IT SOMETIMES MIGHT FEEL, THAT PRESIDENTS FROM EVERY ADMINISTRATION HAVE DONE DEALS WITH THIS REGIME IN IRAN TO GET BACK THEIR MOST IMPORTANT TREASURE, AND THAT IS THEIR CITIZENS.
AND EVEN GOT BRITTNEY GRINER BACK FROM RUSSIA AT A TIME OF WAR WHEN THE U.S. IS ON THE OTHER SIDE.
>> THAT -- THAT RELEASE ITSELF REQUIRED SOME DECISION-MAKING BY PRESIDENT BIDEN AND REQUIRED LETTING A MAN BACK ON THE STREET WHO IS A NOTED ARMS DEALER AND RESPONSIBLE FOR PROBABLY HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DEATHS AND INJURIES AROUND THE WORLD.
BUT THE PRESIDENT SIDED ON THE NEED TO LOOK AFTER AMERICANS THAT ARE WRONGFULLY DETAINED AROUND THE WORLD, AND HE'S ALWAYS GOING TO COME DOWN ON THAT SIDE EVEN IF IT MEANS MAKING A TOUGH DECISION, A DECISION THAT MIGHT DRAW CRITICISM.
HE'S NOT GOING TO BE AFRAID TO DO THAT.
NOW, AGAIN, I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING SPECIFIC ON THESE THREE CASES TO SPEAK TO.
BUT I CAN ASSURE YOU, AND I CAN ASSURE THEIR FAMILIES THAT WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO WORK ON IT.
AND IF THE DECISIONS -- AND, AGAIN, I'M NOT SPEAKING TO SPECIFICS HERE.
BUT IF THE DECISIONS THAT ARE REQUIRED ARE TOUGH ONES, THEY SHOULD KNOW THAT PRESIDENT BIDEN IS NOT GOING TO BE AFRAID TO MAKE THEM.
>> AS YOU KNOW, THE FAMILIES ARE DESPERATE TO HAVE A MEETING WITH THE PRESIDENT, JUST LIKE BRITTANY BRITTNEY GRINER'S FAMILY DID AND OTHERS, AND WE'VE OBVIOUSLY BEEN REPORTING THAT ON OUR AIR.
SO I WANT TO KNOW WHETHER YOU THOUGHT THAT WAS A GOOD IDEA AND WHETHER THAT MIGHT HAPPEN, BUT ALSO IS THE IRAN SITUATION MORE POLITICALLY DIFFICULT FOR THIS ADMINISTRATION THAN THE RUSSIA SITUATION?
IN OTHER WORDS, TO DO A DEAL WITH RUSSIA AND RELEASE, AS YOU SAID, AN ODIOUS HUMAN BEING, OR TO MAYBE SEND SOME -- WHATEVER, WHATEVER THE DEAL WOULD BE WITH IRAN.
WHICH IS MORE DIFFICULT?
>> EVERY CASE IS DIFFERENT, CHRISTIANE.
IT'S DIFFICULT TO SAY, YOU KNOW, ONE'S MORE DIFFICULT THAN ANOTHER.
NOW, CLEARLY THE IRAN SITUATION IS COMPLICATED BY THE FACT THAT WE DON'T HAVE DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS WITH IRAN.
WE DON'T HAVE AN EMBASSY THERE.
THERE'S NO LINES OF COMMUNICATION EVEN AT SENIOR LEVELS BETWEEN US AND THE REGIME.
WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH, AS YOU KNOW, A PROTECTING POWER IN THIS CASE.
WITH RUSSIA, OF COURSE, WE DID.
BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE'RE GOING TO WORK LESS OR NOT PURSUE IT AS AGGRESSIVELY AS WE CAN.
AND AS FOR THE MEETING, AGAIN, BACK TO MY ORIGINAL POINT, EVERY CASE IS INDIVIDUAL.
AND CERTAINLY THE PRESIDENT WEIGHS EACH OF THESE REQUESTS VERY, VERY SERIOUSLY.
WE NEED TO BE MINDFUL THAT AS WE POSITION OURSELVES, THAT WE DON'T DO THINGS THAT MIGHT MAKE IT HARDER TO GET AMERICANS WHO ARE WRONGFULLY DETAINED RELEASED IN THE SITUATION THAT THEY'RE IN.
AND EACH SITUATION IS DIFFERENT.
NOT ONLY THE GOVERNMENT POWER THERE, THE REGIME THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, BUT THE CONDITIONS THAT THEY'RE IN.
AND SO THE PRESIDENT HAS TO WEIGH ALL OF THESE FACTORS WHEN WEIGHING WHETHER OR NOT TO MEET WITH INDIVIDUAL FAMILY MEMBERS.
BUT IF IT MAKES SENSE AND IT'S GOING TO BE HELPFUL AND IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO AND IT COULD HELP US GET THESE FOLKS HOME, THE PRESIDENT HAS SHOWN IN THE PAST THAT HE'S MORE THAN WILLING TO DO THAT.
>> CAN I ASK YOU ABOUT UKRAINE, WHICH IS NOW THE MASSIVE, MASSIVE PIECE ON YOUR DESK?
WE HEAR NOTHING BUT REAL DRAMA FROM THE BAKHMUT AREA.
WE HEAR THE UKRAINIANS, AND OF COURSE YOU HEAR IT BETTER THAN WE DO, RUNNING OUT OF AMMUNITION.
THEIR GOOD SOLDIERS, THEIR HIGHLY-TRAINED SOLDIERS BEING KILLED AT AN ALARMING RATE COMPARED WITH ORDINARY FOOT SOLDIERS AND CONVICTS BASICALLY BEING RECRUITED BY RUSSIA.
THE U.S. HAS NOW SAID YOU'RE GOING TO SPEED UP, YOU KNOW, MAYBE TANK AND PATRIOT MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEMS.
DO YOU THINK -- DOES THE UNITED STATES BELIEVE THAT UKRAINE IS SPENDING TOO MUCH TIME ON BAKHMUT?
>> WELL, THOSE ARE PRESIDENT ZELENSKYY'S DECISIONS TO MAKE.
HE'S THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF.
WE PROVIDE ADVICE AND COUNSEL AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE WHERE IT MAKES SENSE.
BUT I CERTAINLY WOULD NOT SPEAK FOR PRESIDENT ZELENSKYY AND THE UKRAINIAN MILITARY AND THE DECISIONS THAT THEY'RE MAKING.
THEY ARE STILL BRAVELY INSIDE BAKHMUT.
BAKHMUT IS VERY VICIOUS RIGHT NOW AND HAS BEEN NOW FOR SOME WEEKS AS RUSSIA JUST CONTINUES TO THROW FLESH AT THIS FIGHT, LARGELY, AS YOU SAID, OUT OF PRISON.
AND THE UKRAINIANS ARE FIGHTING BRAVELY.
I MEAN HERE WE ARE ON THE 21st OF -- >> MARCH.
>> -- OF MARCH, AND BAKHMUT STILL HAS NOT FALLEN TO THE RUSSIANS.
SO THE UKRAINIANS HAVE PRIORITIZED THIS FIGHT.
THE RUSSIANS HAVE CLEARLY PRIORITIZED THIS FIGHT.
AND WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IS STAY FOCUSED ON MAKING SURE THAT PRESIDENT ZELENSKYY HAS WHAT HE NEEDS WHEREVER HE CHOOSES TO FIGHT.
AND THAT MEANS INTELLIGENCE.
THAT MEANS SUPPORT.
THAT MEANS WEAPONS.
THAT MEANS CAPABILITIES.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE FOCUSED ON.
>> DO YOU THINK THEY HAVE THE WHEREWITHAL TO MOUNT THIS MUCH VAUNTED SPRING OFFENSIVE?
>> AGAIN, I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR THE UKRAINIANS.
THEY REALLY SHOULD BE TALKING TO WHATEVER OPERATIONS THAT THEY MAY OR MAY NOT CONDUCT AND FUTURE OPERATIONS IS ONE OF THOSE THINGS WE'VE GOT TO BE VERY CAREFUL WITH.
WHAT I WILL TELL YOU IS THAT WE BELIEVE THAT THE WEEKS AND MONTHS AHEAD ARE GOING TO BE CRITICAL.
THAT WE BELIEVE THAT MR. PUTIN IS GOING TO TRY TO MOUNT ANOTHER OFFENSIVE AND MAYBE ALONG MANY DIFFERENT VECTORS, AND THAT WE HAVE GOT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE DOING EVERYTHING WE CAN TO MAKE SURE UKRAINE IS READY FOR THAT, TO DEFEND THEMSELVES AGAINST THOSE RUSSIAN OFFENSIVES BUT ALSO TO HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY TO CONDUCT OFFENSIVE OPERATIONS OF THEIR OWN AT A TIME AND PLACE AND A SIZE AND A SCALE OF THEIR CHOOSING.
THAT'S WHY WE'RE TAKING BATTALIONS OUT OF UKRAINE RIGHT NOW AND PUTTING THEM THROUGH COMBINED ARMS MANEUVER TRAINING.
THAT'S WHY THEY'RE WRAPPING UP TRAINING ON THINGS LIKE THE PATRIOT AIR DEFENSE SYSTEM.
I MEAN WE'RE DOING EVERYTHING WE CAN TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE READY AS BEST THEY CAN BE FOR THESE CRITICAL WEEKS AND MONTHS AHEAD.
>> HOW ARE YOU ASSESSING IN THE WHITE HOUSE WHAT IS BEING DESCRIBED AS THE ANTI-AMERICAN AXIS THAT'S DEVELOPING?
WHAT IS YOUR VIEW OF THIS MEETING IN MOSCOW?
>> WELL, LOOK, IT'S NOT ANYBODY'S SECRET THAT CHINA AND RUSSIA HAVE TRIED TO INCREASE THEIR COOPERATION AND IMPROVE THEIR RELATIONSHIP.
BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT THIS IS A MARRIAGE OF CONVENIENCE, NOT OF AFFECTION, NOT OF LOVE, NOT OF DEEP, ABIDING, SHARED INTEREST.
WHERE THEY INTERSECT IS PUSHING BACK ON THE UNITED STATES AND OUR INFLUENCE AROUND THE WORLD.
WHERE THEY INTERSECT IS PUSHING BACK ON THIS THING WE CALLED A RULES-BASED INTERNATIONAL ORDER, WHICH I KNOW SOUNDS LIKE A WONKY TERM, BUT IT'S BASICALLY THE RULE OF LAW AND THE FOUNDATIONAL PRINCIPLES OF THE U.N. CHARTER BY WHICH NATIONS AROUND THE WORLD ARE SUPPOSED TO ABIDE.
AND THEY'RE PUSHING BACK AGAINST THAT.
THEY'D LIKE TO CHANGE THE RULES OF THE GAME.
AND IN EACH OTHER, THEY SEE A USEFUL FOIL.
THEY SEE A USEFUL FRIEND.
BUT THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE DOING.
THEY'RE BASICALLY TRYING TO USE EACH OTHER HERE TO CHALLENGE U.S.
LEADERSHIP AND THE WEST, PARTICULARLY IN EUROPE BUT ELSEWHERE AROUND THE WORLD.
I WOULD NOTE, CHRISTIANE, THAT IF YOU LOOK AT THE STATEMENT THEY PUT OUT TODAY, THEY TALKED ABOUT CALLING ON THE PRINCIPLES OF THE U.N. CHARTER THAT NEED TO BE RESPECTED AND INTERNATIONAL LAW, WHICH NEEDS TO BE OBSERVED.
YOU KNOW WHAT?
WE WOULD AGREE WITH THAT.
100% WE WOULD AGREE WITH THAT.
SO IF PRESIDENT XI REALLY BELIEVES THAT STUFF THEY JUST PUT OUT IN MOSCOW, THEN HE OUGHT TO BE TELLING PRESIDENT PUTIN TO GET HIS TROOPS OUT OF UKRAINE BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONES VIOLATING THE U.N. CHARTER.
THEY'RE THE ONES VIOLATING SOVEREIGNTY AND TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY.
AND THIS WAR COULD BE OVER RIGHT NOW.
IF PRESIDENT XI WANTS TO USE THAT INFLUENCE WITH HIS FRIEND, PRESIDENT PUTIN, THAT'S THE WAY HE COULD DO IT.
>> OKAY.
I WANT A YES OR NO ANSWER.
PUTIN HAS BEEN ISSUED AN ARREST WARRANT.
IF HE COMES TO NEW YORK FOR THE UNGA, WILL THE UNITED STATES ARREST HIM?
>> I WON'T GET INTO A HYPOTHETICAL.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S USEFUL TO SPECULATE.
AS YOU HEARD THE PRESIDENT SAY, THIS WAS JUSTIFIED.
HE AND HIS MILITARY HAVE BEEN COMMITTING WAR CRIMES.
WE NEED TO HOLD HIM TO ACCOUNT.
>> JOHN KIRBY, THANK YOU SO MUCH INDEED.
>>> AND FINALLY TONIGHT, AS WE'VE SAID, THE ARRIVAL OF SPRING, WHICH IS CELEBRATED AS NEW YEAR IN IRAN AND AFGHANISTAN.
NOWRUZ.
AND EVEN ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WORLD, AT RITHE ARRIVAL OF G DRAWS CROWDS.
SO LEAVING YOU NOW WITH MORE BEAUTIFUL PICTURES FROM MEXICO TO MARK THE VERNAL EQUINOX.
WE SAY THANKS FOR WATCHING AND GOODBYE FROM LONDON.