April 9, 2021

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR: Hello, everyone, and welcome to “Amanpour and Company.”

Here’s what’s coming up.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BORIS JOHNSON, BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: Prince Philip earned the affection of generations here in the United Kingdom, across the commonwealth, and

around the world.

AMANPOUR (voice-over): Mourning Prince Philip, the duke of Edinburgh, the man Queen Elizabeth called her rock, dead at 99.

I look back at his tragic childhood, his lasting influence on the royal family, and defining public service.

Plus:

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We only go back to full compliance when the U.S. has lifted all sanctions.

AMANPOUR: Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator digs in, but says indirect talks with the United States are on the right track. Is a breakthrough really in

sight? I talk to Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman, Saeed Khatibzadeh.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

AMANPOUR: Welcome to the program, everyone. I’m Christiane Amanpour at Windsor Castle, where Prince Philip passed away peacefully this morning,

just two months shy of his 100th birthday.

In a statement, Buckingham Palace spoke of the queen’s deep sorrow at losing her beloved husband of more than 70 years. Indeed, the duke of

Edinburgh is the longest-serving consort in British history.

This is how the queen described him in 1997 on their 50th wedding anniversary.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

QUEEN ELIZABETH II, UNITED KINGDOM: He has quite simply been my strength and stay all these years, and I and his whole family and this and many

other countries owe him a debt greater than he would ever claim or we shall ever know.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: A remarkable tribute to a man who had no clear constitutional role, a man, who despite the norms of the 1950s and beyond, always took his

place one or two steps behind his wife, a man who sacrificed his own bright career in the Royal Navy to support the crown, and a man who now is being

remembered for his service, his World War II heroism, his sharp wit, even his gaffes, and his role as the family patriarch.

Here’s how the British state broadcaster announced the news.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: BBC Television is broadcasting this special program reporting the death of the duke of Edinburgh.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: “God Save the Queen,” the national anthem, was broadcast to the nation this somber day for the monarch, now a widow after more than seven

decades of marriage.

In keeping with tradition, an announcement of the prince’s passing was hung outside Buckingham Palace. Earlier, it was there for all to read. But to

discourage crowds during this pandemic, the notice was removed after just an hour. And the public has been asked to stay away from funeral events.

The prince will lie and rest here at Windsor Castle behind me before a funeral at St. George’s Chapel in the castle.

Royal correspondent Max Foster takes a look back at Prince Philip’s extraordinary life.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MAX FOSTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): They were married for more than seven decades, but had been destined for each other since childhood,

according to one of Queen Elizabeth’s bridesmaids.

MARGARET RHODES, COUSIN OF QUEEN ELIZABETH II: I think she fell in love when she was 13. And, God, he was good-looking. He was sort of a Viking

god.

(LAUGHTER)

RHODES: She never looked at anybody else ever. And I think he really, truly has been a rock.

FOSTER: The couple married in Westminster Abbey on November the 20th, 1947.

For the rest of his life, Prince Philip was a near constant presence at the queen’s side. He gave a rare insight into life behind palace walls when

celebrating their 50th wedding anniversary.

PRINCE PHILIP, DUKE OF EDINBURGH: I think that the main lesson that we have learned is that tolerance is the one essential ingredient of any happy

marriage. It may not be quite so important when things are going well, but it is absolutely vital when things get difficult.

And you can take it from me that the queen has the quality of tolerance in abundance.

(LAUGHTER)

FOSTER: If this companionship came at a professional cost, it was one Prince Philip was prepared to pay.

RHODES: Just to have been there all the time behind her really to have sacrificed his life — he did it too — sacrificed his life, because I

think he would have loved to have gone on in the Navy and really made a career out of that. So, he sacrificed too.

And so I think it’s made for a wonderfully solid marriage.

FOSTER: The queen and Lieutenant Mountbatten met before the Second World War, when he was a young naval cadet.

ROBERT HARDMAN, ROYAL BIOGRAPHER: His number one job from the word go has been to — quote — “support the queen.” Everything he does is in support

of the queen.

It’s just been one of the great royal romances, I think, of history. People talk about Victoria and Albert as a phrase which trips off the tongue. And

I have no doubt that, in years to come, people will talk about Elizabeth and Philip in exactly the same way.

FOSTER: Famous for his energy, the duke’s health inevitably deteriorated as he headed into old age.

The royal family Christmas was disrupted in 2011 when Philip had to be taken to hospital for minor heart surgery. Five months later, during the

queen’s Diamond Jubilee celebrations, Philip had to go to hospital again, this time with a bladder infection.

Family came and went. And, within days, Philip was well enough to return home, but not to return immediately to his public duties. In the spring of

2017, Prince Philip effectively announced his retirement, saying he would give up official royal duties.

A year-and-a-half later, he was involved in a car crash, raising questions about whether he should be driving at the age of 97. Then, public

appearances were reserved for special occasions, such as Lady Gabriella Kingston wedding in May 2019.

Prince Philip had been patron or president of some 800 charities, including the WWF. He was a renowned environmental campaigner. He also had his own

royal heritage, being born into the Greek and Danish royal families. But he renounced those titles when he took British citizenship in 1947.

So, what of his role in the British monarchy?

CONSTANTINE II OF GREECE, COUSIN OF PRINCE PHILIP: I think a pivotal, pivotal point of — because he was the head of the family. He was — it’s

his responsibility as a father to be that. And he does that extremely well.

FOSTER (on camera): Would it have been difficult for him always in public to be taking a backseat to his wife?

CONSTANTINE II: I would have thought that anybody who has that responsibility will find it, I would say, taxing. But your — when you have

this whole concept in your blood, and you keep your sense of humor and your sense of dignity, then you carry it out beautifully.

FOSTER (voice-over): And one thing Prince Philip certainly had was a sense of humor and a tendency to make gaffes.

On a trip to Australia in 2002, he asked an Aboriginal leader, “Do you still throw spears at each other?”

And when meeting the Obamas in 2009, a reference to world leaders.

PRINCE PHILIP: Can you tell the difference between them?

(LAUGHTER)

FOSTER: Prince Philip, servicemen, campaigner, great-grandfather, and a beloved husband.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

AMANPOUR: And our royal correspondent, Max Foster, is with me now.

Max, we are obviously keeping distanced because of the pandemic. And that’s not just us. It’s also about the funeral and about all that is going to

happen now until he’s laid to rest. What are the plans?

FOSTER: Well, he didn’t want a lot of fuss, as was his character.

I think the queen would have wanted a bigger event for him to mark his role as, if not in name, then consort to the queen, the support that she gave

him and the country and the world and commonwealth.

So, he always had a sort of downgraded royal event planned anyway. He was very intimately involved in the plans. But, because of the pandemic, he can

even have the relatively small procession that has been — would have been planned for London.

So, I think we will hear them confirm details tomorrow. But the whole event will happen here within castle walls. That’s where the body is. That’s

where the queen is. And we will have to see how many people they can invite to the service, and, indeed, how many cameras can be invited to service, so

many questions they now have to work through within government guidelines.

AMANPOUR: And even we have been watching the police move people along. They have been trying to play — put flowers down, but they have had to

move along. They don’t want to keep crowds.

But just talk a little bit about the queen, who’s been bubbling here for — obviously, for the last month with Prince Philip since he came out of

hospital.

She’s alone in there now. Do we expect family to come. What do we expect?

FOSTER: We’re not being given any information.

As I understand it, the queen would make a tribute, some sort of statement before the other members of the royal family. So, no one’s really speaking

at this moment. They’re just remembering Prince Philip.

I think, in terms of what happens now, it’s speaking to the family, trying to confirm exactly who should be in the church at the time, and then trying

to give as much of a tribute to him as possible. And I think that’s quite hard, when Prince Philip didn’t want the fuss.

And I think a lot of people are, frankly, talking about Prince Harry today as well, because he’s obviously in California. Will he be able to come,

under travel restrictions? If he’s given exemption, is that fair, when he’s not a working royal?

Lots of things to work through at this point, but I think there’s a real sense of sadness. You talk about the flowers up at the castle, the palace

and the government asking them not to do that, because they’re concerned.

But I think people are struggling a bit with how they feel. They want to express themselves.

AMANPOUR: They do, because it is an era-defining moment.

FOSTER: He’s always been there, hasn’t he, for the last…

AMANPOUR: Yes.

FOSTER: For most people’s lives, he’s been there.

AMANPOUR: Yes. Right.

FOSTER: And now they have to get used to the idea of him not being there.

AMANPOUR: Yes.

Well, you’re going to stay on it. We will be following your reporting as the details are broadcast. And you will bring us all the latest.

Max, thank you so much.

Now, as we said, residents of Windsor have expressed their grief today. They are trying to pay their respects to the prince and to the queen. And

this town, of course, is synonymous with the royal family itself, which gave it their very name, the House of Windsor.

Here’s what they had to say, some of them, who we have talked to.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I’m upset. It’s not nice. We love the royal family. We live in Windsor. Why wouldn’t we? Yes, yes, very upset. And a shame he

didn’t make it to 100.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The royal family has always been an integral part of Windsor and for our family. We have lived our whole lives. And so,

naturally, we feel the same way. So…

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I think it’s probably the most significant death in the royal family for at least a decade, isn’t it? I mean, I think the last

one was probably the queen mother. And I think it hits home how frail the queen is as well, because, obviously, the parade and losing the duke of

Edinburgh, I think it’s just a bit more real that, at some point soon, we might lose our queen.

And that, I find really upsetting. She’s such a part of our country.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Because the king died.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The king. It’s — Prince Philip has died, hasn’t he?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes. And we have come to lay our flowers.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: From children and residents here to presidents, prime ministers, and world leaders, they are all sending their condolences.

Joe Biden, the U.S. president, spoke of the duke’s commitment to public service. And he said: “His legacy will live on, not only through his

family, but in all the charitable endeavors he shaped.”

Here’s how the British prime minister, Boris Johnson, remembered Prince Philip this morning.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHNSON: Like the expert carriage driver that he was, he helped to steer the royal family and the monarchy, so that it remains an institution

indisputably vital to the balance and happiness of our national life.

We give thanks as a nation and a kingdom for the extraordinary life and work of Prince Philip, duke of Edinburgh.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: And joining me now is Simon Lewis. He served as communications secretary to the queen from 1998 through the year 2000.

Welcome to the program, Simon Lewis.

And those obviously were very crucial years, not only the aftermath of the death of Princess Diana, which was one of the most, I guess, emotional

moments of the queen’s modern reign. And, of course, Prince Philip was heavily involved in the choreography of the funeral.

Tell us what you remember in the aftermath of that event?

SIMON LEWIS, FORMER COMMUNICATIONS SECRETARY TO THE QUEEN: Well, first of all, let me say, this is a very sad day for the country. It’s a very sad

day, obviously, for the queen and the royal family, and, I have to say, a very sad day for those of us who were privileged to work alongside Prince

Philip.

And I — the country feels a different country today. So, it’s quite an extraordinary moment, a very sad moment. I mean, they were — and we have

heard earlier — they were difficult times for the royal family, the monarchy, following the death of princess of Wales.

There was a whole set of issues, the role of the tabloid press, the way they were operating, the kind of way in which people were looking at

different institutions. And what Prince Philip did, as the patriarch, was slowly, but surely start the process of incremental change that every

institution like the monarchy needs to undertake to reflect the changing country, as the monarchy always has done, and to make it able to move

forward to the next generation.

And that is the great beauty of the monarchy. And I think history will be very kind to Prince Philip for his role as a modernizer, but within the

context of a historical institution.

AMANPOUR: OK, so that’s really interesting, his role as a modernizer.

Drill down a little for us, then, because we understand it he was he who brought the press, the cameras in first to the royal family, to make them

more accessible to the British people and the world.

What other things did he do to modernize?

LEWIS: Well, I mean, as you say, he — it was his idea with others to actually introduce a series about the royal family the 1960s which shone

some light on the institution and was actually, although a risk, exactly the right thing to do.

I mean, there’s a legion of examples, one that I was directly involved in when I was at the palace. So, in 1998, there were about 100 million users

of the Internet. Now it’s 5.4 billion. And Prince Philip realized — and he led this — that having a royal Web site would actually garner such

interest and attention that it actually would widen the messages about the monarchy and the royal family.

So he drove that through. That’s a very small example, but, actually, that was a very important example of where I think Prince Philip was always

ahead of his time. He was ahead of his time in the environment, obviously.

And, as you picked up by his eldest son as well, he was ahead of his time in looking at kind of the importance of physical fitness for young people,

the Duke of Edinburgh’s Award, his work with playing fields, organizations, but always with a modesty.

I think it’s really important that he didn’t ever want to claim credit for what he did. He was always there to support the queen. And that’s a hugely

important part of his legacy, not just to the monarchy, but to the United Kingdom.

AMANPOUR: And we were just seeing pictures of former President Barack Obama and the first lady, Michelle Obama, who also put out a statement,

mourning his death and speaking about how he welcomed them when they first came to Buckingham Palace, obviously, with the queen, and talking about his

role as — you know, he was always standing behind the queen, that was his role, and yet how he also showed leadership.

I want to play for you a little bit of an interview I did many years ago, actually, in 2013, with the queen’s cousin, Margaret Rhodes. We have

already heard from her, but she addressed this issue of him playing second fiddle.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RHODES: I think that he had to give up a lot, which was — made it very difficult for a man to be second fiddle.

But I think that’s — want to give him such great credit for the fact that he’s — he accepted the position because he loved her and has been a rock

to her. And he’s carved out a career for himself, which there was no real model for whatsoever.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: I think that’s so interesting, no role model for that — no real model for that role.

And it’s said in legend that he asked the queen’s father, King George VI, what is my job, when they got married? And you said, she is your job,

pointing to then Princess Elizabeth.

How did you see that play out? Was there ever any tension? Or was it just natural?

LEWIS: Well, first of all, this is a member of the royal family, a man who could have risen to the top position at Navy. He could have been the first

lord of the fleet. So, that’s what he gave up professionally.

I never saw anything other than complete and utter support. In fact, it was very sweet. When I was interviewed for my job by the queen and then the

duke of Edinburgh, he called the queen Lilibet, which I thought was very endearing and kind of it was a little insight into their relationship,

which I think was absolutely driven by their joint commitment to doing the right thing for the country and the royal family.

But I think also, inevitably, because he was a man of such vigor — and when I first met him, he would have been his late 70s. And he had the vigor

and energy and restless intellect of a man half his age. There must have been frustrations for him along the way. He must have felt at times that he

had sacrificed a lot, but never, ever did he do anything other than be there for the queen and, as you say, be there and behind the queen

supporting her.

I mean, I think he saw himself in a way as her eyes and ears. I think, increasingly, he did things and he went out and he met people. He had his

program. And he brought back to the queen the interest and the intelligence that he found. So it was a great complementary relationship, which is why

it is so terribly, terribly sad that this has happened now.

AMANPOUR: Tell me, as communications honcho at the palace for the queen, he also was defined and so well-known here in the U.K. and around the world

for his gaffes, for some of the less politically correct statements and comments that he used to make.

What was it like having to manage that?

LEWIS: Well, he was a very forthright man. And he was a man who had strong views which he held with conviction, but they — conviction — but they

weren’t superficial views on whatever the subject might be.

I felt, to be honest, that it was slightly overdone. I mean, yes, there were occasions when he might have phrased things slightly differently. Yes,

there were occasions when he was saying something that might sounded as though he was from a kind of different era.

But, actually, I also felt there was a kind of game with the U.K. press and the tabloids to try and kind of catch him out. And I — that was, I think,

someone of (AUDIO GAP) taken out of context, made slightly sort of…

AMANPOUR: Slight technical difficulties there, but we got a lot from Simon there, former communications director at the palace.

So, like the queen, Prince Philip was deeply committed to the commonwealth. Leaders of those nations have been paying tribute to the duke as well,

including the Australian prime minister, Scott Morrison, who said: “The commonwealth family joins together in sorrow and Thanksgiving for the loss

and life of Prince Philip.”

Also, the prime minister of Canada has commented today.

And Baroness Patricia Scotland is secretary-general of the Commonwealth of Nations. And she’s joining me now from London.

Baroness Scotland, welcome back to the program. We have spoken several times about the importance of this commonwealth.

(CROSSTALK)

AMANPOUR: Tell me how it manifested in terms of Prince Philip’s attention to the commonwealth, not just with the queen, but on his own trips.

PATRICIA SCOTLAND, SECRETARY-GENERAL, COMMONWEALTH OF NATIONS: Well, the first thing to say, the commonwealth, as you know, Christiane, is 54

countries that represents 2.5 billion people, 60 percent of whom are under the age of 30, and five different regions, countries as large as India with

1.36 billion people and small as Tuvalu, with only 12,000.

And the prince was important to all of them, because you have to remember that, when the then-Princess Elizabeth became queen in Kenya, it was Prince

Philip who had to tell her that her father had died and that she was now queen. But they were in the middle of a commonwealth tour, which they had

undertaken on behalf of the then-king.

So, from the whole of their married life, the commonwealth was an integral part of their existence. And the queen said, when she was 21, that she was

going to commit herself to the Commonwealth of Nations whether her life was short or long.

And when she married Prince Philip, that became a conjoined commitment. And he was with her right the way through. And I know that, if we look at the

things that they did together, they were really avant-garde.

If you remember, back in the 1950s, when things were very different now, it was Her Majesty who said that she saw the commonwealth as a wholly new

construct of the best of man, and it brought together people of all different races, religions, and peoples.

And so they were one of the first people who had this universal idea as to what the role was in order to bring common good and goodness generally to

people. And the prince was right in the heart of that. I mean, he had had this experience from the war where he had worked with commonwealth member

states, individuals, and they had — they had struggled together, they had fought together.

And I think neither the queen, nor Prince Philip ever forgot that comradery and the commitment from our commonwealth family. And I think he

demonstrated that in the things that he achieved in the Commonwealth Studies Conferences, the Duke of Edinburgh Awards.

They were all innovations brought by Prince Philip. And I think he will be remembered with such warmth and real appreciation.

AMANPOUR: Baroness Scotland, I want to ask you, because it’s — obviously, we’re right in the middle of a historical moment, where a lot of attention

is being placed on former colonialism, on commonwealth, on really trying to bring diversity and equality to peoples all over.

We know that, up and down different times, members of the commonwealth decide maybe they want to have a republic and not be represented by a

monarchy. How do you think the passing of Prince Philip and the eventual farewell to the queen will affect the longevity of the commonwealth itself?

SCOTLAND: I think the commonwealth will continue.

If you look at what her majesty and the duke of Edinburgh, Prince Philip, have said, they said that they is a new construct. This isn’t the old

empire. This union isn’t brought together by treaty. It’s brought together by values and commitment.

And the commonwealth has done some extraordinary things. You will remember that it was the commonwealth who raised the issues in relation to

apartheid. It was the commonwealth who put that stake in the ground, and said that we will only be able to have anyone come and join our family if

they agree in the equality that there is in terms of each of us.

And that is a standard-bearer. And I think both the prince and her Majesty the Queen have been the standard-bearers. And she has always made it clear

that she is the queen of her realms, but she is the head of the commonwealth. And that commonwealth is something that she has protected and

supported her whole life.

And the prince was right there by her side. And I always think of the Commonwealth Studies Conference, which His Royal Highness founded in 1956.

And he described it on that stage as an extraordinary experiment. And this was a real pioneering forum for bringing together emerging leaders and

talented men and women from the management of industrial corporations, trade unions, the professions, civil society.

And his vision was really prescient, because he was creating something which had never been seen before, the bringing together of all these

different disciplines from across the commonwealth. And that continues today.

More than 60 years later, people from across the commonwealth, leaders from across the commonwealth from all these different disciplines are forging a

new vision for what we need to do to develop and deliver the sustainable development goals to challenge climate change and to innovate.

And if you read what he said in 1956, it was remarkable, because it was prescient. He was identifying that technology and science would be of real

importance for the next millennium. So, I think that his legacy and the vision that he had for humanity is something which I think will really

bolster the commonwealth going forward.

And all the leaders, I think, honored him for that. And he should be honored. But he never wanted to be. And he did things so gently, in many

ways, and in a such self-effacing way, where he had huge humor. He had real judgment, real, real judgment.

He was a remarkably kind person. I always found him really warm and witty and challenging, but in the best possible way.

AMANPOUR: Well, thank you so much for your unique reflections there and your perspective, Baroness Scotland.

Now, again, I am here at Windsor Castle as we look back on the life of Prince Philip, the duke of Edinburgh, who passed away here peacefully this

morning at the age of 99. He was just 26 when he married then Crown Princess Elizabeth in true pomp and pageantry back in 1947. No one could

have known then their union would last some 73 years, outlasting wars, scandals and countless global challenges to the monarchy itself.

Joining me now is historian Margaret MacMillan. And we want to get down to some of the history of what Prince Philip lived and the huge span of

history that not only he, but the queen himself have made, have watched over.

So, Margaret MacMillan, let’s first talk about World War II, because many of the tributes remember some of the sacrifice he made, some of the heroism

as well. Tell me about his involvement there, because I think he went off with the Navy as a convoy director or convoy passengers there, right?

MARGARET MACMILLAN, HISTORIAN AND AUTHOR: Well, he came from a world — and he himself was, I think, someone who felt a great sense of duty.

And it seemed natural to him to take chances and to risk his life. And he was — although he was a royal, he was someone who had to make his own way

in the world. He didn’t have a lot of money. And I think, if he had not become the consort of the queen, he might well have remained in the Navy

and had a very distinguished career there.

But I think that’s partly what we’re remembering today, this idea of someone who, uncomplainingly — of course, sometimes, he complained — we

all were — but, on the whole, uncomplainingly did a job which can’t have always been easy.

And, of course, in the Second World War, what he did was not only not easy, but very dangerous.

AMANPOUR: Let me ask you a little bit about what I was just talking to Baroness Scotland about. She’s head of the Commonwealth of Nations, and was

saying what a transformative effect Prince Philip had, along with the queen, on moving and shaping and modernizing and getting behind equality

and all of those things in what had been an empire.

I want to play what Prime Minister Trudeau has said today about the passing of Prince Philip, the Canadian prime minister. Let’s just play that.

Do you know what? I’m going to read it.

He said: “Prince Philip was a man of great purpose and conviction, who was motivated by a sense of duty to others .He will be fondly remembered as a

constant in the life of the queen.”

So, beyond that, Margaret MacMillan — and you are part Canadian, and I think I’m talking to you from there. What does the commonwealth, from your

perspective and from Canada’s perspective, mean today?

MACMILLAN: It’s an organization that’s changed a lot.

And I think Prince Philip and the queen have had a lot to do with it. I mean, I would have thought when I was much younger that it wasn’t going to

last. The British Empire was rapidly fading after the Second World War. And although it had become called a commonwealth by this point, I think a lot

of us probably thought that it would no longer remain an organization.

And it did. It became a different sort of organization, as Baroness Scotland was explaining. It was no longer a political organization, no

longer sharing defense organizations, no longer one part of the empire, Britain, ruling another part of the empire. That had become obsolete. It

had gone.

But what the commonwealth became is a sort of club, a club of people who shared, for better or worse, some sort of common history, had been through

some things together, who had things to talk about, had ways that they might want to help each other.

And I think, in a way, I’m surprised. I would have been surprised. The younger me would have been surprised that it did last so long, and that

there still are ties in the commonwealth, personal ties, ties of culture, academic ties. It’s no longer a major political organization.

But it still, in a way, I think, matters. And I think it matters because any organization that brings people of very different parts of the world,

very different cultures, very different histories, that brings them together and enables them to talk to each other is probably a good thing in

our world.

AMANPOUR: And, Margaret MacMillan, stand by, because we need to ask Simon Schama, historian, writer, to join us as well, and to join this discussion.

He is joining us from New York.

Simon Schama, you have been observing this for a long, long time, and writing about the royal family and so much of the history. Can you take us

back to Greece, which is where Prince Philip was born, and then had to flee with his family after the revolution that toppled his uncle, who was king

there?

SIMON SCHAMA, HISTORIAN: Right.

AMANPOUR: Talk to us a little bit about that.

SCHAMA: Yes, that’s very crucial question, Christiane.

He was actually born in Corfu in a villa that belonged to or I think was given to his father, Prince Andrew, called Mon Repos, “My Rest.” And that’s

exactly what he didn’t have, actually.

He — it’s very important, I think, when we’re thinking about actually the way Prince Philip embraced what optimistically was supposed to be the

stability of the British Constitution and the monarchy’s part in it, to remember that he came out of an absolutely catastrophic vortex of events.

His grandfather, King George of Greece, was assassinated. His uncle, King Constantine, was forced to abdicate by a revolution. His father, Prince

Andrew, was one of those sort of informally indicted — others were formally indicted — for military incompetence, rather unfairly I think,

during the Greco-Turkish War.

And it was thought, actually, that his father might be one of those not merely tried, but also executed, like those who were held responsibility.

So, baby Philip, age 1 — he wouldn’t have known any of this at the time — was actually rescued by a British cruiser.

And it’s said that he was sort of taken out in a fruit box, a fruit crate, before arriving to safety. It just goes on. His mother was diagnosed with

schizophrenia and institutionalized. One of his sisters was killed in a car crash. He was sent to school as a boy in Germany to a school run by Kurt

Hahn, who was Jewish, and was persecuted.

And that was the foundation of the famous Gordonstoun, to which Philip went in Scotland and sent Prince Charles. So, this as a kind of an inferno, an

absolute inferno that he came out of.

When he was serving in the Royal Navy, he was serving, I’m sure, with knowing in mind that one of his brother-in-laws was a paid-up Nazi and

fighting for the other side.

So, I think all of this — we always think of Prince Philip as kind of rough and jolly, which all of that was true, but there was this kind of raw

— rawness, really, about his early life. He always — famously, Prince Philip did not wear his wedding ring. But he did wear another ring. And it

was a ring taken from his father, Prince Andrew’s finger at the time of Prince Andrew’s death.

So, his family history was extremely important to him. And it made his sense of commitment to a kind of constitutional monarchic stability a

matter of emotional and historical drama, I think, even though you wouldn’t suppose that from seeing him in formal and ceremonial circumstances.

AMANPOUR: Simon, I wonder — you kind of brought me to my question.

Did all that, I mean, turmoil and catastrophe of his youth and tragedy and horror, how did that shape him to be the man he was, as the consort of a

queen for 73 years?

SCHAMA: Well, the war itself — and the Navy, as everybody’s been saying, became his haven, as Britain did.

But I think, actually, part of his — part of why people responded to him, both, I think adversely, as well as sympathetically, a vast majority of

British people sympathetically, made him a restive person.

And, therefore, it was a kind of triumph, really, that this very indeterminate constitutional position of being prince consort, somehow

being someone on whom the queen relied, but never really sharing the authority — and he was not a king consort — he was a prince consort — he

managed to bring off.

And he did so by displacing a lot of this tough stuff that he had to deal with in his family life into hundreds of good causes, but particularly

environmentalism and the World Wildlife Fund, but it made him a bit of a diamond in the rough. And I think, actually, that’s what people,

particularly the queen herself, loved about him, really.

I mean, the queen, we always have to remember, particularly with a kind of massive requiem sound going on, quite rightly, at the moment, the queen is

sort of — she’s trapped by deference. She has to, on the one hand, be a warm, living human being, but she can’t just be like anybody else.

So she’s rather trapped by her ceremonial, ritual and symbolic role, rarely. So, what she what she really needed, crucially, I think, in the

marriage, but also in her institutional role, was someone who would always be honest, who would be honest with her, would always be candid with her.

And that’s what the duke of Edinburgh gave her. I mean, it also was very unusual for a royal marriage to be so rooted in genuine love, which this

clearly was, from the first (INAUDIBLE) in Dartmouth College in 1939, through to the wedding in 1947.

So, I think the authenticity of this deep personal bond of love and affection made — enabled Prince Philip really to be extremely — give her

all of that honest, candid, and, if necessary, rough advice through calamity after calamity. It’s not been an easy monarchy in lots of ways.

AMANPOUR: Indeed.

Let me ask you, Professor Margaret MacMillan, about the battle of the sexes, so to speak. I mean, it just wasn’t usual in those days for a man to

walk behind his — her — his wife, and to take on a secondary role.

And I just wonder if you can talk to me about what that took, what it meant. What kind of example did it put? How different was it than the

relationship between Queen Victoria and Prince Albert, who was officially named prince consort, whereas Prince Philip wasn’t?

MACMILLAN: I think it must have been difficult, but I think he did it with great grace.

And, as Simon Schama says, he made a role for himself. And it became a very important role.

And, I mean, there are precedents for this, that we tend to think that women have always followed men around, but we have had female monarchs

before, Catherine the Great, for example, Maria Theresa, Elizabeth I, who did have men — not always married to them, but had men very close to them,

who they were not treating as equals, but who were very important to them.

And so it’s not unprecedented that you would have a man who would fill this role. I think we probably in the modern age found it strange when we expect

people to have independent careers.

But what I think is so interesting about his relationship with the monarchy — and I think it was a relationship not just with the person of the

monarch, but with the monarchy itself — is the way in which he took it very seriously.

And he did his best, I think not always successfully, to try and modernize it. He did his best to try and connect it with the world. We were talking

earlier on about the commonwealth. And I think he developed in British life and, presumably — and I can’t speculate about his relations with his

family, but I think he developed a role for himself where he was someone who had always been there, someone who would speak bluntly, someone who you

forgave for speaking bluntly.

I think it was important that he did occasionally speak out, and that people would remember that he was actually a human being. I think he helped

to give a human face to the monarchy. And I think he helped to make it more sympathetic.

I think people understood that he didn’t always have an easy time with it. I mean, there used to be criticism when he would say sometimes provocative

or rather silly things, but I think the British eventually got used to it, and said, oh, that’s just Prince Philip, that’s the duke of Edinburgh,

that’s the way he is, and it’s very nice to have someone like that in the family.

AMANPOUR: Indeed, so many people are talking about how fond they were precisely of his bluntness and his outspokenness. Some of it, of course,

ruffled a lot of feathers, and for good reason, but nonetheless.

Simon Schama, I want to ask you about legacy finally, and what you think the passing of this man after this long beside the throne means in terms of

the era and for the royal family going forward.

SCHAMA: It’s a tricky moment, Christiane, isn’t it, because, actually, the United Kingdom is not so united right now.

We’re talking in the aftermath of the disintegration of the Good Friday Agreement in Northern Ireland. In a few weeks, we have elections coming up

in Wales and in — most particularly in Scotland, with the favorite, although — and being favorite, Scottish National Party committed to

another referendum on independence.

What’s really interesting, I think, is whether or not the enormous and understandable outpouring of affection for Prince Philip and, indeed, for

the queen and for the institution of the monarchy right now will help Britain sort of soldier through the fraying of the union, or whether or not

the sort of sense of the passing of someone who’s brought off this extremely challenging and tricky role of being simultaneously —

simultaneously a family man and paragon — not paragon — an exemplary husband.

Prince Philip would be the first person to, I think, chuckle at the notion that he’s a paragon of anything.

But whether or not, at the same time do that and see the monarchy as a kind of source of stability at a very, very stormy and problematic moment, we

will discover — Britain after Brexit is having an identity crisis. I wouldn’t say a meltdown, but it’s certainly a kind of loss of navigation.

And, sometimes, these kind of ceremonial departures help steady the ship. But that’s by no means guaranteed.

AMANPOUR: It’s really fascinating, because it’s not just about his passing, but, as you say, what happens to the next generations of the royal

family.

And, of course, everybody thinking of the queen right now.

Simon Schama, Margaret MacMillan, thank you both, professors and historians, for joining us this evening.

Now, the queen and Prince Philip, of course, traveled the world together, as we have been discussing. Some Iranians might remember their state visit

to Tehran under the shah back in 1961. That was before the Islamic Revolution of 1979. And it was a vivid example of just how long a span of

history they witnessed.

And now, of course, we stay on the topic of Iran with a quick news update on the vital efforts to revive the 2015 nuclear deal. Momentum seems to be

building in Vienna, where meetings are under way, though the United States and Iran are still not talking directly. And plenty of sticking points

remain.

Saeed Khatibzadeh is Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman. And he’s joining me from Tehran.

Welcome to the program, Mr. Saeed Khatibzadeh.

Can you tell me and tell our viewers where the talks, where the meetings stand? I know they’re indirect, but is there hope that it could produce a

reentry into the nuclear deal?

SAEED KHATIBZADEH, SPOKESMAN, IRANIAN FOREIGN MINISTRY: Good to be with you, Christiane.

Actually, the moves in Vienna are very — in the right direction. There were positive moves that all the 4+1 made in Vienna. Vienna talks showed

that progress is possible. And the positive momentum which has been created by 4+1 and Iran can be sustained if the United States is ready to fulfill

its obligation under the resolution, United Nations Security Council Resolution 2231.

At the same time, we are in a delicate situation. It seems that there are there are those inside the current United States administration that are

much more committed to Trump’s sanction than President Obama’s nuclear deal.

To me, it’s a political decision that President Biden should make. Does he actually want to risk the nuclear deal signed by the United States when he

was the vice president, in favor of Trump’s failed legacy and sanctions, or he’s actually trying to depart from this failure?

AMANPOUR: Mr. Khatibzadeh, can I just ask you, from Iran’s point of view, before we get into sanctions and the modalities of whether this agreement

can be revived with the U.S. participation, what exactly does Iran want?

Why is it a good deal, from the perspective of the president, the foreign minister, and why do you all think you should get back into the deal or

that the deal should be revived?

KHATIBZADEH: Iran has been always crystal clear on the JCPOA.

It was very tough negotiations that P4 — P5+1 then, plus Iran and the E.U., went through. And after we signed, we sealed, and we tried to

implement that, from then, Iran has been always consistent in terms of elaborating that everybody should be in full compliance with the JCPOA.

Iran has been implementing fully and faithfully the JCPOA for many years, even one year after President Trump withdrew from the JCPOA.

From then, Iran has been always also crystal clear that all sanctions imposed illegally on Iran by the United States, meaning that those who have

been imposed, reimposed or relabeled by Trump administration, should be removed verifiably and at once.

So, this is a clear — clear and crystal-clear position of Iran. We think that it is not only logical. It is a workable path back for the United

States to get back to the deal and in full compliance.

AMANPOUR: Let me just read a tweet that you retweeted. It’s from your boss, the foreign minister, Javad Zarif, who said today: “Iran proposes

logical path to full JCPOA compliance. And that would be U.S., which caused this crisis, to return to full compliance first. Iran will reciprocate

following rapid verifications. All Trump sanctions were anti-JCPOA and must be removed.”

So, again, we still appear to be at this point where it’s, who’s on first, who goes first? Is this going to be a surmountable procedural issue? Can

you get over this issue?

KHATIBZADEH: Look, Christiane, United States broke the deal. So, they have to fix that.

They know whatever should be done by the United States to fix that. It is almost impossible for anybody inside Iran to trust United States,

especially after four years of nonstop economic war against the Iranian people.

And remember that Trump administration imposed all sanctions on Iran in the first place not because Iran was violating the JCPOA. Iran was subject to

the illegal extraterritorial sanctions by the United States because Iran was fully and faithfully, actually, implementing the JCPOA.

So, logically, it is up to the United States to show to everybody that they want to reverse the course that Trump administration started. And,

remember, in 2015, when the JCPOA was signed, Iran was first to — was the first party that implemented the deal.

And after many months of verification, when, in January 2016, IAEA verified that, United States started the full removal of sanctions, which actually

didn’t happen even under President Obama.

But the point is that, this time, the United States has to show to everybody that they actually want, in practice, not on paper, to reverse

the course and they want to implement the JCPOA fully faithfully.

Iran has paved the way to preserve the deal. The United States knows exactly what Iran has done to preserve the deal. And we think that the

United States has to first remove all the sanctions verifiably and open the verification.

Iran is ready to not only stop its remedial measures taken to respond to the sanctions by — imposed by the United States, but also to reverse. And

all the measures taken by Iran is actually reversible.

AMANPOUR: So, let me ask you.

We have talked about these indirect talks which have been under way. And there is another round coming up. But do you think it will lead to direct

talks between the U.S. and Iran in Vienna or wherever next week?

KHATIBZADEH: Let me put it in this way. There has been no direct or indirect talks in Vienna or elsewhere, because there is no need for any new

negotiations, once we have negotiated in full details the JCPOA.

What we are doing right now in 4+1, plus Iran and the E.U. as the coordinator of the JCPOA, as we call it, the built-in mechanism in the

deal, joint commission, is to identify the list of sanctions, the full list of sanctions that the United States should actually remove.

The 4+1 have the channels to talk to United States, to see what United States is actually thinking. The United States should get to the point that

we can verify that they are actually implementing. Whether Iran and United States can again talk, it depends if the United States get back to the deal

and on the table, JCPOA table, when everybody is present. Then we can continue.

But until then, there will be no direct or indirect talks or negotiation between two sides.

AMANPOUR: Well, let me ask you this, then, because, even if these sanctions are relieved, in other words, the sanctions that were imposed by

the Trump administration, other existing sanctions which the U.S. has had will not be lifted, according to your counterpart at the State Department,

Ned Price.

Let’s just play what he said about this, this week.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NED PRICE, SPOKESPERSON, STATE DEPARTMENT: We believe that Iran’s ballistic missile program, that Iran’s violation of the — Iran’s human

rights abuses, that Iran’s support for malign proxies, Iran’s support for terrorism, we believe all of those things pose a profound challenge to us

and — to us, as well as to our regional partners.

That is why we will continue, including through sanctions, to push back on those — on those issues.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: So, let’s say the nuclear part of this, the JCPOA part of this, is solved.

Will Iran be open to discussing these other issues that, as you very well know, is where a lot of the resistance comes from, from countries in the

Persian Gulf area, from Israel, from the United States itself? They want these other issues addressed as well at some point.

KHATIBZADEH: First of all, let me clarify that all sanctions, without any distinction between designations and sanctions, should remove.

Everybody knows that four years of Trump was exactly — target was about to ruin the JCPOA and targeting Iran. And all the sanctions imposed by the

United States is very much related to the JCPOA. And it is not hidden that all the officials under Trump, were arguing that they’re going to make it

impossible or make it very much difficult for any other administration to get back to full compliance.

So we do believe that any sanctions imposed by Trump should be removed. It doesn’t matter if it is relabeled or reimposed or actually imposed.

Everything should get back to January 2017.

On the — on other issues that you mentioned, I assume that you know better than me that no country on Earth compromise on its national security and

national — and missiles is actually our defense, the issue of our defense. So, nobody is going to talk about that.

If our neighbors are ready to talk about 100 billions of — quote, unquote — “beautiful military” — American military equipment put in our region,

if United States is ready to stop this, and if the other sides are ready to talk about those issues, it’s a matter of time. We have to wait and see.

But nobody’s going to talk about these sorts of issues.

On the regional issues. Again, there’s huge differences between us and United States. We have never been shy to say that, as I said, shoulder to

shoulder to Israeli regime, are actually the main root cause of many problems in our region.

If there was no United States aggression in — to our region, the war in Afghanistan and Iraq, then there would be no such permanent endless war as

a normal thing in our region.

The only thing that actually we and Iran and United States agreed upon was to solve the nuclear issue. Unfortunately, the United States to even make

this agreement a point of conflict between two sides.

And we really hope that the United States can address this issue from where that it is.

One last thing.

AMANPOUR: All right.

KHATIBZADEH: It seems that there are those inside the U.S. administration that they’re trying to use some sanctions — to keep some sanctions as a

leverage on Iran.

They have tried once, and they failed, and it will fail again if they do that.

AMANPOUR: All right, Mr. Khatibzadeh, we — our show is over. We’re running out of time.

Thank you so much for joining us from Tehran.

That’s it. Thank you for watching “Amanpour and Company” on PBS and join us again tomorrow night.

END