July 1, 2022

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

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHRIS PATTEN, LAST GOVERNOR OF HONG KONG AND AUTHOR, “THE HONG KONG DIARIES”: And I just hope that the rest of the world will keep on

recognizing that what Hong Kong represents is really important and fundamental to all of us.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: As China marks 25 years since the handover of Hong Kong, Britain’s last governor there, Chris Patten, tells me why he thinks the

West let Hong Kong down. Then.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICHELLE ZAUNER, SINGER, JAPANESE BREAKFAST AND AUTHOR “CRYING IN H MART”: How’s it feel to be at the center of magic. To linger in tones and words?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: A young artist at the height of her powers, Bianna Golodryga speaks with indie rock star and bestselling author, Michelle Zauner, of

Japanese Breakfast.

Plus, as extreme weather continues to wreak havoc around the world, Professor Kristie Ebi tells Hari Sreenivasan how we can improve our

response to the climate crisis.

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

And when Britain handed Hong Kong back to China 25 years ago, ending more than 150 years of colonial rule, the city was set to be governed under the

one country, two systems model. Allowing it to retain democracy and freedom of speech, unlike in Mainland China. But it wasn’t long before Beijing

started chipping away at that promise. In a moment, my interview with Britain’s last governor of Hong Kong, but first, correspondent Kristie Lu

Stout looks at what’s left of the territory’s autonomy.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KRISTIE LU STOUT, CORRESPONDENT (voiceover): After Margaret Thatcher reached a deal with the Chinese on the return of Hong Kong, a local

reporter took the Iron Lady to task.

EMILY LAU, FORMER JOURNALIST AND PRO-DEMOCRACY LAWMAKER: You signed an agreement with China, promising to deliver over five million people into a

— the hands of a communist dictatorship.

STOUT (voiceover): Thatcher claimed, mostly everyone in Hong Kong was happy with the deal and told Emily Lau.

MARGARET THATCHER, FORMER PRIME MINISTER OF THE UNITED KINGDOM: You may be a solitary exception.

STOUT (on camera): So, what do you make of that answer today in 2022?

LAU: Many of the journalists, who subsequently stood up, they asked them the questions. So, even in that room, I wasn’t a solitary exception.

STOUT (on camera): July 1, 2022 marks exactly halfway through 50 years of the one country, two systems autonomy, Beijing promised to Hong Kong at the

1997 handover. It aims to preserve the city’s freedoms of expression and assembly, as well as its institutions including an independent judiciary.

STOUT (voiceover): But in the wake of the 2019 protests, pressure on the city’s freedoms intensified, thanks to a new national security law.

Supporters say the law ended the chaos of 2019 and restored order but it did more than that.

Scenes of mass protests like this are no more. At least 186 people have been arrested under the law, including a 90-year-old catholic cardinal. The

opposition is virtually wiped out with many of the city’s pr- democracy figures in jail or exiled. Politically-charged artworks like the Pillar of

Shame, Tiananmen Memorial have been removed. Dozens of civil society groups including, the city’s largest independent trade union have disbanded. And

national security investigations have led to the shuttering of news outlets like the Apple Daily.

When asked about charges of diminished freedoms, a Hong Kong government spokesman told CNN, many freedoms and rights are not absolute and can be

restricted for reasons, including protection of national security and public safety. So, as Former Security Chief John Lee prepares to leave the

city from July 1, what is left of Hong Kong’s promised autonomy?

JOHN BURNS, EMERITUS PROFESSOR, UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG: We have autonomy in religion, in education, in media, including social media, in the

internet, in how we manage our civil service. The second system is still here. It is functioning. It’s under stressed.

STOUT (voiceover): Lau has always been a skeptic of one country, two systems. As a reporter, a lawmaker, and former chair of the Democratic

Party.

LAU: I will not say that one country, two system is completely finished. The fact that I can stand here, in the Democratic Party office, to talk to

you shows there’s some freedom. And there are some differences but they are getting less and less.

STOU (voiceover): Lau said she is saying in the city to support her friends and colleagues in prison, abiding by her mantra.

LAU: Be bold, be wise, and be careful.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: Emily Lau speaking to Kristie Lu Stout there. President Xi Jinping ventured outside of Mainland China for the first time since the

start of the pandemic to visit Hong Kong on this 25th anniversary, burnishing his own view of success there.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

XI JINPING, CHINESE PRESIDENT (through translator): Over the past few years, Hong Kong had withstood one severe test after another and overcome

one risk and challenge after another. After weathering the storms, Hong Kong has emerged from the ashes with vigorous vitality.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: Critics say Hong Kong has become virtually a police state and we should note that journalists from several international media

organizations, like Reuters and CNN, were blocked from covering Xi’s trip.

As the last governor in Hong Kong, Chris Patten said that Britain had provided, “Scaffolding that enabled the people there to ascend.”

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHRIS PATTEN, LAST GOVERNOR OF HONG KONG AND AUTHOR, “THE HONG KONG DIARIES”: I have no doubt that with people here, holding on to these

values which they cherish, Hong Kong’s star will continue to climb. Hong Kong’s values are decent values. They are universal values.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: And he’s written about his experience in a new book called, “The Hong Kong Diaries”. I started by asking him about his feelings as he handed

over the reins.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: Lord Chris Patten, welcome back to our program.

PATTEN: Nice to be with you, again.

AMANPOUR: So, let me take you back, 25 years, today is the anniversary of the handover. You were governor of Hong Kong then. I just want to read

something you sent back to London, I have relinquished the administration of this government. God save the queen. Patten. Concise. What were your

emotions then?

PATTEN: They were a lot less concise than that. I was leaving a city that I loved. “I was leaving some really great friends. My family, ditto,

because they loved it and my wife was the real hero of my time there had loved it as well. I felt very emotional about whether Hong Kong would be

able to survive as it had as a great international financial city. An extraordinary combination of economic freedom and political freedom.

I hoped that that would all be true. And on the whole, the Chinese leadership at the time seemed to be slowly relaxing the communist grip on

every aspect of life in China. So, I guess we all hope that would be too far for Hong Kong as well.

AMANPOUR: So, let me ask you with the fullest of time in the way you just, sort of — you know, contextualized your hopes at the time, was it more of

a hope than a kind of a certainty? I don’t want to say pollyannaish. But do you think Britain just put too much hope in the idea that communist China

would honor for 50 years, which they said they would, the one country, two systems?

PATTEN: What the — my biggest critic in Hong Kong, on the British side was a retired diplomat who was a great expert on China. But a rather vain,

and by vain, guy who didn’t accept that anybody else had a point of view, which was worth considering. And yet, he tended to think of Hong Kong

rather than Hong Kongers.

And he’s the colonel of his arguments about Hong Kong, was looking at the Chinese leadership. He would say, they may be thuggish dictators but

they’re men at their word. Well, we now know that part of that is true. And for some time, they reasonably and clearly kept to the main points of the

international treaty we’ve signed with them and kept to the agreements about Hong Kong having a high degree of autonomy and hanging on to its way

of life.

I think that changed fundamentally. And we wouldn’t know it would happen like this with Xi Jinping. An old fashion Maoist, who believes in the cult

of personality, in controlling everything himself. He’s even pushing the economy in the sort of, Mao direction. State and enterprises being the most

important private sector squeezed. And I think what’s happening in — with dealing with COVID at the moment there is a bit, some, sort of, Maoist.

So, I think that we want to know that Xi Jinping would take over. And Xi Jinping, his first instructions to the Parisian (ph) government codders

were to fight what he called an intense struggle about it. And then he listed all the things that you and I would regard as being fundamentals of

a free society. For proper historical inquiry, freedom of speech, rule of law, separation of powers.

And what he was actually describing there, it’s quite interesting when you look at it, was a pretty good way of talking about Hong Kong. And I think

why — one of the reasons why he’s been so ruthlessly tough on Hong Kong is that Hong Kong represents a political and intellectual challenge to the

notion that Chinese communist central control will rule forever and be a very attractive thing for the rest of the world, which is of course not.

AMANPOUR: You talk about in your book, a speech you made about this whole issue in 2017, of course, that was after Xi, as we know. And you said, the

most difficult question after the speech was from a kid who said, we’ve listened to you, Mr. Patten. But what if you are wrong? What will happen if

the communist party starts arresting us? Sending people to prison? You know, you obviously went through all the Nelson Mandela. All of the hope

and dreams of democracy and how it’s inevitable —

PATTEN: Yes.

AMANPOUR: — and this and that. But that child, or rather, that young person asked you a very relevant question.

PATTEN: Sure, and I — nowadays, I find the most difficult thing I’m asked again and again by people from Hong Kong who are in Britain. My students,

there are lots at the university where I’m the chancellor at Oxford. And they say to me, you know, should we go back to Hong Kong? And it’s the most

extraordinary difficult question in a mere 100,000 of them in the UK now making a huge contribution to the country. But able people, doctors,

nurses, teachers, and entrepreneurs. And what do I say to them?

I can express, as you’ve said, all those wonderful remarks of people like Nelson Mandela that you can’t lock up an idea. And I do believe that in the

long run, the ideas that we represent in democracies and open societies will triumph over surveillance state totalitarianism like you see in China.

And I think we’re also, to a convincible extent, dealing with post-peak China just as we are dealing with post-peak Putin.

But it’s very difficult to give those assurances with complete conviction. And to be seen, to be suggested, other people should have to be braver than

I’ve ever been. So, I find it morally really, really difficult. And I just hope that the rest of the world will keep on recognizing that what Hong

Kong represents is really important and fundamental to all of us.

AMANPOUR: Tell me how you describe Hong Kong right now. All these brave people have found themselves in jail. How do you describe it and how do you

see it and the next five or even 10 years?

PATTEN: Well, a great international financial city. A free city, albeit not an entirely democratic one but on the way to democracy is being turned

into, frankly, a neo-police state. Now run by a policeman who earned his colors, earned his house captain’s colors for the Chinese by being the

policeman who was responsible for the appalling policing of the demonstrations against the extradition treaty in 2019 when they were up to

two million people on the street. And rather than talk to people, they were dealt with tear gas and plastic baton rounds and tasers.

Indeed, I was suggesting the other day that maybe the emblem of this Hong Kong, at least for the time being, should be the taser rather than the

Bergenia, the flower. So, it’s really grim. And, of course, of course, what happens as each of these leaders while they go along with whatever their

masters in Beijing want, they all pretty well make — they all, I think — I think everyone since I was in Hong Kong myself, each one of them is

either themselves or their family had foreign passports. In the case of Mr. Lee, his wife, and two sons have foreign passports. Carrie Lam’s husband

and two sons have — had British passports.

So, you ask yourself, didn’t they say confident about the future? Why make sure their families have got foreign passports? I mean, I’m very happy that

they should want to live in Britain but there’s a sort of awful paradox about the fact that these people who are locking up kids are — who can’t

come here, although I’m trying to change that, we’re trying to change that into some success at the moment, they’re locking up kids while themselves

have kids who come here with the passport. It’s really — it’s worse than ironic.

AMANPOUR: You know, you have said, and you say in your book, you basically assessed greed to be the West motivating factors to relations with China,

and indeed Russia, in terms of natural resources. We’re seeing it all play out now. But you also said, post-peak Putin and post-peak Xi.

But it doesn’t look like that from here. It looks like they are at the peak of their own ideas for the world, which are autocratic. Which don’t go

around, you know, the rule of law. And which as we can see it, in Russia’s case anyway, doesn’t even respect international law or boundaries. How

should the West deal with these countries if we’re not going to divide the world into a new Cold War?

PATTEN: Even though China has been an accomplice to Russia’s wicked behavior in Ukraine, they are in slightly different categories. Russia is

very much a nation in decline, which is trying to reimagine its past again and trying to trade in grievance-soaked nationalism.

And if you ever ask yourself, what do you have in the house, apart from vodka and a copy of a warrant piece that was actually made in Russia? They

would have everything. We’re dependent, excessively dependent on Russian oil and gas. But Russia is a coming country. Russia is — has nuclear

weapons. Not a very good army, they were large one and is a trounced whenever there’s a free — a fair fight in Ukraine.

China is different. China is a much bigger in a more important part of the global economy. And I’ve never thought that we should try to contain China.

But I do think we should constrain China when it behaved badly. And we shouldn’t be terrorized.

What we should do is to stand up for our own values. Democracy. Open societies are going to last much longer than totalitarian regimes, provided

we stand up for ourselves, work together, work together when we are being bullied. And unfortunately, there are some signs that we’re not always

prepared to just stand up for democratic values.

I look at what’s happening in the United States. I look at what’s happening in parts of Europe now and I worry. I look at what’s happening in the

Republican Party in the United States and worry when I see people denying that President Biden won the election. I mean, it is not a very good signal

to send about the long-term strength of democracy.

AMANPOUR: You led me right into my next question because what about democracy in your own country? You were, obviously, a Tory MP for a number

of years. You were chairman of the Conservative Party. But you’ve recently said about the current government here, we have a nationalist-populist

government that is fatally not popular. You have called about — called it the Johnson Cult still hanging on. And describing this government as

shameful and seedy. So, we know your view here. Tell us a little bit more about it. And what can your party do?

PATTEN: Well, what is quite interesting is that the sort of views that I’ve expressed in similar terms, not maybe with quite a reason of technical

or adjectives. But they’ve been expressed by, for example, two former leaders of the Conservative Party, Michael Hayden (ph) and William Hay,

many others. So, all of them expressing a lack of self — a lack of confidence in the prime minister.

Whether it will persuade him to do the decent thing, I don’t know. A friend of mine who was one of his teachers at school wrote a report about him when

he was 16 or 17, which is — which has been true right through his life. He said of Boris in a note to his father, Boris thinks that it’s childish of

the rest of us to not recognize that he’s exceptional. And that the network of obligations and duties, which the rest of us have to recognize don’t

apply to him. And that’s unfortunately been the — sort of way he’s lived for the last, whatever it is, 50 odd years.

AMANPOUR: And what do you think are the most at-risk elements of rule of law, human rights, the democratic nation? We know that in terms of Brexit

and the Northern Ireland protocol, this prime minister tends to rip up a deal that he solemnly agreed to with the EU. We know that in terms of

refugees and asylum seekers, they’re sending them to Rwanda, which has, at the very best, a questionable human rights record. What worries you about

what may be coming down the pike?

PATTEN: I’ll tell you what worries me most, perhaps. I mean, I’m worried about all those things. The — it’s very difficult to stand up

internationally for the rule of law and for sticking to your word if you don’t seem to be doing it to yourself. But what really worries me is that

we’re going to face, I think, in the United Kingdom in the next few years a real — another real challenge to the United Kingdom from Scotland and

maybe from — in Northern Ireland as well. And I think we need a government which is capable of working with others and other parties in order to put

the best possible case for the union because without it, we’d be a much- depleted country, both in international terms and in economic terms.

AMANPOUR: And finally, you alluded to, you know, the strains on our political discourse and political activity, the deep divisions, the

partisans. As you said, you know, I worry for the American Republican Party. But also, as we’ve just described, the British Conservative Party’s

got its own issues. You are probably the last or one of the few of a dying breed of a moderate, conservative who has, you know, much more ability to

cross lines and get business done. You said recently that you’re angry and it’s probably just because so many of the things that I think that my

generation took for granted are now being trashed. Like what?

PATTEN: Well, let me just say, I went into politics partly because I got involved in an American campaign when I’ve just been a student in New York,

working for John Lindsay, who became mayor of New York. And was originally a Republican, became an independent, became a Democrat. But when I was

working in New York on a political campaign, the political representation of New York was Javits, Keating, Rockefeller.

None of them, none of them would get a — send a prayer in the Republican primary these days. They were internationally minded, they were — believed

in markets, they also believed in social responsibility, and they weren’t driven by a right-wing ideology, which has no relevance to the lives of

most people live which is based on trying to open up wedges between people on racial or cultural lines.

And I really worry that if we allow ourselves to be torn apart by that sort of identity politics, it is going to seriously undermine our ability to

work together in defending the values which have made us all the best places to live in the world.

AMANPOUR: Boy, at a time when we can really see them under attack. Lord Patten, thank you so much for joining us.

PATTEN: Thank you very much indeed. Nice to be with you again.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: A sobering assessment from a veteran politician.

Next, to an artist who’s certainly having a moment. Michelle Zauner is navigating newfound stardom, performing in the season finale of “Saturday

Night Live”, and joining “Time Magazine’s” 100 most influential people list. The indie-rock star is also a “New York Times” bestselling author for

her memoir “Crying in H Mart”. Here’s a taste of “Be Sweet” from her band’s new album, “Jubilee”.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAPANESE BREAKFAST, INDIE ROCK BAND: Make it up to me, you know it’s better. Make it up to me, you know it’s better. Be sweet to me, baby. I

want to believe in you, I want to believe, be sweet. Be sweet to me, baby. I want to believe in you, I want to believe in something.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: Bianna Golodryga sat down with Zauner to talk about her creative success in literature and music.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BIANNA GOLODRYGA, SENIOR GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Michelle, thank you so much for joining us. It’s such a pleasure to have you here. Wow. We’ve

just been talking about what an incredible year, too, 2021 has been for you. And now this year, your best-selling memory headlining musical

festivals, musical act for SNL anyone in their season finale. What has it been like for you?

MICHELLE ZAUNER, SINGER, JAPANESE BREAKFAST AND AUTHOR “CRYING IN H MART”: It’s been completely surreal and certainly very validating. You know, there

were so many years put into this record and growing the band and also this book, you know, it was about a five-year process. And so, it feels

incredibly validating, after all, that time that I’ve reached this level. It’s very surreal.

GOLODRYGA: So, we’ll get more into the book in just a moment. Let’s talk about your musical career because that took years to lift off, really. And

you started this passion in your adolescent years in Oregon. You moved to New York, and like so many of these stories, you struggled. What kept you

persisting in this field? And were there moments where you thought, you know, what, maybe I should do something different?

ZAUNER: So many times. You know, I started playing the guitar and writing songs when I was 16 years old. So, for almost — oh, how long was that? 17

years. And, you know, I came from this DIY background where I would play house shows and basements across North America and drive a 15-passenger van

in — with my bandmates and sleep on floors at colleges and random people’s houses and carrying an 80-pound amp down some rickety stairs every night.

So, you know, I think that I came up in a time where, you know, that was paying your dues as an indie musician. And I really admired people that,

kind of, came from that background. And within that community, we were always, sort of, supporting each other, that that’s what we were supposed

to do.

And that sometime — someday it would happen for you. But there were certainly a number of occasions where, you know, the floor was particularly

gross or the show was particularly dismal, and not many people came. You’d get paid in, like, a can of soup and few loose bills that I wanted to give

up. And I certainly did give up when my mom got sick when I was 25 and it felt like, at that age, that it was time to move on. But then I made a

record about that experience called “Psychopomp” and, of course, was the one that sort of took off.

GOLODRYGA: OK. So, there was — we’re going to play an excerpt from the song. Just — I want to get your response to what these words meant for

you.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ZAUNER: How’s it feel to stand at the height of your powers to captivate every heart? Projecting your visions to strangers who feel it, who listen,

who linger on every word. Oh, it’s a rush. Oh, it’s a rush

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GOLODRYGA: How does it feel to stand at the height of your power?

ZAUNER: I mean, it is a constant rush, you know, I mean, I think that this new record, “Jubilee”, was written after two albums and an entire book

about grief and loss. And I felt like after I had completed the book, I had sort of said everything I needed to say about that experience and it was

time to begin a new chapter creatively.

And so, I wanted to, kind of, rush to the other end of the spectrum of human experience and write this album about joy. And I think part of it was

this beautiful experience I was having where people were listening to my music for the first time. Where was able to pursue a career in the arts and

finally being able to pay rent. And that was a real joy.

And so, I wanted to write an album about giving myself permission to feel joy. Finally allowing joy into my life. The joys of getting to do what I do

for a living, which is just a complete lottery ticket. But, of course, you know, in any creative field there is this sort of agony of just, you know,

toiling away and this constant fear of rejection and misunderstanding. But then, you know, there’s this other side that’s just so perfect and so

joyous and wonderful and to be able to look out at a sea of people singing words you wrote back to you is such a perfect feeling that I feel so lucky

to get to do every day. And so that song is, sort of, about the two poles of creativity. The rush of, you know, completing something that resonates

with people and also just the agony of creation and self-doubt and imposter syndrome.

GOLODRYGA: Does that feeling ever get old? The rush of performing for an audience that’s singing your lyrics back to you?

ZAUNER: It never gets old, no.

GOLODRYGA: You lost your aunt, you lost your mother, you lost your grandmother and you write about that in the book. What role, if any, and

maybe intentional or not, did these women play in your, both careers, both literary now and in music?

ZAUNER: I think — I mean, certainly my mother and losing her has informed my music and my book completely, you know. I mean, before that I was

pursuing both writing and music. But she has certainly been the inspiration for all of my work pretty much over the past eight years.

But I think, in a way, she made me really work at it. Like, she was not really supportive of my creative life, not because she didn’t believe in

me, but I think as a mother feels it is her duty often, she felt like it was her responsibility to, sort of, protect me from the financial

insecurity of that type of profession. And also, the emotional instability and the rejection that comes with that type of life. And so, I think that

she really instilled a very strong work ethic in me that I would always have to, kind of, fight for this. That this was never going to come easily.

GOLODRYGA: Did you find that to be judgmental? I mean, I know you talked about it in the book about how she would just give you certain looks every

time she saw a new tattoo and a look that only a mother could give, right? And the response in the feeling that only a daughter could feel from their

mother.

What were those interactions like?

ZAUNER: My mother was an incredibly judgmental and critical woman that, you know — especially as an only child, and only daughter, could feel

incredibly smothering. And now in retrospect, of course, I really miss that smothering devotion. But at the time, it was completely exhausting. You

know, I had such an independent streak and I was creative, and it felt like this woman was standing in the way of my passion and my dreams. But I think

it was her way of loving and protecting me. But, you know, it was — I think most parents probably aren’t thrilled for — to see new tattoos on

their children.

GOLODRYGA: Who did you write this book for? Was it therapeutic for yourself in the way that some of your music had been?

ZAUNER: I think that in all of my creative work, it’s really just for myself. I think that oftentimes the person is the most universal and, you

know, it was really, a way of just making sense of what had happened. It was such a whirlwind six months when we found out that she had stage four

cancer, I moved to Eugene, and we went through two horrible rounds of chemotherapy. And then she died. I was married during that time. I left

behind music during that time. It was just such a whirlwind. My whole life changed in six months. And so, I think so much of this book was sort of

just trying to make sense of that and trying to express to people what I couldn’t in conversation.

GOLODRYGA: And so much of this book and so much of your relationship was it surrounded with food and Korean food and your love for Korean food. And

you talk about the trauma you experienced after her loss and concern about the connection. Would you still have that connection with your Korean

heritage, with Korean food? What have you learned out of that?

ZAUNER: I have learned that so many, not just like mixed-raced people but adoptees, and you know, people who are immigrants have this shared, sort

of, experience. I think it’s such a natural bridge to your culture. And for me, growing up mixed race and suddenly losing what kind of tethered me to

that part of myself, just felt at risk, suddenly, in this way that I had never experienced before.

And it was healing, you know. I felt for a long time, I could not remember my mom before she got sick. Because it was sort of the first concentrated

period of time in the last seven years that I got to spend with her after moving away from home and for college at 18. And so, that made me

incredibly sad that all I could remember was this really traumatic, you know, period of time.

And I knew my mother would not want me to remember her that way. And it wasn’t until I started going to Korean grocery store and started cooking

Korean food that I had all of these lovely memories from my childhood start to, sort of, breakthrough and I could remember my mom again, and the things

that we shared before illness entered our lives.

GOLODRYGA: You’re going to read an excerpt from the book and I love how you described your mom. It’s not the, sort of, what you’d see in American

households, the sort of compassionate, overly sweet, sacring-filled mother. But your mother really expressed her love and appreciation for people

through food. By knowing which foods they like, which food they didn’t. And she was really proud of you for even trying novel foods. Can you read a

little bit of that excerpt?

ZAUNER: Food was how my mother expressed her love. No matter how critical or cruel she could seem, constantly pushing me to meet her intractable

expectations. I could always feel her affection radiating from the lunches she packed and the meal she prepared for me just the way I liked them. I

can hardly speak Korean but in H Mart, it feels like I am fluent.

GOLODRYGA: Your mom is obviously not here with us but I’m sure you’ve thought over and over again in your head how she would have reacted to this

book. I know your dad had voiced some questions about some of the facts in the book. How would your mom, in your opinion, have responded to this and

its success?

ZAUNER: I always like to think that if another half-Korean girl wrote this book about her mother, my mother would read it and say in a sort of chiding

way, I hope that you love me this much to write something like this. But I’m sure that if she wrote — if she read this book, she would find her own

issues with the storytelling.

But I think that she would be incredibly proud of me. I think of her all of the time when I get to wear a pretty dress or do a photoshoot or carry a

nice bag or wear sunscreen or all of these things like — that I know that she would be so proud of. And I have to think of, in some way, that she

knows even though it goes against every logical belief that I have.

GOLODRYGA: We hear President Biden reflect on his loss in his life, and he says whenever there’s a crisis, whenever there’s a tragedy issue, and what

have you. And he tells those grieving that there will come a day when the thought of the loss of their loved one will not bring a tear to their eye

but a smile to their face. And I am just wondering when was that moment for you when the thought of your mother would bring a smile to your face

instead of tears to your eyes?

ZAUNER: Gosh. I mean, I don’t know if I can pinpoint the specific moment. But I also think that I really enjoy crying for my mother, you know. I talk

about it so much in interviews. And that sometimes when something just knocks me off my feet and brings a tear to my eye remembering her, I’m so

comforted that that’s there. Because, you know, I feel like — I don’t know who said this, but you know, the sentiment about love — grief being love

enduring. I truly believe that.

And so, it brings me great comfort when memories of my mother make me smile. But it also brings me great comfort that I still cry for her

because, you know, it’s such an intense raw feeling to remember her and have a small memory, kind of, knock you off of your feet that I think that

was another chapter in my life. When I was able to also just appreciate the tears, you know, I think that that’s another, sort of, level of grief that

is still pretty new for me that I appreciate.

GOLODRYGA: Michelle, thank you.

ZAUNER: Thank you so much.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: Such a moving conversation there about grief and family.

Now, to climate change in the United States and new obstacles thrown up by the Supreme Court. It is just ruled to curb the Environmental Protection

Agency’s ability to regulate carbon emissions. This comes amid a period of extreme weather around the world, with over 40 million Americans under heat

alerts last week. Kristie Ebi has been researching the health risks of climate change for decades. And she tells Hari Sreenivasan that response

systems must be improved to prevent more deaths.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HARI SREENIVASAN, CORRESPONDENT: Christiane, thanks. Professor Kristie Ebi, thanks so much for joining us. We just had a result

from the Supreme Court that says that the Environmental Protection Agency does not have that broad authority to regulate coal-fired power plants and

shift them towards cleaner sources, that they have to tailor a specific kind of proposition to individual power plants. I mean, in the grand scheme

of things, what is this sort of a ruling do to our efforts to fight climate change?

KRISTIE EBI, PROFESSOR, GLOBAL HEALTH, UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON: This is, needless to say, a very disappointing ruling. And it’s out of step with the

understanding of climate science. And it’s out of step, frankly, with where our economy is going. We know that the number of jobs in one of the

fastest-growing sectors is all in renewables. The cost of renewables have dropped significantly. And an announcement that got very little press was

when all of the major auto companies said they’re going to get out of internal combustion engines.

Industries moving on. Industry understands the future needs to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and industries moving toward them. We know

that the coal industry is dying out in the U.S. It’s no longer economical. That renewable — the cost of renewables have dropped significantly. Giving

and recognizing the EPA has that authority would’ve helped move this transition faster. Delaying this means that we are going to continue as a

nation to significantly contribute to the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. We’re going to continue to damage the health and well-being of

Americans, and of people around the world. And it’s a very disappointing ruling.

SREENIVASAN: We are hearing a headline here, a headline there about, more often than not, homeless people who are dying in extreme heat conditions in

the United States. And you and climate and climate researchers around the world are telling us that this is going to be normal. That the temperatures

are increasing but the — these deaths are preventable.

EBI: This is a very important issue. Our temperatures are rising. We’re seeing more intense and longer heat waves. And those most are vulnerable,

including the unhoused, unless we do more to protect them, are expected to die in increasing numbers as we have these more heat waves, higher summer

temperatures.

SREENIVASAN: Just the other day we had dozens of people die in the back of a trailer. They were being smuggled across the border. And again, there are

lots of causes for this. But ultimately what led to their death was the heat inside that trailer. And that’s not something that we heard about 10

years ago or 15 years ago. Nearly at the same rates that we’re hearing about today. And I’m wondering, this combined with the stories of unhoused

people dying in extreme heat, is this a part of what’s going to be normal for us to hear as the summers get hotter?

EBI: If we don’t make any changes, then yes. But we knew — we really do have to start thinking differently about our future. It is going to be

hotter. And when you think about so many activities, so many policies we have. All of them were developed, just assuming that the weather is

constant. That is no longer the case. And people don’t factor that into decisions, the human smuggling, which is just a huge tragedy in many

dimensions.

They don’t think about the weather. They don’t think about what that could mean for all of those poor people in the back of that truck. So, unless we

can really move our policies. Unless we can recognize the interconnectedness of all of the vulnerabilities that there is, as you

said, lots of reasons for human smuggling. We need to address those. We need to address ways to ensure that people can stay in their countries,

which is what their preference is. We need to find ways to address multiple different challenges to our societies and recognize that climate change is

a stress multiplier.

SREENIVASAN: Are there any specific populations that are at greater risk say, for example, pregnant women.

EBI: There is a real risk with pregnant women. There’s a growing number of a study showing that during the last period of pregnancy, and it’s still

being defined, during heat waves we’ll have more low-birth-weight babies. So, babies that come early and are smaller then. And there can be

consequences for those children for years depending on how it’s medically managed.

There’s also an increase in stillbirths during some periods of pregnancy. And so, pregnant women do need to be protected. Outdoor, workers adults at

the age of 65. Children under the age of one, physiologically can’t — really manage this higher core body temperature. People who take certain

drugs, like beta blockers or some psychotropic drugs reduce the ability of your body to sweat. The list is quite long, which is why we need these

comprehensive plans for how to bring together all of our city services so that we can make sure that we can protect people.

SREENIVASAN: Just this year, areas in India and Pakistan, experienced just scorching temperatures that would be unimaginable and it would’ve been

almost science fiction. But they’re well, living through it right now already in 2022.

EBI: That’s correct. And there is an area of climate science called detection and attribution that looks at these individual events to

determine the extent to which climate change could’ve made a difference. And we know for some of these heat waves in India, the one that we had here

in Seattle a year ago, into Northern Scandinavia, in Japan that have — heat waves have occurred. That would be virtually impossible without

climate change. That these are climate change-fueled events. And the climatologist tells us we’re entering into a period where almost all of our

extreme advances are going to be made more extreme fire changing climate.

SREENIVASAN: How does climate change, that might be caused in some other part of the world, how is that an accelerant to a hurricane becoming worse

or a heat wave becoming worse?

EBI: When we think about the distribution, for example, temperature in our region or the distribution that we were used to when we were growing up, it

forms a nice curve that’s called the bell-shaped curve because it looks like a bell.

And as we burned more fossil fuels, removing the median of that, the average of that to a higher temperature. But at the same time, that higher

temperature, the shape of the curve is coming down and flattening and going further out to the right. And we’re seeing a much bigger increase in

extreme events than one would have expected just because of the dynamic of the climate system. And the climate system needed to do something with all

this energy that we’re putting into it.

SREENIVASAN: So, some of that energy goes back into, say, the Gulf Coast and the waters. And then those waters end up warmer and the warmer waters

are worse for those hurricanes?

EBI: You’re exactly right. The — those higher temperatures in the oceans are driving the strength of hurricanes. We’re not necessarily going to see

more hurricanes, but there’s going to be a change in the distribution to more intense hurricanes. Just as with precipitation. We’re seeing about the

same number of precipitation events, but a shift to much heavier precipitation events.

SREENIVASAN: You know, as you are saying this answer, it’s interesting to me because the number of hurricanes that I’ve covered, there usually is

some sort of a plan that kicks in a few days in advance. There are people who take it seriously. Infrastructure is moved into place or moved out of

harm’s way. And we don’t really think of heat waves are extreme heat that way. And I guess we’re just — we’re willing to live with the casualties.

EBI: When we may think about these large heat waves, for example, the heat dome in Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia, the estimates are being

refined, but currently we are thinking about 1,000 excess deaths. And if we had any other kind of event that killed 1,000 people, in just a few days,

we would call it a mass casualty event. But we don’t. We don’t think about heat as the hazard it can be.

SREENIVASAN: This week, King County, which houses Seattle, created, kind of, an extreme heat plan, and that was, I think, their first-ever. Why did

they have to take the steps?

EBI: We didn’t have one last year when we have the heat dome. There was real efforts by King County, by the cities to do everything they could to

help protect people during the heat dome. But these systems require time to put together. When you think about all the different city services you want

to have at the table, it’s not just the health department or the meteorologist department. But you also want the police, the fire

department, EMT, your emergency departments who is responsible for talking with the elderly care institutes. Who are the trusted voices for redline

districts?

And you start thinking of all the different services, all the different representatives, it takes a while to get everybody together and make sure

you are coordinated on a plan. For example, the city opened some cooling shelters. But how do you find out where those shelters are? How do you get

to those? Are you expecting people to walk to the bus when it’s 108 degrees and wait for a bus to go to a cooling shelter? Do you keep the shelter open

overnight? Our temperatures at night are 80 degrees, which in June is just unheard of here in Seattle.

And so, making all of those decisions, making sure all that works together, requires time and requires coordination. So, it’s really important that

cities start working on this before they have their first major heat wave so that they are prepared when it does happen.

SREENIVASAN: I mean, there have been analysis that show that these extreme heat events are more — what? They’ve more than doubled in the last 40

years and that this is affecting almost a quarter of the world’s population?

EBI: That’s correct. And the projections are we could have a 15 to 20-fold increase in these events, depending on the extent to which we control our

greenhouse gas emissions.

SREENIVASAN: 15 to 20-fold, sorry. That’s just — so — does that just — break that down for me. Are we talking about the increase in likelihood of

one happening or the increased frequency of it happening?

EBI: The intensity of these events are projected to increase. So, if you look at a one in a 50-year heat wave. So, a heat wave we expect about one

every 50 years, what we saw back in the Middle Ages would occur 15 times more often. And we’re seeing even more extreme events.

A few years, ago and there was a heat wave in Scandinavia, and the Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute said that this was a one in

three-million-year event, which is pretty hard to wrap your head around that these events are so extreme, it’s hard for us to imagine.

SREENIVASAN: And considering that this is a global problem, this is — and that the bulk of the carbon that’s released into the air is happening from

industrialized nations, at the United Nations level or the climate conference level, what’s happening to try to mitigate some of the effects

that are disproportionately going to be felt by poor countries?

EBI: Under the United Nations framework convention on climate change are four different funds that the high-income countries put money into to help

with adaptation which is trying to do things like put in place early warning systems. Also, to help people in terms of agriculture water, a

whole range of issues. And also, to help low and middle-income countries reduce their burning of fossil fuels of oil, and gas, and coal.

One of the challenges we see in health when you look across those funds, less than half a percent of those funds of gone towards health. That the

majority of the funds have gone towards the significant challenges we’re facing with food and water security. Which is critically important. But we

also need that investment in health. And there is starting to be a shift under those adaptation funds to put more funding into the health challenges

so we don’t have people suffering and dying in heat waves.

SREENIVASAN: And now I know that the UN had cut some of the climate aid to poor countries. What kind of impact is it going to have? Because, as you

mentioned, it takes a while for $1 to translate into policy on the ground.

EBI: As you said, the low and middle-income countries, for most of them, collectively, have very low emissions of greenhouse gases. 80 percent of

our emissions come from just 20 countries. And so, these countries are coming into the convention, and very appropriately saying, we’re suffering.

In the language used under the United Nations framework convention on climate change, this is loss and damage. That they’re suffering losses and

damages. And it’s not their fault. They didn’t emit these greenhouse gases. And they are, collectively, have a strong voice. And they need to have more

funding to help them manage the kinds of crises they’re facing because of climate change that they didn’t cause.

SREENIVASAN: Do you think that there is any sort of a moment that can impress upon the richer countries, the responsibility that they have?

EBI: There’s a couple of different answers to that. First is, one of the changes I’ve seen over the last 15 years, is climate change is no longer

within a country’s ministry of environment. It’s now, all of country issue. It’s a security issue for many countries.

And so, this becomes a different kind of negotiation. And so, one hears stories about countries, like the U.S., going in talking with countries

saying, here are some goals we’d like to achieve. And the response from the country is, you need to talk to us about climate change. And so, it’s

coming in at a very different level.

The second is, it can be discouraging looking at what’s going on at the national level. And I encourage people to look sub-nationally. At all the

cities that have set their goals for adaptation and for mitigation. All that’s going on sub-nationally, all that’s going on in our businesses,

there is so much change, positive change going on. And to pay attention to that positive change and contribute to it is going to help move our

politicians at the national level further forward.

SREENIVASAN: Professor Kristie Ebi from the Univesity of Washington, thanks so much for joining us.

EBI: Thank you very much for covering this.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: And finally, tonight, letting nature do its thing. That’s the strategy of Riverside Park in New York City. 20 goats have been introduced

to munch on weeds that have invaded the area. Usually, this would require chemical sprays. But in a much more nature-friendly way, the hungry goats

are happily eating up the weeds, even those that are poisonous to humans. They’re also particularly suited to the sloping ground, which park staff

struggled to access. The unusual visitors have attracted their fair share of spectators, and four of the goats will stay in the park for the rest of

the summer, chomping their way to a vastly improved location for everyone else.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: And that is it for now. Remember you can always catch us online, on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. Thank you for watching and goodbye

from London.