Read Full Transcript EXPAND
CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR: Hello, everyone, and welcome to “Amanpour and Company.” Here’s what’s coming up.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: Today, I’m instructing my administration to halt funding of the World Health Organization.
DR. TEDROS ADHANOM GHEBREYESUS, DIRECTOR-GENERAL, WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION: We regret the decision of the president of the United States
to order a hold in funding.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: Global outrage at America’s move to pull the plug on the World Health Organization in the midst of a pandemic. I explore the dangers with
W.H.O. adviser, Jamie Metzl.
Then and now, from leadership to U.S.-China relations, historian and author, Margaret MacMillan joins me.
Plus, Obama, Sanders, Warren. Top Democrats unite behind Joe Biden. I ask the chair of the Democratic National Committee, Tom Perez, about the
presidency and COVID-19.
And, Washington State had the first American case of the virus but early action is paying off. Lieutenant governor, Cyrus Habib, joins me.
Welcome to the program, everyone. I’m Christiane Amanpour working from home in London.
President Trump is facing an avalanche of global criticism over his decision to halt U.S. funding for the World Health Organization. That is
the U.N. body directing the global fight against coronavirus. Bill gates who is foundation is second largest funder of the W.H.O. after the U.S.
called the move “as dangerous as it sounds.”
The E.U.’s foreign policy chief says there’s “no reason for this move.” And the head of the W.H.O. himself says they are getting on with the job
despite the president’s regrettable decision. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DR. TEDROS ADHANOM GHEBREYESUS, DIRECTOR-GENERAL, WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION: This is a time for all of us to be united in our common
struggle against a common threat, a dangerous enemy. When we’re divided, the virus exploits the cracks between us.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: President Trump is accusing this U.N. agency of buying into Beijing’s handling of the outbreak amid its lack of transparency in the
early days after the disease emerged in Wuhan. But Trump himself first called COVID-19 a hoax. And in January, Trump praised China’s efforts and
transparency and thanked President Xi Jinping.
Joining me now from New York to discuss the ramifications of this decision is Jamie Metzl. He is a member of the W.H.O.’s advisory committee and he’s
the author of “Hacking Darwin: Genetic Engineering and the Future of Humanity.”
Jamie Metzl, welcome to the program.
You are well placed to be able to drill down on what this decision means. First of all, just your reaction when you heard President Trump carry
through with his threat which kind of emerged last week to defund the W.H.O.
JAMIE METZL, ADVISER, WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION: Well, it is heart breaking and it should be heart breaking for every American and every
human. The W.H.O. is not perfect. It certainly has made mistakes, it made mistakes in the beginning of this crisis. But we need the W.H.O. now more
than ever and we need it because the virus has shown us that we’re all interconnected, we are all one humanity. And if we need to coordinate a
response, which we must, the W.H.O. is the essential body for doing that. Rather than undermining the W.H.O., we need to be working together to
strengthen it.
AMANPOUR: What do you make of the president’s saying, well, this could be for 60 days or 90 days? It’s almost like, you know, he’s smacking an
organization that he doesn’t like on the wrist, you know, like a naughty child or something. But how much damage resource-wise and funding-wise will
even a halt for a period of two to three months take? What kind of a toll will it take?
METZL: Well, it depends on what kind of adaptations the organization may be able to make to keep essential processes going. I would imagine there
could be credit facilities and the rest of the world, probably even China, will provide that kind of credit. So, the first issue is just funding
essential activities now.
But the second issue is equally important and that is we need to be not only delivering the message, we need to be building the foundations of a
collaborative global response to this pandemic, and the W.H.O. has to be part of that and all sovereign entities need to be part of that and that’s
why the W.H.O. and — can’t exclude the entities — countries like Taiwan in this process. This is one humanity.
AMANPOUR: Right.
METZL: We have to get over our restrictions and come together to solve this common problem.
AMANPOUR: OK. So, you just mentioned Taiwan and this drills down and this kind of exemplifies, illustrates this current issue. President Trump
attaches the W.H.O. to China. He’s basically saying W.H.O. was the vehicle for China’s early lack of transparency and the W.H.O., for instance, never
mentioned Taiwan. As we know, China, you know, doesn’t recognize Taiwan and the W.H.O. is part of the U.N. It’s really complicated.
So, what is actually kind of the parameters within which the W.H.O. can work? Is it in hoc to China? Is it an independent body? Describe for
people, what is the situation?
METZL: And that’s really a big part of the problem. And forgive me for a little bit of history, but the W.H.O. created in 1948 to play just the kind
of role that it needs to play now. It’s been politicized not just by China but also by other states. And China has actively played politics with the
W.H.O. and fought actively to keep Taiwan out. And that’s really hurt everybody, not just the people of Taiwan, but because we’re all
interconnected, that hurts everybody.
And so, China has played politics with W.H.O. The United States is now playing politics with the W.H.O. We need to get over this because we need
the W.H.O. We need to fix it. We need to strengthen it. And that means maybe a little more independence. It means a having the kind of global
surveillance networks that the W.H.O. needs. Having the authority to send emergency response teams to crisis spots.
China — it is unconscionable that China kept W.H.O. experts out of the country for more than a month. So, there’s a major problem with China.
There was a massive and disastrous cover-up. W.H.O. should have done better. The United States absolutely could have and should have done
better. There’s a lot of fingers to point. We should be pointing fingers now but in a constructive way that raises the question, what went wrong and
how can we fix it? Because for all we know there’s another pandemic that could emerge before we have solved this one.
AMANPOUR: So, in your view, Jamie Metzl, as an expert advisory to the W.H.O., what is the biggest problem with this pandemic that potentially the
W.H.O. transmitted because of China’s lack of transparency? For instance, one of these — the W.H.O. tweeted in January 14th, preliminary
investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human to human transmission of the novel coronavirus identified
in Wuhan, China.
Now, we all know that local doctors there were raising the alarm and they were fined or fired. And we also know that that language is a little bit
like the Chinese official language. Give us your take on that.
METZL: Yes. As I said, the W.H.O. was way too trusting of bad information coming out of China and I think they were, in some ways, inadvertently
perhaps complicit in the misinformation that China was very, very dangerously spreading early on in this process but we have to get under
that question and say, why? And that’s because the W.H.O. doesn’t have the mandate to go and send emergency teams to collect information where it
needs to be collected. So, they were reliant on the Chinese authorities.
The W.H.O. relies on countries for most of its budget and that is — so they have to play politics. And just the selection of the head of the
W.H.O. is part of big power politics. And so, if we don’t want that to be the case and we shouldn’t want than to the case, we have to say, how do we
fix it? And we need a stronger W.H.O. But even this W.H.O. could have been much more aggressive in criticizing some of the statements that were coming
out of China, there were a lot of very aggressive behaviors that many people think were violative of human rights and the W.H.O. didn’t say
anything about that. When W.H.O. teams were denied access into China, the W.H.O. could have been more aggressive and more vociferous in saying, hey,
this is a big problem, and that — those are the things that we need to fix and we need fix them now.
AMANPOUR: Can I ask you, and that is not going to be a popular question and it’s not to indicate any equivalency or whatever, but clearly,
everybody is saying and reminding that President Trump himself was early on, first of all, called it a hoax, the whole coronavirus, but then, he was
actually surprisingly conciliatory and praising of Xi Jinping. I mean, this is what he said, for instance, on January 24th. China’ has been working
hard to contain the coronavirus. The United States greatly appreciates their efforts and transparency. It will all work out well. In particular,
on behalf of the American people, I want to thank President Xi Jinping.
And, you know, he said a lot of things in those early days, lavishing praise on him. By February 7th, saying that, you know, he is a strong,
sharp, powerfully focused, great disciplined is taking place in China. President Xi strongly leads a very successful operation. I mean, on and on
and on. I mean, you know, how do you assess that?
METZL: You know, it should be obvious to pretty much everybody that what we’re seeing is a cover-up. Certainly, the W.H.O. was not perfect but there
were entities, I mentioned Taiwan. Taiwan, Singapore, South Korea, they acted very, very quickly with all of the same information and reports from
U.S. intelligence, President Trump chose to actively, in many ways, spread disinformation like the type that you mentioned.
This will be seen as one of the great failures of leadership in all of American history. And what President Trump is trying to do is rewrite
history. Just like the Chinese communist party is also trying to do the same and to cover-up the terrible inaction in the beginning, the Trump
administration is doing the same and trying to divert attention.
It is not coincidental that there was the big “New York Times” story over the weekend about all of the failures and missteps and then, we had a very
unhinged press conference at the White House and now this. I mean, there is a big story to be told. It has to be told. There are failures by China, by
the W.H.O., by the United States and others. Pointing fingers wildly and cutting off funding isn’t going to help but we have to get to the base of
the problem of how our systems failed and we have to fix those problems.
AMANPOUR: Well, let me ask you that because, I mean, you have used the word cover-up to discuss what the U.S. has done, what China has done, et
cetera, and these are pretty strong words. And I want to read you a tweet by Brett McGurk, who as you know, is a long-time diplomat. He was the point
man for the fight against ISIS for several administrations. March 8th, he said, Trump says the coronavirus came out of nowhere. But last year, the
DNI warned that we were vulnerable to a pandemic that could lead to massive rates of death and disability. Severely affect the world economy, strain
international resources. You know, this pandemic playbook, as we have seen and we interviewed the person who wrote it, was ditched by the
administration.
METZL: Absolutely. So, we had lots and lots of warnings by the Intelligence Community. In an earlier life, I was on the National Security
Council and my then boss, Richard Clarke, he did all kinds of work on this. So, we’ve had warnings for years. But forget even the warnings, early in
this year, in January, we had actual reports of this virus and all of its dangers. And even then, meaningful action — insufficient action was taken.
And so, we really need to — we need to look at this because we have warnings. And frankly, there’s a bigger issue because we could be having
this exact same conversation if it wasn’t a global pandemic but let’s say some kind of nuclear device went off and, you know, forbid — I hope this
obviously never happens. But in New York where I am or London where you are or Beijing, we’d say, we had all of these warnings, why didn’t we do
anything?
And that’s why there’s a bigger structural problem of a mismatch between these huge existential threat that is we face as a common humanity and how
we’re organized as countries who are fighting for their own little piece of the globe and we have to address that bigger issue or else we’ll be having
this exact same conversation in some other context.
AMANPOUR: Well, I want to ask you about this and I want to, by way of illustration, play what Bill Gates said in the kind of warning that you are
talking about right now in a TED Talk in 2015. He raised the comparison between pandemic and nuclear war and all the rest of it. And, of course,
Bill Gates is second biggest funder after the U.S. to the W.H.O. and he called Trump’s move as dangerous as it sounds today. And this is what he
said in 2015.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BILL GATES, FOUNDER, BILL AND MELINDA GATES FOUNDATION: If anything kills over 10 million people in the next few decades, it’s most likely to be a
highly infectious virus rather than a war. Not missiles but microbes. Now, part of the reason for this is that we have invested a huge amount in
nuclear deterrence. But we have actually invested very little in a system to stop an epidemic. We’re not ready for the next epidemic.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: Well, Jamie Metzl, apparently not ready or not ready and willing to read the playbook for this epidemic. And so, I want to ask from your
perspective as an expert on the advisory body for the W.H.O. and all of your other experience, what is it going to take? Because it is not about
not being ready. The playbook’s there. The mechanisms are there. They weren’t used.
So, what is it going to take to get your country, the United States, to be more proactive the next time? And you have heard Dr. Tedros of the W.H.O.
say, don’t to politicize COVID, that will just increase the number of body bags.
METZL: So, for sure we need a much bet stronger, better resourced and less politicized on all accounts World Health Organization, even though the
World Health Organization that we have now is doing a great job. Not perfect but great.
But for the United States and for all of our countries, we need to — first, we have to have surveillance systems at home and abroad. We also
need to think differently about how we address this whole category of problems. We have a military and there’s some kind of war or whatever. We
don’t demobilize the entire military. We have a standing military capacity that is doing surveillance, that is doing training, that is developing
capabilities. We have this big ramp-up that we’re seeing the world over now.
But if at the end of this, when we will get to an end of this, whether it’s a year from now, two years from now, who knows? Once we have a vaccine
that’s distributed and people are feeling safer, the danger is we’re going to fully demobilize and then have to start from close to zero as we’re
doing now. And so, what we need to have is an ongoing capability that recognizes that this — the threat of global pandemics, just like climate
change, destruction of our ecosystems, these are ongoing threats, and if we don’t organize nationally and internationally to address them in a
collective and ongoing way, we’ll just be back to different versions of this conversation and we can’t live that way.
AMANPOUR: Well, exactly. And that’s why I think this is such an important baseline to potentially reset and try to figure out how the world deals
with the next big threat no matter what it is.
Jamie Metzl, thank you so much, indeed, for joining us.
METZL: My great pleasure.
AMANPOUR: So, how does the world learn from this and how will history record this period? What can it teach us about where we are and what sort
of a world will emerge — we’ll emerge into? The eminent historian and professor emeritus of Oxford University, Margaret MacMillan joins me. She’s
also written extensive of U.S.-China relations.
Margaret MacMillan, welcome to the program.
I know you are in Oxford in quarantine or lockdown like everybody else is. You just heard Jamie Metzl talk about, you know, what we’re confronted with
right now and whether we’re ready. I just want to ask you first because you have written about U.S.-China relations, just to react, for instance, to
what’s happened. But Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut, he tweeted, China has too much influence at the W.H.O. So, we pull funding from the W.H.O.
Giving China more influence at the W.H.O. Smart. What do you make of this current crisis?
MARGARET MACMILLAN, HISTORIAN AND AUTHOR: I think it’s putting under strain a relation that was already under strain between the United States
and China. And I found what Jamie Metzl said was very sobering indeed, because I think we are showing ourselves, at the moment at least, not very
good at working internationally on an international problem.
The relationship between the United States and China is probably the key relationship for the next decades. It’s important because the United States
remains the world’s biggest power including military power and China is a major regional power, growing very fast. And if these two countries can’t
work together, it doesn’t mean they have to be friends, but if they can’t work together and if they can’t cooperate together, then the rest of us
really feel the chill.
AMANPOUR: So, I mean, look. Leaders use whatever’s at their disposal to, you know, as you heard Jamie Metzl say cover-up, others say, you know,
deflect from perceptions of failure over this, others say it’s just like a big campaign rally. To that, there is a poll in the United States that says
as — it’s the Harris Poll, which says, 90 percent of Republicans and 67 percent of Democrats believe the Chinese government is responsible for the
virus spreading.
What does one do when you’re trying to have an adult global reaction and relationship to fighting this or any kind of massive global problem, but
then you’re ceding your people with the kind of distrust?
MACMILLAN: Well, that’s a danger, I think. And, of course, the Chinese, I think, handled the outbreak badly. We know that. They covered up. They let
it get grouped in Wuhan and elsewhere much too much and they were not cooperative initially, but they did swing around and they did cooperate
with the W.H.O. and they did begin to cooperate internationally and share information. I think we need to remember that.
I think the issue really is, is one of leadership. If you have leaders who are telling their people that the enemy is over there and the enemy is to
blame for everything, in this case, President Trump blaming all this on China, I think that’s when you get into trouble. And I think it’s a natural
human thing to look for something or someone to blame. I mean, we look for scapegoats. And China’s becoming a handy scapegoat. Immigrants in previous
epidemics have been handy scapegoats. And that’s where, I think, leaders have to fight back against. I mean, leaders are not there just to listen.
They (INAUDIBLE) their instincts of their people. They are there to actually try and call them to reason.
AMANPOUR: You know, I wanted to talk about leadership with you and I wonder whether you have had a chance to sort of evaluate and think about
who you think has emerged as, you know, a responsible or admirable leader in this. You know, there was a very interesting little meme going around.
There was, you know, a graphic showing Angela Merkel, the New Zealand prime minister, Jacinda Ardern, the Norwegian prime minister, Erna Solberg, the
Danish prime minister, a number of women whose countries seem to be doing amongst the best because of the decisions they took. I just wonder what you
— where do you see leadership?
MACMILLAN: Well, I think I see them in those countries and I would add South Korea, as well. And I think what we’re also seeing is that it really
(INAUDIBLE) and not just that you have leaders who will make decisions and who will talk openly to their people about what the issues are, but you
have citizens who trust their own governments. And when citizens trust the governments, then they will do things which seem unreasonable, perhaps
difficult.
You know, in Britain, we more or less trust the government here and so, we’ve stayed inside. We haven’t gone out into the parks. We haven’t done
things that were not meant to do. And I think trust is enormously important. I mean, Sweden is going down a rather interesting road of not
doing a complete lockdown because and that’s because, by and large, the Swedish people trust their government institutions and trust the government
and its advisers knows what it’s doing. And when you have societies where people don’t trust their leaders, then, I think, we get into real trouble.
AMANPOUR: I mean, some of Sweden’s statistics do show that their infections and deaths are higher than some of their neighbors, but I
understand what you’re saying, they did rely on that social compact with people.
But when it comes to trust and leadership, as you know very well, the prime minister of this country, Boris Johnson, was taken ill. He was taken to
hospital. He was then taken to the ICU. Now, he is out. But in his video message afterwards he said, thanking the NHS, that it could have gone
either way. That’s pretty dire. I mean, he actually said, it could have gone either way.
The whole time the government was telling us he was in great spirits. He was interacting, you know, with the nurses and there’s been a pretty big
backlash about the way they described his condition. Can you talk about that? But also, compare it to your own great, great grandfather or great
grandfather, David Lloyd George, who was prime minister and ill during the Spanish influenza of 1918?
MACMILLAN: Well, in the case of Lloyd George, he was prime minister. He was fighting an election campaign in November, December 1918, and he may or
may not have had the Spanish influenza. He was sick and he had to be put into isolation in Birmingham where he was, Birmingham or Manchester, I
think. We’re not sure. But I think there were enough government officials and the cabinet was strong enough that government could continue even
though he was locked up.
Boris Johnson, I think has suffered — well, of course, he suffered through the illness and I think everyone is very relieved he came through. But I
think the government will pay a penalty for not being honest at first and I think they are also paying a penalty for not seeming to know what to do
when the virus began to hit the U.K.
What I think has made a difference in Britain is that people trust things beyond the government. They tend to trust the civil service and above all,
they trust the National Health Service. And there’s this extraordinary statistic when the National Health Service asked for volunteers, they were
overwhelmed. I think they got something like 750,000 volunteers in the first 24 hours. So, I think it’s not just a question of trusting a
particular leader, it’s trusting the institutions and the organizations that surround that leader and trusting your fellow citizens as well.
AMANPOUR: And I’ve heard people talk about, you know, the necessity in times like this of leaders being able to inspire and lift morale, to be
able to inspire and lift the idea of hope. And I wonder — because you’re also Canadian, you have seen a very different reaction in Canada and in the
United States. Two federal systems, as you have described it. A much, much less infection, much less catastrophe in Canada just north of the border.
Can you try to sum up why you think that’s happened?
MACMILLAN: I’ve been trying to work it out myself. I mean, because, in fact, when the virus began to hit in Canada, the liberal government was not
all that popular. And Justin Trudeau, the prime minister’s ratings were not that great. They have gone up as have the ratings and approval ratings of
the prevention premiers.
And I think one of the differences, and I’ve been reflecting on it, is that in the United States you have a federalism which a lot of people don’t
really accept and you have people who don’t really trust the federal government in Washington. I suppose that goes back to the founding of the
United States, but perhaps also it goes back to the civil war and the whole stress on states’ rights and mistrust of government.
In Canada, we have a federal system but it’s tightly bound by shared values and norms and by political parties which tend to be national. And we tend
to see in Canada provinces working very closely with the federal government. I mean, there are times when they call each other names. But I
think we have a much closer type of federalism than you do in the United States, and I think it’s coming out at the moment.
I mean, although the premier of my own province, Ontario, is a conservative, he is working very closely with the liberal government
(INAUDIBLE), and that’s true of premiers right across country. And we also, of course, have public health and socialized medicine. I think that’s made
a difference because we have had a capacity in each province to respond to the challenge. We haven’t got enough equipment, nobody does, but I think we
are better off than many parts of the United States because we have public standards across Canada for the sort of treatment people should be having,
sort of equipment and provisions that hospitals should have.
AMANPOUR: And crucially, Margaret MacMillan, Canada clearly affected by SARS. SARS came and hit Canada in 2003. And clearly, they actually did take
lessons from it. They did write their own pandemic playbook and followed it this time.
MACMILLAN: Yes. I think we did learn from that. I mean, I was in Toronto when it hit, and the city was shut down, not as much as it is now, but
quite shocking to us. And I think we realized and I think we — we’re right to realize that we live in a very globalized world. Canada has a great many
immigrants, great many people going to see families, families coming to see them. We’re very much, like most countries in this world, linked in to a
global community. And so, we know that we cannot keep ourselves safe. There are draw bridges we can pull up.
If there is a virus, a pandemic out there, it’s going to come sooner or later. And it’s no point in trying to find people or countries to blame for
that. These are things that ignore borders. Viruses don’t stop borders.
AMANPOUR: I want ask you who what you think and how you think we’re going to emerge from this. I want to just quote a little bit of a poem that did
rounds on online. Poet by the name of Kitty O’Meara. She wrote it in March, so last month. And part of it says, and the people stayed home and they
read books and listened. And when the danger passed and the people joined together again, they grieved their losses and made new choices and dreamed
new images and created new ways to live and heal the earth fully as they had been healed.
That would be lovely. Do you see — I mean, is a pandemic historically a great resitter (ph)? Can you see climate, justice, inequality, I mean,
neighborhood, you know, lack of xenophobia — I mean, can you see the big issues somehow, you know, being reimagined?
MACMILLAN: I can. And I think there are really two things. One is that sometimes it takes a real catastrophe and it could be a war, it could be an
epidemic, it could be a national disaster, it could be a financial crash to make us realize just how much we depend on each other and makes us realize
what’s wrong and what’s right in our societies, and it does.
I think a catastrophe does force us to rethink things that we have been doing and we’ve already, I think, even before 2020, we were thinking that
not all was well in our societies. I think we were concerned about growing inequality. We were concerned about the strains within societies. We were
concerned about the feelings that people had that they were being marginalized and left out.
And I think if anything good comes out of this catastrophe, and it is, I think, a catastrophe, it will be that we will look more seriously at some
of the things that we knew or half knew were already wrong in our societies. And what I hope is we’ll also look at the international order
because we live on what is not a very big planet and it’s increasingly linked. What happens in one part of it affects what happens in other parts.
And I think we need to reflect again on what international institutions we have, including the WHO, but all the many others we have, and to make them
stronger, not to destroy them, because, in the end, we’re all in the same boat. And that is what really worries me.
You can’t put up barriers among some of the things that — like epidemics. And we have to work together. And so I’m hoping that, for all the rhetoric
that is flying around at the moment — some of it is really dispiriting — but I’m hoping that enough people around the will say, look, this isn’t
working, and we have got to work together, because, otherwise, we’re all really going to be sunk.
CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR: Yes, indeed. Let us hope.
Margaret MacMillan, thank you very much for joining us this evening.
Now, some of that, some of changing the world, revolves around elections, right? Elections do matter.
So, as criticism of President Trump mounts, the Democratic Party is putting on a united front. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi launched a blistering attack
on Tuesday, saying that Trump is causing unnecessary deaths and an economic disaster.
Senator Elizabeth Warren has now joined President Obama and Senator Bernie Sanders endorsing Democratic nominee Joe Biden. Obama focused on leadership
skills, saying his former V.P. has what it takes to deal with this pandemic.
Tom Perez is chair of the Democratic National Committee, and he’s joining me now.
Welcome to the program, Tom Perez.
And I want to just start by asking you, I guess, you know, what — this idea that the Democratic Party is now really united, how is that going to
play out in a situation where campaigning, fund-raising, all of that is so difficult to achieve in a quarantined world?
TOM PEREZ, DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN: I really believe, Christiane, that our unity has always been our greatest strength and Donald
Trump’s worst nightmare.
And look at where we are right now in the presidential race. We had roughly two dozen candidates get in the race. Every single one of them said, I’m in
it to win it, and, if I don’t win it, I will support the nominee.
And that’s exactly what has happened now, everybody coming together around our presumptive front-runner nominee, Joe Biden.
And the unity of values that we are showing — I applaud Senator Sanders, whose strong endorsement is critical, and Senator Warren today, as you
correctly point out.
Yes, we have a global pandemic. So we are changing our tactics, but we’re not changing our goals. We have trained 8,000 digital organizers in the
last three or four weeks. We continue to do that. We continue to build up in these battleground states. We have laid a foundation that enables us to
communicate with voters.
No, we’re not knocking on doors, that’s for sure. But we’re communicating through alternative means. And the energy is out there. We just saw it in
Wisconsin earlier this week, where we scored some really important victories there.
And the momentum, I think, is on our side in very real ways. People want leadership in this country who’s looking out for them. They want competent
leadership. This president has been an abject failure. He is chronically ineffective.
He’s making matters worse by the day. People are seeing that.
AMANPOUR: Tom Perez, of course, he does — he is the president. He is an incumbent. And he has all the advantages of that, plus the daily White
House, as they call it, the bully pulpit, where he’s very prominent, and all over everybody’s television screens.
And he has — I mean, continuing this China conversation, he has put out a video, as you saw, trying to attach Joe Biden to China and trying to
portray Joe Biden as weak on China.
Now, obviously, the fact-checkers looked it up and found a lot of inaccuracies and false edits and all the rest of it all, selective editing.
But it’s happening, and it’s happening in full view of a captive audience that Trump has, but Joe Biden doesn’t.
PEREZ: Well, the thing is, every time he speaks, he puts his foot in his mouth. He has violated every principle of crisis management.
You speak clearly. You speak compassionately. You speak accurately. He says, I am in charge, I can do anything I want, something like that, the
other day.
That is chronically inaccurate. He says, this is under control. We still don’t have enough PPE. We are nowhere near the rest of the world on
testing.
And let me get to the China question, Christiane, because it’s really important. The chronic failure of this administration to act during the
months of January and February and early March have wreaked havoc on the United States.
And what is increasingly clear is that one of the reasons he was reluctant to act in January is, they were negotiating a trade agreement with China.
He didn’t want to offend China.
He actually spoke glowingly of China in January, because that trade agreement trumped all of the concerns about the pandemic that had found its
ways — its way to our shore.
So, when you’re talking about who was soft on China, it was this president’s pursuit of this trade agreement that blinded him to the
pandemic that was being — that was arriving on our shores that he had been warned about repeatedly.
And, as Speaker Pelosi correctly pointed out, the failure to act promptly has resulted in loss of lives, absolutely, tragically, preventably.
AMANPOUR: And, of course, Joe Biden’s team, you all point out that he actually did take quite a firm hand in terms of leadership and how he would
deal with the Chinese leadership during one of the last Democratic debates. That was on February 25.
We’re just going to play this excerpt.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOSEPH BIDEN (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: And here’s the deal. I would be on the phone with China and making it clear, we are going to need to be in
your country. You have to be open. You have to be clear. We have to know what’s going on.
We have to be there with you and insist on it and insist, insist, insist.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: So, Joe Perez — sorry — Tom Perez.
PEREZ: Yes.
(CROSSTALK)
AMANPOUR: This goes to the leadership issue.
And, well, you can comment on that. And then I want to play something that President Obama said about this during his endorsement.
PEREZ: Sure. Sure.
Christiane, I had the privilege of having a front-row seat to governance, as the labor secretary in the United States and, before that, leading the
Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department.
I saw Joe Biden firsthand. I worked with him firsthand. One of the many reasons why Joe Biden is going to win in November is, he can restore the
global respect for the United States. He understands China. He has met more with Xi than Trump has. He knows what to do with China.
He knows how to bring the world together. He has done it. He knows all of these world leaders on a first-name basis. The global community is
absolutely waiting for leadership to return in the United States.
That is Joe Biden. I have seen it front, close and personal, and I know he is going to do a spectacular job.
AMANPOUR: So let me just play this little bit of a sound bite from President Obama’s endorsement now, because I want to talk about the content
of what he’s just saying here.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARACK OBAMA, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Joe has the character and the experience to guide us through one of our darkest times and heal us
through a long recovery.
And I know he will surround himself with good people, experts, scientists, military officials, who actually know how to run the government, and care
about doing a good job running the government.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: So, look, you have just said it about restoring respect, et cetera. President Obama is alluding to the fact that it’s a known leader
needed in a time of national and international crisis.
But, as you know, people like Senator Sanders, Senator Warren, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, they want more. It’s not about just going back to the status
quo ante of the Democratic Party. They want a lot more in the progressive vein that they brought millions of people out during the campaign.
So where does — what’s going to happen in that regard?
PEREZ: And Joe Biden wants more too.
And, again, I worked with him, had a front-row seat. Joe Biden is a dreamer and a doer. He dreams an America where everybody has access to health care.
And he has a very aggressive plan to build upon the Affordable Care Act and get us to the point where every single person in this country has access to
quality, affordable health care.
Joe Biden has a plan. And he’s worked very closely with Senator Sanders to ensure college affordability. He’s been a good listener to folks. He
understands that income quality is one of the abiding challenges of our time.
And what happens during a recession — And this may be more than a recession — is that recessions exacerbate inequality, because the folks
who are already struggling end up bearing the brunt of this. And Joe Biden understands the people who’ve been suffering.
And that is why Joe Biden isn’t looking to return us to something of yesterday. He is working to return us to the values that have always
inspired us, the values of inclusion and opportunity, but he knows that we must do better.
This isn’t simply a third term of Barack Obama. This is about moving forward and building on successes we have had, but continuing the bold
movement forward on paid leave, on college affordability, on health care, on national security, on preparedness, all of these things.
A dreamer and a doer, that’s the Joe Biden I know.
AMANPOUR: Just very quickly, the stats show that people under 45, the millennials, the AOC supporters and Bernie bros and all the rest of it, are
still not getting on board.
What are you going to have to do to convince them? What is he going to have to do to convince them?
PEREZ: Well, we’re working hard to earn every vote.
And, actually, when you look at the polling, the exit polling from all of the primaries early on, especially on Super Tuesday, which was the first
Tuesday in March, overwhelming numbers of Democrats, even though they were supporting a host of different candidates, said, we’re going to come
together and support whoever our nominee is, Senator Sanders’ full-throated endorsement of the vice president, Senator Warren.
And we will work to earn the support of people like Congresswoman Ocasio- Cortez, who is such an important part of our coalition. We’re building this coalition everywhere. And we will work with everyone.
AMANPOUR: And I need to ask you this, obviously, because it’s a story in newspapers, on the AP, allegations by a woman called Tara Reade, who
accuses the vice president of sexual assault in the ’90s, when she worked in the Senate office.
Obviously, the campaign is denying it. What and how are you going to deal with these allegations, particularly in our MeToo world?
PEREZ: Well, listen, every time somebody makes an allegation of this nature, they should be taken seriously. They should be treated with
respect. And the vice president and his team have said exactly that.
And I welcome a full review of this.
At the same time, I have known this vice president now for 25 years. I know the work he has done on things like the Violence Against Women Act. I have
seen the work he has done to make sure that everybody, every woman in this country, every person in this country is treated with respect and dignity.
He has denied these allegations very, very vigorously. And, frankly, I believe him. I know the Joe Biden who has worked his tail off throughout
his career, and that’s the Joe Biden I see. And the American people will make that judgment. And I think they are going to conclude that Joe Biden
is the man of character and respect who has worked to enable women to realize the American dream in this country.
AMANPOUR: And can I ask you, finally, because this is really important for November in terms of voting, whether you might need to have a lot of
absentee ballots and a lot of — you never know what the situation is going to be in November.
So, I know the Democratic Party was kind of upset by what happened in Wisconsin. Nonetheless, you got some of the results that you want there.
But President Trump said to “FOX & Friends” on March 30 that a Democratic proposal to add funding for voting by mailing in the corona relief bill was
crazy.
He said: “They had things, levels of voting that, if you ever agreed to it, you would never have a Republican elected in this country again.”
(LAUGHTER)
AMANPOUR: You know, are you concerned about potential suppression of vote, not able to have an alternative to in-person, lining up at a polling booth?
PEREZ: Yes.
Listen, we weren’t kind of mad at what happened in Wisconsin. We were absolutely spitting nails. What happened in Wisconsin was unconscionable.
The Republicans — that was voter suppression steroids. It’s one thing to enact voter I.D. laws and voter purges.
Those are undemocratic. They’re unconstitutional. They’re unlawful. They’re un-American. It’s another thing to force people to put their own lives in
jeopardy to exercise the right to vote.
And that is why Democrats and I would note, Christiane, Republican governors, Ohio, in Iowa, New Hampshire, Republican governors in these
states and Republicans elsewhere have said that vote by mail should be a viable alternative this November.
We need to give voters choice this November. Vote — if you want to vote early, vote absentee, do that. If you want to vote at the polls or early-
vote, do that. That’s the choice we need.
AMANPOUR: Tom Perez, thank you so much indeed for joining us, chair of the DNC. Thank you very much.
And now to the state that has started returning its ventilators to the federal stockpile, Washington state. In late January, it reported the first
case of coronavirus in the United States. And the governor, Jay Inslee, early, placing restrictions on mass gatherings and later closing all
schools, bars and restaurants.
The state has more than 10,000 cases to date, but it has not been hit nearly hit nearly as hard as New York and New Jersey and some others.
Cyrus Habibi — Cyrus Habib is the lieutenant governor, and he’s joining me now.
Welcome back to the program, Lieutenant Governor.
(CROSSTALK)
AMANPOUR: I trust you are keeping well and in quarantine. And I just hope everything’s going there.
And we’re really interested in how you managed to keep the toll as low, relatively, as it has been. Just give us an idea of how that happened.
LT. GOV. CYRUS HABIB (D-WA): Well, thank you, Christiane. Good to be with you this afternoon.
And, as you mentioned, we were the first state to report a case and, sadly, also the first state to report a death in the United States. And so we did
— and I want to say that Governor Inslee really took early action, as you mentioned, was — you know, he leveled with the people of the state of
Washington, took decisive action.
And, as a result of that, what we have seen is, through our shelter-in- place order, which is stay home, stay healthy, through closing down in- person school activities, we have seen our reproduction rate for the disease down close to one, which is really, as you know, the inflection
point.
And so this is not the time to become complacent about that. But it is a time to recognize that, hopefully, we are at our peak. Hopefully we are now
going to start seeing reductions. But until we have an exit strategy for this, the governors of West Coast states are committed to making sure that
we continue to be vigilant and that we only begin the process of reopening once that’s called for.
AMANPOUR: Lieutenant Governor, I just want to remind our viewers that you are blind, and, therefore, you are wearing your sunglasses, or your special
glasses.
And it’s really poignant. No, it’s great for people to see that everybody can do anything if they put their mind to it.
And I want to ask you about the sort of potential exit strategy. Is it too early to be talking about that? Because clusters of states and clusters of
governors on the West Coast, on the East Coast are beginning to try to unite to figure out how and when they may be able to gradually move out of
lockdown and back to — back to the economic life.
HABIB: I don’t think it’s too early to be thinking about it and planning for it, and doing so in a collective fashion, in a strategic fashion.
When you talk about these three West Coast states — and we hope that others will also come together with us — you’re talking about a pretty
sizable percentage of the American population.
And so it is important that we start to think about it. But what it will take is, we know — and I know that you have experts who come on your show
who have talked about this — we know that testing, we know that contact tracing, and, ultimately, scientific research into a vaccine and/or a cure
are going to be essential.
And we also know that we may have multiple rounds of this. So, I do think it’s important to level with the — with my constituents and with the
American people to say, this is not — just because we’re planning this doesn’t mean that things are going to go back to normal in May.
We have not seen the indications that would suggest that things are going to go back to normal in the very near future. And, in some ways, even when
we do start to let up on these executive orders, we know that things aren’t going to be perfectly the same for a long time, just because — certainly
until we find a vaccine or cure.
AMANPOUR: And testing as well as is really lagging behind. And I know there’s a big call for that, and supplies and things.
And, of course, there is this big hullabaloo between the president and governors, who has the executive authority to call any number of things?
So, I want to ask you, because there is a report on NPR that your governor, Jay Inslee, on a conversation, on a phone conversation with the president
was asking him about ramping up — using his authority to ramp up the production and the delivery of medical supplies.
And, in response, President Trump apparently said, the federal government serves as a backup. And, apparently, Governor Inslee said, I don’t want you
to be the backup quarterback. We need you to be Tom Brady here, that they needed — the federal government needs to put all its weight behind it.
Is that a fair description of the conversation, would you say?
HABIB: I wasn’t on the call.
That’s how Governor Inslee has described it. And he joked that he would have said Russell Wilson, our hometown quarterback, except there’s there’s
no way anyone…
(CROSSTALK)
(LAUGHTER)
HABIB: But, look, there’s a real irony that, on one hand, you have President Trump, when it comes to showing leadership, really saying, I’m
going to lead from behind, and this isn’t really my problem, and governors should do what they have got to do, and then, on the other hand, this week
really making claims that are not rooted in the Constitution about how he can dictate to states how they’re going to respond.
I think that for your viewers all over the world, I think this is a portrait of both the good and the bad of a federal system of government,
which means that the good news is that, when you have a federal administration that is delinquent, that doesn’t mean that all is lost.
And you can have Governor Inslee, Governor Cuomo, Governor Newsom and others taking really important actions that have saved hundreds of
thousands, maybe even millions of lives.
But on the flip side of it, it is also a federal system that always anticipated cooperation with our federal partners. I don’t think that, even
under the worst kind of game theory 200 years ago, they thought of a president who would use press conferences to brag about his approval rating
and his TV viewership numbers while there are tens of thousands of Americans who have died.
AMANPOUR: Lieutenant Governor, I want to ask you a final question, and it’s a personal question.
Your political career has been stellar. You have won all your races, all the local races in your state. You are a sure bet for reelection. But you
have decided, you announced last month, not to do that and not to continue in politics as we know it, but maybe to try to make the world a better
place and coming out of this coronavirus.
You have decided to go into a religious order, the Jesuit order. Tell me about that. How did that come about? Why?
HABIB: Yes.
And, well, it’s — I should say, it’s — one might think that it relates to what we’re going through now. And while there certainly is some resonance
and some poignancy to the timing of this, this was a decision that was made before this all began.
I applied and was accepted into the order, into the society last year. And, really, what it comes down to is that I have deep respect for politics and
for the people who do it. And I have been — it’s been a real honor to serve in the legislature as lieutenant governor and to fill in as acting
governor while Jay Inslee was running for president.
But, over the past few years, I have really come to believe that this is not bringing me the truest form of joy. And, as I began the process of
discerning — and, as a Catholic, I did that through the lens of faith — what would bring me a deeper sense of joy, I realized that I can continue
my public service, but in a different way.
And I can do that, and I want to do that, I’m drawn and attracted and called to do that, within the church, by ministering to others directly,
working with those on the margins, the homeless, immigrant and refugee populations, and doing it in the name of the — in the name of my spiritual
and religious tradition and bringing people consolation and solace and, also, I should say, some healing, which, if we’re going to solve problems
like COVID-19, I think we could have use some greater perspective and come together in our political realm as well.
AMANPOUR: Service is service.
Lieutenant Governor Cyrus Habibi, thank you very much indeed for joining us.
Cyrus Habib. I keep wanting to say it in a different way.
Lieutenant Governor Cyrus Habib, thank you so much, indeed, for joining us.
HABIB: Thank you. A pleasure.
AMANPOUR: And, finally, yesterday, we told you about a different kind of service.
We told you about Captain Tom Moore, than 99-year-old British war veteran who raised three million pound sterling for the NHS doing, as you can see,
100 laps of his back garden on his Zimmer frame, no less.
Well, overnight, Captain Moore has raised that to a whopping eight million pounds, with donations still coming in.
It is truly an amazing story. It’s an amazing feat, and it’s heartwarming.
And that’s it for our program tonight. Remember, you can always follow the show on Twitter. Thanks for watching, and we will see you again tomorrow night.
END