>>> HELLO, EVERYONE.

AND WELCOME TO AMANPOUR AND COMPANY.

HERE'S WHAT'S COMING UP.

WHEN FRIENDS BECOME FOES.

CANADIANS ARE FUMING AFTER BEING HIT BY TRUMP TARIFFS.

I SPEAK TO FOREIGN MINISTER, AND UKRAINIANS ARE WORRIED ABOUT SURVIVAL.

AFTER TRUMP CUTS THEM LOOSE.

FORMER DEFENSE MINISTER JOINS ME FROM KYIV.

>> THEN, A PARTNERSHIP FOR PEACE, ACTIVISTS BRIDGE THE DIVIDE AND TELL ME WHY THEY BELIEVE IN A DIFFERENT KIND OF TWO-STATE SOLUTION FOR THE MIDDLE EAST.

PLUS, MAGA AND THE MEDIA.

JOURNALISM PROFESSOR FRANK SES NO TALKS TO MICHEL MARTIN ABOUT HOLDING POWER TO ACCOUNT IN THIS SECOND TRUMP TERM.

>>> AMANPOUR AND COMPANY IS MADE POSSIBLE BY THE ANDERSON FAMILY ENDOWMENT.

JIM ATWOOD AND LESLIE WILLIAMS, CANDICE KING WEIR, THE SYLVIA A.

AND SIMON B.POYTEC ENDOWMENT TO FIGHT ANTI-SEMITISM.

THE FAMILY FOUNDATION OF LEILA AND MICKEY STRAUSS.

MARK J.BLESCHNER.

SETON J. MILLMAN, AND JOAN GANTS COONEY FUND.

CHARLES ROSEN BLUM, COMMITTED TO BRIDGING CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN OUR COMMUNITIES.

BARBARA HOPE ZUCKERBERG.

JEFFREY KATZ AND BETH ROGERS AND BY CONTRIBUTIONS TO YOUR PBS STATION FROM VIEWERS LIKE YOU.

THANK YOU.

>>> WELCOME TO THE PROGRAM, EVERYONE.

I'M CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR IN LONDON.

THERE ARE NO TWO WAYS ABOUT IT.

THIS IS SEEN AS THE END OF AN ERA, BY TOP EUROPEAN LEADERS WHO HAVE BEEN MEETING TODAY IN BRUSSELS WITH PRESIDENT ZELENSKYY FOR A SPECIAL SUMMIT ON DEFENSE.

THEY ARE ALL DIGGING DEEP TO REPLACE THE UNITED STATES.

WHICH HAS PAUSED ITS KYIV FOR SURVIVAL.

HERE'S URSELA BLUNTLY LYING OUT THE STAKES.

>> THIS IS A WATERSHED MOMENT FOR EUROPE.

AND UKRAINE IS PART OF OUR EUROPEAN FAMILY.

IT'S ALSO A WATERSHED MOMENT FOR UKRAINE.

EUROPE FACES A CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER.

>> IN A MOMENT, I SPEAK TO UKRAINE'S FORMER DEFENSE MINISTER.

FIRST, TO TRUMP'S ON AGAIN/OFF AGAIN TARIFFS WITH CANADA AND MEXICO THAT WOULD HURT ORDINARY CONSUMERS IN ALL COUNTRIES AS WELL AS THE ECONOMY.

THE BACKLASH IS REAL, CANADIAN STORE OWNERS ARE TAKING AMERICAN PRODUCTS OFF SHELVES.

SPORTS FANS ARE EVEN BOOING THE AMERICAN NATIONAL ANTHEM.

CANADIANS ARE ALSO OUTRAGED BY TRUMP'S REPEATED TAUNT TO MAKE THEIR COUNTRY THE 51st STATE.

AND THERE ARE EVEN REPORTS THE U.S. MIGHT KICK CANADA OUT OF THE FIVE Is SECURITY INTELLIGENCE ALLIANCE.

IF THIS IS HOW TRUMP TREATS ITS ALLIES, HEAVEN HELP ITS ADVERSARIES, BUT WAIT, ACTUALLY, AS PRIME MINISTER TRUDEAU POINTS OUT, TRUMP IS TREATING THE MURDEROUS DICTATOR VLADIMIR PUTIN VERY NICELY.

CANADIAN FOREIGN MINISTER JOINS US NOW FROM TORONTO.

FOREIGN MINISTER, WELCOME TO THE PROGRAM.

CAN I FIRST START WITH WHAT IS DIRECTLY HITTING YOUR COUNTRY?

IT IS, I THINK, YOUR PRIME MINISTER SAID A TRADE WAR.

THE U.S. HAS LAUNCHED A TRADE WAR.

CAN YOU TELL ME HOW THIS IS AFFECTING YOU, AND DID YOU EVER EXPECT YOUR CLOSEST, YOU KNOW, ALLY WITH A 5,000-MILE BORDER TO GET INTO THIS KIND OF FIGHT WITH YOU?

>> THIS IS COMPLETELY UNJUSTIFIED AND UNJUSTIFIABLE COMING FROM THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION.

CANADA IS THE BIGGEST TRADING PARTNER TO THE U.S. WE'RE THE BIGGEST CLIENT.

WE BUY MORE FROM AMERICAN BUSINESSES THAN THE UK, FRANCE, CHINA, AND JAPAN COMBINED.

SO WHEN PRESIDENT TRUMP ACTUALLY IMPOSES 25% TARIFFS AGAINST OUR ECONOMY AND STARTS A TRADE WAR, HE IS ACTUALLY GOING AFTER HIS OWN AMERICAN PEOPLE.

BECAUSE THIS WILL COST MORE FOR THEM AT THE PUMP, AT THE GROCERY STORE, OR WHEN THEY BUY A NEW HOUSE OR THEY WANT TO DO RENOVATIONS.

SO THIS WILL DRIVE THE COST OF THINGS AND PRODUCTS AND COST OF LIVING IN THE U.S., AND IT WILL ACTUALLY ALSO HURT A LOT OF JOBS IN THE U.S. AND A LOT OF PEOPLE WILL LOSE THEIR JOBS.

SO THERE'S NOBODY THAT IS WINNING OUT OF THIS.

BUT PRESIDENT TRUMP STILL IS CONTINUING TO ATTACK THE CANADIAN ECONOMY, AND THEREFORE, ALSO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE'S COST OF LIVING.

>> SO HE JUST ANNOUNCED A 30-DAY REPRIEVE, AND ALSO WITH MEXICO.

I THINK IN CANADA, SPECIFICALLY ON AUTO PARTS OR THE AUTO INDUSTRY AFTER BEING LOBBIED, I BELIEVE, BY THE U.S. AUTO INDUSTRY.

AND YOU HAVE SAID, BUT HANG ON A SECOND, WE'RE NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH, QUOTE, THIS PSYCHODRAMA EVERY 30 DAYS.

WHAT IS THIS ON AND OFF AGAIN THING, WHAT DOES THAT DO TO A NATION'S ECONOMY?

>> WELL, OF COURSE, WE CAN'T GO THROUGH THAT DRAMA EVERY SINGLE 30 DAYS BECAUSE THIS IS CREATING TOO MUCH UNCERTAINTY.

AND WE KNOW THAT BUSINESS INVESTMENT IS ALLERGIC TO ANY FORM OF UNCERTAINTY.

AND WE KNOW ALSO THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP WANTS TO ATTRACT MORE OF THE INVESTMENTS TO HIS OWN COUNTRY GOING AGAINST THE VERY TRADE AGREEMENT THAT HAS BOUND US FOR MANY, MANY YEARS.

SO MY POINT IS THIS, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE ABLE TO BRING BACK CERTAINTY, BUT WHILE DOING THAT, AND OF COURSE, BEING IN CHARGE OF THE CANADIAN DIPLOMACY, I'LL BE WORKING AN OFF RAMPS, WE'LL FIND A WAY TO GET THROUGH THIS, BUT WE ARE STANDING STRONG IN CANADA, BECAUSE CHRISTIANE, WHAT IS IMPORTANT FOR VIEWERS TO UNDERSTAND RIGHT NOW IS THAT THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION HAS NOT ONLY PUT TRADE AS AN ISSUE ON THE TABLE, THEY HAVE BEEN PRESENTING MANY OTHER THINGS, INCLUDING MILITARY COOPERATION, SECURITY AND INTELLIGENCE COOPERATION, WATER COOPERATION.

I COULD GO ON AND ON AND ON.

AND THAT'S ENOUGH.

CANADIANS HAVE HAD ENOUGH.

WE'RE A STRONG COUNTRY.

WE WILL DEFEND OUR SOVEREIGNTY, WE'LL DEFEND OUR JOBS, WE'LL DEFEND OUR WAY OF LIVING.

AND WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT AT THE SAME TIME THE VERY TARGETS OF THIS TRADE WAR, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, ARE VERY MUCH AWARE AND ARE PUTTING PRESSURE ON THE PRESIDENT THAT IS DOING ALL OF THAT TO THEM AND TO US.

>> SO THAT WAS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD, WHAT YOU JUST DID.

THAT'S ENOUGH.

PRIME MINISTER TRUDEAU HAS ALSO SAID THE SAME, AND HE'S RESPONDED, AND HE SAYS IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS, I BELIEVE, TARIFFS ON $100 BILLION OF AMERICAN GOODS COMING IN.

AND YOU HAVE SAID IT'S AN EXISTENTIAL THREAT TO YOU.

JUST A QUICK QUESTION.

THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, THE PRESIDENT SAYS TOO MUCH FENTANYL, TOO MANY MIGRANTS COMING ACROSS THE BORDER.

>> THAT'S NOT TRUE BECAUSE FUNDAMENTALLY, LESS THAN 1% OF FENTANYL ACTUALLY COMES FROM CANADA TO THE U.S. WE KNOW THERE'S A SCOURGE OF FENTANYL IN NORTH AMERICA.

WE KNOW CANADIAN ANDS AMERICAN LIVES ARE BEING TAKEN BY THIS CATASTROPHIC DRUG, BUT FUNDAMENTALLY, WE HAVE A STRONG AND SECURE BORDER.

WE HAVE 1.3 BILLION DOLLARS WORTH OF INVESTMENT IN OUR NEW BORDER PLAN.

WE HAVE INVESTED IN MORE BOOTS ON THE GROUND, BLACK HAWK HELICOPTERS, A NEW FENTANYL STRIKE FORCE WITH THE AMERICANS.

WE ALSO HAVE A NEW FENTANYL CZAR.

WE HAVE DONE EVERYTHING THAT WAS REQUIRED UNDER THE EXECUTIVE ORDER THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP SIGNED TO LEGITIMIZE, TO GIVE HIM THE POWERS TO IMPOSE THESE TARIFFS.

BUT CLEARLY, THIS IS NOT THE ISSUE RIGHT NOW.

THIS IS A PRETEXT.

THIS IS NOT THE RIGHT ARGUMENT BECAUSE FUNDAMENTALLY, THE U.S. IS A NET EXPORTER OF ILLEGAL MIGRANTS, OF ILLEGAL GUNS, AND ILLEGAL DRUGS TO CANADA.

SO WHAT IS AT STAKE IS MORE THAN THAT.

PRESIDENT TRUMP WANTS TO PUT US INTO A STATE WHERE WE ARE MUCH MORE WEAKENED ECONOMICALLY IN ORDER EVENTUALLY TO ANNEX US.

HE'S SAID THAT.

HE QUESTIONED OUR BORDER AS WELL.

SO WHILE WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THE DIPLOMATIC LEVEL AND WORKING WITH MANY OF HIS SECRETARIES, WORKING WITH HIM, AND I HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN ALL OF THIS, OF COURSE, WITH THE PRIME MINISTER AND THE MINISTER OF FINANCE HERE IN CANADA, IT WAS IMPORTANT FOR CANADIANS AND THE WORLD TO KNOW WHAT IS EXACTLY HAPPENING.

AND WHEN THE U.S. DECIDED TO LAUNCH THIS TRADE WAR, THIS WEEK, WE DECIDED TO MAKE IT PUBLIC.

>> YOU KNOW, I MEAN, EVEN PRIME MINISTER TRUDEAU WAS CAUGHT ON A HOT MIC OR WHATEVER SAYING TO PEOPLE, THIS IS REAL.

THIS THREAT TO ANNEX CANADA AND MAKE IT A 51st STATE.

MOST PEOPLE THOUGHT THAT WAS JUST A JOKE, IT'S A NEGOTIATING PLOY, WHATEVER IT IS, TRUMP BEING TRUMP.

WHY DO YOU THINK IT'S SERIOUS?

WHY WOULD AMERICA WANT TO DO THAT?

AND HOW CAN YOU STOP THEM?

>> WELL, FIRST, WE CAN DEFINITELY STOP THEM BECAUSE CANADIANS ARE UNITED.

THEY'RE UNITED TO DEFEND OUR COUNTRY.

THEY'RE UNITED TO DEFEND OUR JOBS.

AND AS I WAS SAYING, ALSO OUR WAY OF LIFE.

WE'RE NOT AMERICANS.

WE'RE VERY PROUD OF OUR COUNTRY, AND WHEN YOU LOOK BACK AT OUR HISTORY, WE CREATED CANADA AT THE TIME AND WE WERE PART OF THAT BECAUSE WE DIDN'T WANT TO BE THE UNITED STATES.

AS YOU CAN HEAR FROM MY ACCENT, I'M FROM CANADA AND THERE IS ALSO THIS GRAND BARGAIN TO MAKE SURE ULTIMATELY THAT WE COULD CREATE A STRONG COUNTRY IN NORTH AMERICA.

SO BASED ON THAT, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DEFEND WHO WE ARE AS A COUNTRY.

AND WE HAVE SHOWN -- WE HAVE BEEN SHOWN TOO MUCH DISRESPECT FROM THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION AT THIS POINT, CALLING US A 51st STATE, CALLING OUR PRIME MINISTER GOVERNOR.

THIS IS NOT ONLY A PERSONAL ISSUE BETWEEN PRIME MINISTER TRUDEAU AND PRESIDENT TRUMP.

IT'S WAY MORE THAN THAT.

IT IS MUCH MORE THAN JUST THE POLITICAL RHETORIC.

IT IS A FUNDAMENTAL THREAT.

SO WHAT WE'RE DOING AT HOME IS WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S LESS INTERNAL BARRIERS BETWEEN OUR PROVINCES AND TERRITORIES BECAUSE THAT'S AN ISSUE.

WE THINK WE CAN OFFSET A LOT OF THE IMPACT OF THE TARIFFS COMING FROM THE UNITED STATES BY BEING MUCH MORE ALIGNED AS A FEDERATION, ECONOMICALLY SPEAKING.

WE WANT TO BE CLOSER TO THE UK, LIKE WE DID THROUGHOUT OUR HISTORY.

WE WANT TO BE CLOSER TO EUROPE, CLOSER ALSO TO JAPAN AND ALSO SOUTH KOREA.

AND WE'LL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH MEXICO.

THAT'S JUST OUR REALITY, BUT FUNDAMENTALLY, IF YOU ASK ME WHAT PRESIDENT TRUMP WANTS, WELL, THAT'S A QUESTION TO ASK TO HIM, BUT WE KNOW THAT WE HAVE EVERYTHING A COUNTRY WOULD DREAM OF TO HAVE IN A WORLD.

WHY?

BECAUSE WE HAVE ALL THE ENERGY NECESSARY, WE HAVE ALL THE FERTILIZERS AND POTASH NECESSARY, ALL THE LAND, AND ALSO, AGRICULTURAL SUPERPOWER.

WE HAVE ALL THE URANIUM NECESSARY, THE YDROELECTRICITY, THE PEOPLE, THE CRITICAL MINERALS, I COULD GO ON AND ON.

THAT'S WHY WE BELIEVE WE'RE ONE OF THE BEST COUNTRIES ON EARTH AND WE'RE STABLE, WE'RE DEMOCRATIC, WE LOOK OUT FOR EACH OTHER, WE HAVE VERY STRONG SOCIAL PROGRAMS.

YOU KNOW, SO WE'RE A VERY STABLE DEMOCRACY.

>> I WANT TO ASK YOU -- I HAVE TO TELL YOU, IT IS REALLY, MY MOUTH HAS DROPPED.

MY JAW HAS DROPPED.

HERE IS A MAJOR ALLY WITH A COMMON BORDER AND YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT HAVING TO DEFEND YOURSELF AGAINST AMERICA, AND TALKING ABOUT SEPARATING YOURSELF FROM AMERICA TOWARDS MEXICO AND EUROPE.

IT IS -- IT IS WEIRD -- IT'S JUST, I CAN BARELY INTERNALIZE IT, LIKE THE END OF AN ERA.

I WANT TO ASK YOU ALSO, YOU SAID THERE ARE MORE THREATS REGARDING MILITARY COOPERATION AND THE REST.

AND THEY HAVE THREATENED APPARENTLY TO KICK YOU OUT OF FIVE Is.

I WANT TO KNOW WHAT THAT WOULD DO TO YOU AND WHAT YOU THINK OF THEIR PAUSE ON INTELLIGENCE SHARING WITH UKRAINE AT THIS EXISTENTIAL MOMENT FOR THAT COUNTRY.

>> SO, WE BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE TO EXPAND OUR SECURITY INTELLIGENCE PARTNERSHIP WITH OTHER COUNTRIES AS WELL.

WE, YOU KNOW, WE NEVER STARTED THIS.

WE'RE CLOSE TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

WE'RE THEIR NEIGHBORS.

WE'RE THEIR BEST FRIENDS.

WE'RE THEIR PARTNERS.

SO WE HAVE MANY FAMILIES AND FRIENDS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BORDER, AND WE KNOW THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DON'T AGREE WITH WHAT PRESIDENT TRUMP SAYS.

WE HAVE HEARD IT SO MANY OF THEM HAVE BEEN APOLOGIZING FOR ALL THE RHETORIC THAT IS COMING OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE ON THIS.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME, IT IS IMPORTANT THAT OUR VIEWERS, THAT THE WORLD KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON.

AND FUNDAMENTALLY, WE WILL DO THE WORK TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE PARTNERSHIPS THAT ARE NECESSARY TO PROTECT OURSELVES AND AT THE SAME TIME TO PROTECT OTHERS.

IF THERE'S A COUNTRY OUT THERE THAT UNDERSTANDS THE AMERICANS, IT'S US.

SO WE CAN EXPLAIN TO EUROPE WHAT'S GOING ON.

WE CAN EXPLAIN TO OUR NORTH PACIFIC PARTNERS, OUR MEXICAN AND LATIN AMERICAN PARTNERS OR AFRICAN PARTNERS WHAT'S GOING ON.

I COULD GO ON AND ON.

BUT WHAT I CAN TELL YOU, THOUGH, ABOUT INTELLIGENCE SHARING, I WAS WITH -- I WAS ON A CALL WITH MARCO RUBIO, THE SECRETARY OF STATE, YESTERDAY.

REGARDING THIS VERY ISSUE OF INTELLIGENCE SHARING.

I RAISED IT WITH HIM BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS REALLY, REALLY IMPORTANT.

BECAUSE I'M VERY CONCERNED.

WE UNDERSTAND THAT EUROPE IS AT THREAT WHEN RUSSIA GOES UNCHECKED.

WE UNDERSTAND THAT.

THAT'S WHY WE HAVE BEEN THERE -- >> WHAT DID HE SAY?

>> SUPPORTING NATO FOR 80 YEARS.

WELL, HE DIDN'T CONFIRM THAT WAS THE CASE.

HE WAS REFERRING TO THE FACT IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE A GOOD DEAL ON UKRAINE, AND INDEED, IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE A GOOD DEAL ON UKRAINE.

BECAUSE NOT ONLY IS IT IMPORTANT FOR EUROPE'S SECURITY BUT I'LL END ON THAT, IT'S IMPORTANT ALSO FOR THE SECURITY WE HAVE AS PACIFIC NATIONS, THE U.S. AND CANADA, WHEN IT COMES TO CHINA, BECAUSE CHINA IS LOOKING AT WHAT'S GOING ON IN EUROPE AND WHAT'S GOING ON IN UKRAINE AND HAVING A BAD DEAL ON UKRAINE WOULD SEND A MESSAGE ON TAIWAN AND ACTUALLY TO CHINA.

THAT'S DANGEROUS FOR THE WORLD.

>> AND IT'S JUST SO INTERESTING TO HEAR YOU LAY IT OUT.

AND AS WE CONTINUE TO FOLLOW THIS MASSIVE REALIGNMENT THAT SEEMS TO BE GOING ON.

FOREIGN MINISTER, THANK YOU FOR BEING WITH US.

NOW, THE UNITED STATES, QUOTE, IS DESTROYING THE CURRENT WORLD ORDER.

THAT'S UKRAINE'S AMBASSADOR TO THE UK SAYING THAT.

AFTER TRUMP SUSPENDED THAT MILITARY AID AND INTELLIGENCE ASSISTANCE FOR KYIV.

WHILE REFUSING SECURITY GUARANTEES AND SCOFFING AT PLEDGES FROM EUROPEAN COUNTRIES TO STEP UP.

NOW THE U.S. SAYS IT'S AIMING FOR A MEETING WITH UKRAINIAN OFFICIALS AS SOON AS NEXT WEEK.

TAKE A LISTEN.

>> PRESIDENT ZELENSKYY SENT A LETTER TO THE PRESIDENT.

I THINK THE PRESIDENT THOUGHT THAT IT WAS A REALLY GOOD, POSITIVE FIRST STEP.

AND FROM THAT, WE HAVE NOW -- WE'RE NOW IN DISCUSSIONS TO COORDINATE A MEETING WITH THE UKRAINIANS AND RIYADH OR MAYBE POTENTIALLY JEDDAH.

THE CITY IS MOVING AROUND, BUT IT WILL BE SAUDI ARABIA.

I THINK THE IDEA IS TO GET DOWN A FRAMEWORK FOR A PEACE AGREEMENT, AND AN INITIAL CEASE-FIRE AS WELL.

>> THAT WAS UKRAINE'S DEFENSE MINISTER AND HE STILL ADVISES THE GOVERNMENT AND HE'S JOINING US FROM KYIV TONIGHT.

WELCOME BACK TO THE PROGRAM.

YOU OBVIOUSLY HEARD WHAT THE SPECIAL ENVOY STEVE BUT COUGH SAID.

I THINK HE SAID A TEMPORARY CEASE-FIRE AHEAD OF TRYING TO GET A PROPER PEACE DEAL.

FIRST OF ALL, HOW DO YOU REACT TO THAT FROM THE UNITED STATES?

>> WELL, OUR GOVERNMENT SUGGESTED THAT WE SET UP A STAGED APPROACH TO THE CEASE-FIRE, SO THAT WE CAN DO SOME DEMONSTRATION OF READINESS FOR THAT.

AND THEY SUGGESTED THE AERIAL DOMAIN AND MARITIME DOMAIN WOULD BE CLOSED TO HOSTILITIES.

THAT WOULD GIVE THE INDICATION OF THE WILL.

ON BOTH SIDES.

AND THEN WE CAN WORK OUT THE DETAILS LATER.

IF THAT IS ACCEPTED, THAT COULD BE ACTUALLY A GOOD IDEA BECAUSE WE STILL HAVE A CHANCE TO TALK ABOUT THE DETAILS AND WE STILL HAVE A CHANCE TO TALK ABOUT THE SECURITY GUARANTEES.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME, THERE IS SOMETHING ALREADY HAPPENING TO STOP THAT.

>> SO YOUR PRESIDENT ALSO HAD SAID THAT AND HE SAID IF RUSSIA AGREES AS WELL.

WELL, TODAY, WE HAVE HEARD FROM THE KREMLIN AND THEIR FOREIGN MINISTRY THAT A TEMPORARY CEASE-FIRE IS UNACCEPTABLE, SAYS THE RUSSIAN FOREIGN MINISTRY, AND THERE WILL BE NO ACCEPTANCE, ACCORDING TO THE RUSSIANS, OF ANY KIND OF SECURITY GUARANTEES LIKE EUROPEAN TROOPS ON UKRAINIAN SOIL.

SO WHERE -- WHERE DO YOU THINK THIS IS GOING TO LEAD TO?

DO YOU THINK THIS IS JUST RUSSIA TALKING BEFORE SITTING DOWN, OR IS IT THEIR POSITION?

>> IT'S UNCLEAR UNTIL IT'S OVER.

SO IT CAN LEAD TO LITERALLY ANYTHING.

BUT THE THING IS THAT WHAT WE HAVE BEEN TELLING ALL THE WAY THROUGH, THAT RUSSIANS DON'T WANT PEACE AT THE MOMENT, AT LEAST.

IN THE CURRENT REALITY.

AND WHAT WE ARE SAYING IS THAT CLEARLY THEY DON'T WANT TO BE DETERRED FROM THE FUTURE RECURRENCES OF THIS WAR.

AND BASICALLY, OF COURSE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SECURITY GUARANTEES WHICH WOULD DISABLE RUSSIA FROM STARTING THIS AGAIN OR BREACHING CEASE-FIRE OR ACTUALLY STARTING A NEW CAMPAIGN ALTOGETHER.

THE RISK FOR THAT IS EXTREMELY HIGH BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY DID BEFORE.

I CAN REMIND THE WORLD WHICH WE HAVE A THIRD YEAR ON IS ACTUALLY THE MAJOR ESCALATION OF THE WAR WHICH THEY STARTED IN 2014.

SO THEY CAN RETURN AND THEY CAN START AGAIN, AND CLEARLY, THEIR STRATEGIC GOALS REMAIN INTACT.

THEY STILL DON'T LIKE UKRAINE.

THEY STILL DON'T WANT US TO EXIST AND SO ON AND SO ON.

SO WHAT WE SAID IS LOOK, THE CEASE-FIRE IS AS GOOD AS IT CAN BE PROTECTED.

AND IF IT CANNOT BE PROTECTED, THEN RUSSIA CAN JUST TREAT IT AS AN OPERATIONAL PAUSE.

COLLECT THEIR TROOPS, AND THEN START AGAIN.

AND WE DEFINITELY WANT PEACE, BUT WE DEFINITELY DON'T WANT TO EXPOSE OURSELVES TO THAT RISK BECAUSE THAT RISK WILL BE ENORMOUS AND IT CAN DESTROY THE COUNTRY BECAUSE THAT BLOW CAN BE MUCH HARDER.

>> YES.

>> WE STARTED TO TALK ABOUT THE GUARANTEES.

AS YOU CAN SEE RIGHT NOW, THEY'RE NOT HAPPY WITH THEM, SO HERE WE ARE.

>> HERE WE ARE.

THAT'S WHAT IS THE CRUX OF THE MATTER RIGHT NOW.

I WANT TO ASK YOU ABOUT THIS SUDDEN PAUSE, THIS ABRUPT HALT IN AID THAT THE UNITED STATES, THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION HAS DONE.

STOPPING MILITARY AID TO YOU, AND STOPPING BATTLEFIELD INTELLIGENCE.

I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT APPARENTLY THE PAUSE WILL ALT THE DELIVERY OF MISSILES FOR PATRIOTS, AIR DEFENSE SYSTEMS, ET CETERA, WHICH HAVE, AS WE KNOW, SAVED A HUGE AMOUNT OF LIVES ON CIVILIAN AND CRITICAL ENERGY INFRASTRUCTURE.

I JUST WANT TO ASK YOU AS A FORMER DEFENSE MINISTER, IF YOU DON'T GET THIS STUFF, AND THE BATTLEFIELD INTELLIGENCE, WHAT IS THE RESULT ON THE GROUND?

>> WELL, FRANKLY SPEAKING, IT'S QUITE CLEAR TO ALL UKRAINIANS BECAUSE WE LIVE IN THIS FOR THREE YEARS.

AND WE HAVE BEEN BOMBARDED BY MISSILES AND DRONES LITERALLY HERE IN KYIV EVERY NIGHT.

AND IF WE DON'T RECEIVE INFORMATION ABOUT THEIR ARRIVAL OR ACTUALLY THEIR LAUNCHES WHICH COMES FROM UNDERSTANDING MOVEMENTS OF THE TROOPS, MOVEMENTS OF THE EQUIPMENT AROUND RUSSIA, PREPARING IN THE AIR FIELDS, LAUNCHING THEIR PLANES, WHICH CARRY THE MISSILES, ET CETERA, ET CETERA, OR SHIPS WHICH ALSO CARRY MISSILES, IF WE DON'T SEE THIS INFORMATION IN ADVANCE, WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO TRANSMIT IT TO OUR CITIZENS AND THEY WOULDN'T HAVE A TIME TO GO TO THE SHELTERS.

A FEW TIMES WE HAD THESE BREAKTHROUGHS WHEN WE ACTUALLY HEARD THE ROCKETS FLYING ABOVE OUR HEADS, LITERALLY, AND I WAS MYSELF IN THAT SITUATION, BEFORE THE ALARM.

BUT THESE WERE VERY, VERY FEW TIMES.

PROBABLY A COUPLE TIMES ONLY.

ALL THE OTHER TIMES WE ARE WARNED IN ADVANCE, SO WE CAN PLAN OUR ACTIVITIES, WHOEVER IS NEAR SHELTER CAN GET THERE.

AND FAMILIES, ET CETERA.

IF WE DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION, THERE IS ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF PEOPLE WHO WILL BE EXPOSED TO THESE RISKS WITHOUT ANY CHANCE TO SAVE THEMSELVES.

SO OBVIOUSLY, THAT'S VERY SERIOUS TO SAY THE LEAST.

>> YOU KNOW, FOR US WHO HAVE BEEN COVERING THIS AND MYSELF, AMONGST MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES WHO HAVE BEEN THERE COVERING IT ON THE GROUND, IT DOES SEEM A VERY HARD THING TO INTERNALIZE AND COMPUTE THAT THE U.S. IS COMPLETELY SWAPPED ITS POSITION.

WHY DO YOU THING IT'S DOING IT?

>> FRANKLY SPEAKING, I WOULDN'T GUESS.

WE CLEARLY ARE IN A VERY STRANGE SITUATION BECAUSE WE ARE FOR LIKE 30 YEARS WE HAD UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT AS OUR CLOSEST ALLY.

A MAJOR ALLY IN TERMS OF THE INVESTMENTS AND MILITARY SUPPORT.

FOR AT LEAST TEN YEARS BEFORE WHEN IT STARTED IN 2014, WE HAVE BEEN SUPPORTED BY THE UNITED STATES.

BY ALL GOVERNMENTS, ALL PARTIES.

I KNOW FOR A FACT THAT THE SAME AMOUNT OF PEOPLE WHO SUPPORTED US BEFORE, THEY STILL SUPPORT US NOW.

MILITARY, CIVILIANS, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A HUGE -- YOU KNOW, BUT THE FACT THAT THE GOVERNMENT RIGHT NOW DECIDES TO WITHHOLD THINGS, IT'S OF COURSE VERY, VERY DIFFICULT TO PROPOSE THIS.

I SINCERELY HOPE THAT THE NEGOTIATIONS WILL GO THROUGH AND WE WILL RESUME THE MILITARY COOPERATION BECAUSE THAT'S HOW WE CAN SAVE THE STABILITY.

THERE'S NO OTHER WAY.

>> CAN I ASK YOU TO RESPOND ALSO TO SOMETHING THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP'S UKRAINE ENVOY, KEITH KELLOGG, HAS SAID?

HE WAS ASKED ABOUT THE SUSPENSION OF THIS AID AND INTELLIGENCE, AND HE SAID UKRAINE BROUGHT IT UPON THEMSELVES.

HE, I THINK, MEANT PRESIDENT ZELENSKYY AND THE BUST-UP IN THE WHITE HOUSE.

HE THEN SAID, PEOPLE ASKED, YOU KNOW, WHY DID YOU DO IT?

AND HE SAID, WELL, THE BEST WAY I CAN DESCRIBE THIS PAUSE IS SORT OF LIKE HITTING A MULE WITH A TWO BY FOUR ACROSS THE NOSE, YOU GET THEIR ATTENTION.

A MULE WITH A BIG PIECE OF WOOD ACROSS THE NOSE.

HOW DO YOU REACT TO THAT?

>> WELL, HOW WOULD YOU REACT TO THAT?

WE RESPECT GENERAL KELLOGG.

HE'S A WELL KNOWN MILITARY PERSON.

HE'S BEEN SUPPORTIVE TO UKRAINE ALL THE WAY THROUGH.

WE KNOW THAT HE'S A GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE.

WE KNOW THAT HE ABIDES BY THE GOVERNMENT LINE.

AND WHAT WE KNOW IS THAT HE KNOWS EXACTLY WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE COUNTRY.

AND FROM WHAT WE UNDERSTAND, THAT OUR GOVERNMENT CAME TO THAT MEETING TO SIGN THE DEAL.

I BELIEVE THAT THAT TRANSACTION IS STILL READY TO BE ACCEPTED, SO I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHAT ATTENTION IS THIS ABOUT.

MORE IMPORTANTLY, THERE ARE PEOPLE HERE IN THIS COUNTRY, CIVILIANS, MILITARY, A LOT OF CIVILIANS, WHO ARE RELYING ON THIS INFORMATION AS A LIFE-SAVER.

SO I BELIEVE THAT POSITION SHOULD BE RECONSIDERED.

UKRAINE IS READY FOR PEACE.

THERE'S NO DOUBT FOR THAT.

UKRAINE CERTAINLY IS READY FOR DIPLOMACY.

I DON'T THINK ANYBODY DOUBTED THAT.

AND I THINK THAT IT'S A TIME FOR PROPER COOPERATION BETWEEN THE U.S. AND UKRAINE WITHOUT THE EMOTIONS AND WITHOUT THE ANALOGIES.

>> ACTUALLY AS WE REPORTED JUST BEFORE YOU CAME ON, THAT THE U.S. IS NOW SAYING THAT THEY DO PLAN TO MEET WITH UKRAINIAN COUNTERPARTS IN SAUDI ARABIA SOME TIME SOON.

SO MAYBE THINGS ARE MOVING IN A BETTER DIRECTION.

VERY FINALLY, AND WE JUST HAVE 30 SECONDS, THERE WAS ALSO REPORTS THAT THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION HAD REACHED OUT TO INTERNAL OPPOSITION CHARACTERS.

AND NOW, TODAY, ALL OF THEM HAVE BANDED TOGETHER AND SAID NO, WE ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE ELECTIONS UNTIL THE END OF THE WAR.

AGAIN, I MEAN, FROM OUTSIDE, IT LOOKS LIKE THIS WAS SOME KIND OF INTERFERENCE AGAINST ZELENSKYY'S POSITION AS PRESIDENT.

HOW DO YOU READ IT?

AND THE FACT THAT THE OPPOSITION OF ALL HAVE COME OUT AND SAID NO, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE PLAYED.

>> UKRAINE IS A DEMOCRATIC COUNTRY.

WE'RE EXPECT ELECTIONS TO TAKE PLACE IN THE FUTURE, BUT THE ABSOLUTE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE AND THAT'S PERSONALLY, PERSON OPINION, ELECTIONS DURING THE MILITARY HAUNT MILITARY TIME WHEN THERE'S ACTIVE BOMBARDMENTS OF CITIES, FOR INSTANCE.

IT'S JUST UNSAFE.

WE WON'T BE ABLE TO DO THEM CORRECTLY BECAUSE AT ANY POINT IN TIME WE CAN BE HIT BY ROCKETS, DRONES, ET CETERA.

THAT'S A POSITION OF THE ABSOLUTE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE AND ALL POLITICAL PARTIES.

SO THEY JUST VOICED WHAT WE ALL KNEW HERE.

BUT THE FACT THAT THEY STAND TOGETHER AND THEY SUPPORT GOVERNMENT IS ACTUALLY QUITE A UKRAINIAN THING.

WHEN WE HAVE SOME EXTERNAL PRESSURE, WE USUALLY UNITE.

I THINK PEOPLE NOTICE THAT, BUT THAT'S A NATIONAL CHARACTER THING.

I DON'T THINK THAT'S GOING TO CHANGE.

>> FORMER DEFENSE MINISTER, THANK YOU FOR JOINING US FROM KYIV.

>>> NOW, THE UNITED STATES HAS REJECTED A PLAN PROPOSED BY THE ARAB LEAGUE FOR RECONSTRUCTION AND THE FUTURE GOVERNANCE OF GAZA.

THE FIRST PHASE OF THE CEASE-FIRE IS OVER.

AND ISRAEL HAS SUSPENDED DELIVERY OF HUMANITARIAN AID INTO GAZA.

THOUGH SO FAR, FIGHTING, ACTIVE FIGHTING, HASN'T RESUMED.

AND REPORTS HAVE NOW EMERGED THAT THE UNITED STATES HAS BEEN NEGOTIATING DIRECTLY WITH HAMAS OVER REMAINING AMERICAN HOSTAGES.

SOMETHING ITS NEVER ADMITTED TO BEFORE.

SO WHERE DOES THIS LEAVE THE ONCE VIBRANT ISRAELI PALESTINIAN PEACE MOVEMENTS?

MAY AND RULA SERVE AS CODIRECTORS AT THE NGO, A LAND FOR ALL, WHICH ARGUES FOR A TWO-STATE CONFEDERATION.

THEY JOIN ME HERE IN LONDON.

IT IS SO GOOD TO HAVE YOU HERE.

WE HAVE SPOKEN DOWN THE LINE, AS WE SAY, VIA SATELLITE SEVERAL TIMES THROUGHOUT THESE TERRIBLE PAST 16 MONTHS.

AND ALWAYS ENERGIZED BY YOUR COMMITMENT TO TOGETHERNESS AND TO HOPE AND A VISION.

SO YOU HAVE ALSO, I HAVE TO SAY, YOU'RE ALSO HERE TO ACCEPT THE VIVIAN SILVA AWARD.

SHE WAS THE CANADIAN-BORN RESIDENT OF A KIBBUTZ.

SHE WAS A WELL KNOWN PEACE ACTIVIST AND SHE WAS MURDERED IN HER HOME ON OCTOBER 7th.

WHAT DOES THAT MEAN TO BOTH OF YOU?

>> FIRST, THANK YOU FOR HAVING US.

IT'S WONDERFUL TO BE HERE.

RECEIVING THIS AWARD IS A REMINDER OF THE PERSEVERANCE WE NEED TO SHOW RIGHT NOW IN THESE VERY, VERY DARK TIMES.

VIVIAN SILVA WAS REALLY SUCH A TRAILBLAZER.

AND SUCH A LIGHT FOR ALL OF US IN SHOWING THAT THE ONLY WAY TO INSURE BOTH OUR IDENTITIES, OUR SEPARATE IDENTITIES AND OUR SHARED FUTURE AND OUR SHARED SECURITY AND SAFETY IN THIS HOMELAND FOR ISRAELIS AND PALESTINIANS IS THROUGH SHARED VISION AND THE FACT WE ARE SO HONORED AND HUMBLED TO RECEIVE THIS AWARD JOINTLY IN OUR WORK TOGETHER IS A TRUE HONOR AND A -- >> I WAS REALLY TOUCHED, FIRST OF ALL, WE KNOW IT'S THE FIRST TIME, BUT IT'S GOING TO BE AWARDED EVERY YEAR TO TWO WOMEN ARAB AND JEWISH.

THAT'S SOMETHING AMAZING.

>> YEAH, EXACTLY.

IT'S SOMETHING AMAZING.

IT'S ALSO AN INDICATOR THAT THERE IS A NEED FOR, YOU KNOW, WOMAN POLITICAL LEADERSHIP ALSO.

NOT ONLY WHEN IT COMES TO SOLVING THE CONFLICT OR SPEAKING ABOUT PEACE OR LEADING PEACE ORGANIZATIONS.

BUT ALSO DOING POLITICS AND HAVE IMPACT ON THE POLITICAL DECISIONS AND THE POLITICAL SPHERE.

I DO FEEL HONORED TO RECEIVE THIS AWARD, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I FEEL ALSO SAD.

BECAUSE OF TWO THINGS.

FIRST OF ALL, VIVIAN WAS TRYING TO ADVOCATE FOR A POLITICAL SOLUTION AND FOR PEACE BETWEEN THE ISRAELIS AND PALESTINIANS FOR MANY YEARS WITHOUT REAL SUCCESS.

AND THE SECOND POINT, OUR ACTUAL LEADER REMINDS US ON WHAT'S GOING ON ON BOTH SIDES SINCE OCTOBER 7th, WHICH IS SAD.

>> WHICH HAS BEEN HORRENDOUS FOR EVERYBODY, AND ALL THE WORLD WHO HAS BEEN WATCHING, WHICH IS WHERE YOU COME IN.

IT IS EXTRAORDINARY TO FIND PEOPLE, I KNOW THERE ARE GRASSROOTS MOVEMENTS, BUT YOU HAVE BEEN SO DEDICATED.

YOU KEEP WORKING, YOU'RE ISRAELI-JEWISH, YOU'RE I BELIEVE PALESTINIAN WITH ISRAELI CITIZENSHIP.

THAT MEANS YOU HAVE SORT OF A SPECIAL STATUS.

YOU CAN COME INTO TEL AVIV, YOU CAN WORK WITH MAY, BUT THAT IS ALSO A BIT ABOUT HOW YOU VIEW THE POSSIBLE SOLUTION.

NOT A TWO-STATE SOLUTION AS IS ALREADY ENVISIONED BUT SOMETHING DIFFERENT.

A CONFEDERATION.

TELL ME.

>> SO WHAT WE NORMALLY SAY IS THAT WE'RE A TWO-STATE SOLUTION BUT WITH A TWIST OR A TWO-STATE SOLUTION THAT CAN WORK, AND THAT MEANS WE CALL OURSELVES TWO STATES, ONE HOMELAND.

SO THERE ARE A FEW THINGS THAT KIND OF DIFFERENTIATE US FROM THE CLASSIC TWO STATES, WHICH IS YES, WE ADVOCATE FOR TWO-STATE SOLUTION TO SOVEREIGN DEMOCRATIC, INDEPENDENT STATES AND THE 67 REALIGNED BORDER.

ISRAEL AND PALESTINE BORDER, EVERYTHING WE KNOW ABOUT THE TWO STATES, AND WE RECOGNIZE THE SHARED HOMELAND, MEANING THAT AT THIS POINT IN TIME, ISRAELIS AND PALESTINIANS ARE INTERDEPENDENT, AND INTERTWINED, AND SHARE SO MANY CHALLENGES, BUT ALSO SHARE THE FUTURE.

SHARED NATURAL RESOURCES, AND THAT NEEDS TO BE TRANSLATED INTO THE POLITICAL VISION, AND THAT TRANSLATES BOTH INTO THE NEEDS AND ASPIRATIONS AND ATTACHMENTS TO THE TWO PEOPLE, OF THE TWO PEOPLE TO THE HOMELAND, BUT ALSO VERY PRACTICAL LEVELS.

SO WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT PUBLIC HEALTH ON COMBATTING THINGS LIKE COVID OR LIKE POLIO DISEASES, WE HAVE TO DO THAT JOINTLY, IF YOU THINK ABOUT SHARED RESOURCES LIKE WATER, THE WATER AND SEWAGE OF GAZA RUNS INTO THE MEDITERRANEAN WATER, AND THEN IT GETS TO TEL AVIV A DAY AFTER.

YOU HAVE TO SHARE THESE INSTITUTIONS.

SHARED INSTITUTIONS TO TACKLE THESE THINGS.

>> CAN I ASK YOU, IS THERE A MODEL?

HAS ANY OTHER NATION DONE THIS?

IS IT A BIT SWITZERLAND WITH DIFFERENT FEDERATIONS?

WHAT'S THE MODEL, OR ARE YOU MAKING IT ALL UP FROM WHOLE CLOTH?

>> WE ARE ASPIRING FROM DIFFERENT MODELS, SEVERAL DIFFERENT MODELS IN HISTORY AND THE WORLD, BUT IT'S NOT THE POINT.

WE ARE DEVELOPING A SPECIFIC MODEL FOR ISRAELIS AND PALESTINIANS.

OF COURSE, THERE ARE DIFFERENT MODELS OF CONFEDERATION AND SHARED INSTITUTIONS AND EVEN IF YOU -- WELL, WE ARE SITTING HERE IN LONDON AND THE UNITED KINGDOM IS NOT ANYMORE PART OF THE EU, BUT THE EU IS A KIND OF ANOTHER FORM OF HAVING SHARED INSTITUTIONS AND SHARED MECHANISMS IN ORDER TO HAVE MUCH MORE INTEGRATION BETWEEN SOVEREIGN DEPENDENT STATES.

I WOULD ADD TO WHAT MAY WAS SAYING ABOUT OUR MODEL IS THAT WE START FROM RECOGNIZING THE REALITY ON THE GROUND, THAT WE HAVE TWO PEOPLE, TWO NATIONAL GROUPS AND THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO CLAIM THE RIGHT FOR SELF-DETERMINATION AND WE START FROM THIS POINT OF ACKNOWLEDGING THAT AND THEN WE GO TO THE PRACTICALITIES OF THE SOLUTION BECAUSE IT'S IMPORTANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT BECAUSE THERE IS AN ONGOING LONG-TERM NEGOTIATION OF THE RIGHT OF THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE FOR THEIR RIGHT FOR SELF-DETERMINATION.

>> I FIND THAT PART REALLY INTERESTING BECAUSE YOU HAVE SAID, THE BOTH OF YOU, IT'S PART OF YOUR MANDATE, THAT YES, THERE ARE PALESTINIANS WHO CLAIM HOMES IN AREAS THAT ARE IN ACTUAL ISRAEL PROPER.

NONE OF THIS IS INDENDED IF THEY'RE REFUGEES OR WHOEVER COMES, TO MOVE PEOPLE OUT OF HOMES AND SWAP PEOPLE INTO HOMES.

HOW DOES THAT WORK?

>> SO I THINK WHAT WE'RE OFFERING IS REALLY A MODEL THAT IS KEEPING THE TWO-STATE SOLUTION IN REGARDS TO EQUALITY, COLLECTIVE AND INDIVIDUAL EQUALITY, AND THE RIGHT FOR SELF-DETERMINATION AND THE ATTACHMENT OF BOTH PEOPLE TO THE ENTIRE HOMELAND, MEANING THE SHARED ATTACHMENT BUT ALSO THE SHARED REALITY AND THE INTERDEPENDENCY, AND THAT MEANS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS CHANGE THE REALITY ON THE GROUND, USE THE REALITY ON THE GROUND TO GET TO A SOLUTION BY REASSURING THE PRINCIPLES OF EQUALITY AND A SHARED FUTURE.

THAT MEANS WE'RE ASPIRING, FOR EXAMPLE, JERUSALEM SHOULD BE A SHARED CAPITAL.

>> IT WAS ENVISIONED AS THAT EVEN UNDER THE LAST PEACE PROPOSAL.

>> REFERRING TO YOUR PREVIOUS QUESTION, IF WE DO LEARN FROM THE EU, FROM NORTHERN IRELAND, IF WE LEARN FROM OTHER COUNTRIES THAT HAVE BEEN SOLVED IN A SUSTAINABLE WAY, NOT PERFECT, BUT SUSTAINABLE WHERE THERE'S NO MORE BLOODSHED, THAT GOES TO VERY TIGHT COOPERATION AND AN UNDERSTANDING OF SHARED INTERESTS AND SHARED CHALLENGES MET TOGETHER.

>> ONE OF THE BIG SHARED CHALLENGES IS THAT IT DOESN'T SEEM ANYBODY IS READY FOR THIS.

NOW, NOT YOUR EXTREMIST POLITICIANS AND CERTAINLY NOT TRAUMATIZED POPULATIONS ON BOTH SIDES.

AND SO HOW DO YOU GET PEOPLE, BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE PEOPLE WHO HAVE TO AGREE IN THE END, TO DO THIS?

>> WELL, PEOPLE NEED TO AGREE.

I FULLY AGREE WITH YOU, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, HAVING OR GOING TOWARD A POLITICAL SOLUTION AND POLITICAL SETTLEMENT IS A POLITICAL DECISION.

AND IT SHOULD START FROM THE HIGH LEVEL OF HAVING A POLITICAL DECISION THAT WE ARE ENDING THE SITUATION OF, YOU KNOW, HAVING A MILITARY CONTROL ON OTHER PEOPLE.

AND HAVING THIS ONGOING VIOLENCE WITHOUT DOING ANY SYMMETRY BETWEEN BOTH SIDES BECAUSE WE CANNOT DO THIS SYMMETRY, BUT IT'S A POLITICAL DECISION.

WE CAN WAIT ANOTHER 100 YEARS UNTIL PEOPLE MAYBE ON BOTH SIDES CAN BE READY OR WILL BE READY, BUT WE DON'T HAVE THE LUXURY AND THE PRIVILEGE TO WAIT ANOTHER 100 YEARS.

SO WE ARE TRYING, YES, TO WORK ON THIS LEVEL, TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO HAVE THIS SHIFT, TO BELIEVE THAT IF THEY WANT TO HAVE A BETTER FUTURE, THEY NEED TO ACT FOR IT, AND TO THINK DIFFERENTLY.

BUT WE NEED ALSO, AND WE ACT ACTUALLY ON BOTH POLITICAL AND DIPLOMATIC LEVELS IN THE WORLD AND IN ISRAEL AND IN PALESTINE BECAUSE WE NEED A POLITICAL DECISION.

>> AND AGAIN, IT SEEMS FAR AWAY, BECAUSE YOUR CURRENT GOVERNMENT AND THE EXTREMIST COALITION THAT SUPPORTS IT, THERE'S NO ELECTIONS, THERE'S NO LEADERSHIP.

EVERYTHING HAS JUST COLLAPSED BASICALLY AT THE MOMENT AND THE UNITED STATES HAS REJECTED THE ARAB PROPOSAL FOR GAZA IN ANY EVENT.

WHEN YOU GUYS WORK TOGETHER IN ISRAEL, ON THE PALESTINIAN SIDE AS WELL, HOW ARE YOU RECEIVED?

DO PEOPLE EVEN ENGAGE?

>> SO I'LL SAY TWO THINGS.

NUMBER ONE, WE ARE RIGHT NOW IN MOMENT.

BOTH IN THE WORLD ENTIRELY, WHEN THINGS ARE SHIFTING.

ALSO IN THE MIDDLE EAST.

AND SPECIFICALLY IN ISRAEL AND PALESTINE.

THIS SHIFT LEADS US IN THIS CRISIS AND CATASTROPHE TO AN OPPORTUNITY.

WE HAVE TO GRAB THIS OPPORTUNITY.

IF WE WANT TO ENVISION A FUTURE, A BETTER FUTURE, A SUSTAINABLE, PROSPEROUS FUTURE FOR ISRAEL AND PALESTINE AND THE MIDDLE EAST ENTIRELY, THE LINCHPIN IS THE TWO-STATE SOLUTION AND A TWO-STATE SOLUTION THAT CAN WORK THAT TWO PEOPLE DESIRE AND WANT A BETTER FUTURE FOR OUR CHILDREN AND FOR OUR PEOPLE.

WE AGREE ON THAT.

SO I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE THE FOCUS OF EVEN THE FACT THAT WE'RE FEELING THE TRAUMA AND THE PAIN AND THE SUFFERING AND THE ANGER AND THE REVENGE.

PEOPLE WANT PEACE.

PEOPLE WANT SAFETY AND SECURITY.

AND IT'S AS SIMPLE AS THAT, AND EVEN THE POLLS SHOW THAT AS MUCH AS THE TWO PEOPLE ARE LEADING TOWARDS MORE RADICALIZATION AND HATRED AND RACISM, AT THE SAME TIME, THERE IS A GROWING AND STABLE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE WHO UNDERSTAND THAT THE ONLY WAY TO INSURE OUR SAFETY, AND I'M TALKING NOW ABOUT THE ISRAELI SOCIETY, IS THROUGH A REGIONAL SECURITY FRAMEWORK TOGETHER WITH THE PALESTINIAN SOVEREIGN STATE AS PART OF THAT.

>> REALLY, THE POLLS ARE MOVING IN THAT DIRECTION?

>> YES, AND IT'S A SOLID POLL.

>> ON YOUR SIDE?

>> ON THE PALESTINIAN SIDE?

ON THE PALESTINIAN SIDE, WE ARE WITNESSING ALSO MUCH MORE A SHIFT AND INCREASING PERCENTAGE OF PEOPLE WHO ARE WILLING TO GO TO THE TWO-STATE SOLUTION AND FOR A POLITICAL SETTLEMENT.

>> THAT IS GOOD NEWS.

THAT IS GOOD NEWS.

THANK YOU, LADIES.

THANK YOU, MAY AND RULA.

THANK YOU SO MUCH INDEED.

AND CONGRATULATIONS ON YOUR AWARD TOO.

>> WITH THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION EXERTING HUGE PRESSURE ON THE MEDIA, "THE NEW YORK TIMES" EDITORIAL BOARD ACCUSED IT OF, QUOTE, DISTORTED VIEW.

WHEREBY IT'S BANNING WORDS, PHRASES, AND IDEAS IN FAVOR OF ITS OWN VERSION OF FREE SPEECH.

FORMER CNN WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF AND JOURNALISM PROFESSOR FRANK SESNO FEARS UNLESS NEWS ORGANIZATIONS HOLD ALL POWER TO ACCOUNT, THE END RESULT MAY VERY WELL BE WHAT HE CALLS A PROPAGANDA SERVICE.

HE'S JOINING MICHEL MARTIN NOW TO DISCUSS THIS WORRYING TRAJECTORY.

>> THANKS.

FRANK, THANK YOU FOR JOINING US.

>> IT'S A PLEASURE.

>> YOU AND I WERE AT THE WHITE HOUSE TOGETHER.

SO IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND, EXPLAIN TO PEOPLE WHAT THE WHITE HOUSE PRESS CORPS DOES.

>> WHITE HOUSE PRESS CORPS COVERS THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

THOSE WHO MEET WITH HIM, WHERE THE PRESIDENT GOES, CHANGES IN POLICY, AND THE POLITICS THAT SURROUND THE POLICY AND VICE VERSA THAT TAKES PLACE THERE EVERY SINGLE DAY.

THERE'S A PRESS BRIEFING ROOM.

THAT'S WHERE THE WHITE HOUSE PRESS CORPS SITS WHEN THERE'S A BRIEFING.

SOME HAVE OFFICES THERE.

THOSE WHO ARE THERE ON A REGULAR BASIS, AND THEN THERE'S THE POOL, WHICH YOU HAVE HEARD SO MUCH ABOUT.

SMALLER GROUPS THAT COME OUT OF THE LARGER WHITE HOUSE PRESS CORPS TO COVER THE PRESIDENT, TO BE PRESENT IN SMALLER SPACES, WHETHER IT'S THE OVAL OFFICE OR AIR FORCE ONE.

>> BUT THE POOL ITSELF, COULD YOU EXPLAIN WHY THERE IS A POOL?

>> THERE IS A POOL BECAUSE THERE ARE SO MANY TIMES WHEN THE PRESIDENT IS GOING SOMEPLACE OR HOLDING AN EVENT IN A SMALLER SPACE WHERE THE WHITE HOUSE PRESS CORPS, 100-PLUS PEOPLE, COULDN'T POSSIBLY FIT.

SO TRADITIONALLY, THE POOL HAS REPRESENTED MEMBERS FROM THE PRESS CORPS, A PHOTOGRAPHER, A VIDEOGRAPHER, SOMEONE SHOOTING VIDEO, A PRINT REPORTER, SOMEBODY FROM THE WIRE SERVICE, THAT WAS THE ASSOCIATED PRESS, TO CAPTURE THOSE EVENTS AND REPORT BACK TO THE LARGER WHITE HOUSE PRESS SO THAT THEY CAN THEN TAKE THE DETAILS, THE COLOR, THE PARTICULARS FROM THAT EVENT AND REPORT IT TO THEIR COMMUNITIES.

TO THEIR AUDIENCES.

THE WHITE HOUSE PRESS POOL IS GIGANTICALLY IMPORTANT.

I DID THAT MANY TIMES WHEN I WAS COVERING THE WHITE HOUSE.

WHEN I WAS ON AIR FORCE ONE, THERE WERE A HANDFUL OF US, AND YOU WERE THERE JUST IN CASE SOMETHING HAPPENED.

>> SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, THIS IS NOT A PRIVILEGE.

IT'S A RESPONSIBILITY.

IT'S A PRIVILEGE IN A SENSE IT'S A PRIVILEGE TO YOUR COLLEAGUES BUT IT'S A RESPONSIBILITY.

YOU'RE NOT JUST WALKING FOR YOUR ORGANIZATION AND THE POOL.

YOU'RE WORKING FOR ALL NEWS ORGANIZATIONS AND YOU HAVE A DUTY TO ALL THE NEWS ORGANIZATIONS TO RECOUNT WHAT HAS TRANSPIRED FAIRLY ACCURATELY SO THAT THEY CAN DO THEIR JOBS.

SO WHY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THIS?

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS BECAUSE A COUPLE WEEKS AGO, THE TRUMP WHITE HOUSE BANNED THE ASSOCIATED PRESS FROM PARTICIPATING IN THE POOL.

THE PRESS POOL, OR EVEN TRAVELING ON AIR FORCE ONE BECAUSE THEY ARE ANGRY THAT THE A.P.

CONTINUES TO REFER TO THE BODY OF WATER THAT HAS BEEN KNOWN AS THE GULF OF MEXICO, JUST SOUTH OF THE U.S., PRESIDENT TRUMP DECIDED IT SHOULD BE CALLED THE GULF OF AMERICA.

THE A.P.

IS AN INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION, HAS CLIENTS ALL OVER THE WORLD, IT SERVES ORGANIZATIONS ELSEWHERE SO IT SAID IT WOULD CONTINUE TO USE THE GULF OF MEXICO AND ALSO SAY IN THE UNITED STATES, THE GULF OF AMERICA, SORT OF ALSO KNOWN AS.

THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION DECIDED THEY DIDN'T LIKE THAT AND THEY'RE PUNISHING THEM BY RESTRICTING THEM AS A RESULT.

I DO THINK IT'S WORTH NOTING THAT EVEN CONSERVATIVE NEWS OUTLETS LIKE FOX, FOX NEWS AND NEWSMAX, OBJECTED TO THIS.

WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THAT?

WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF IT?

>> I THINK IT'S VERY SIGNIFICANT THAT FOX AND NEWSMAX AND SOME 40 NEWS ORGANIZATIONS HAVE WRITTEN TO THE WHITE HOUSE SAYING THE A.P.

SHOULD BE ALLOWED BACK IN AND THIS IS A SERIOUS INFRINGEMENT ON FREE PRESS AND THE FIRST AMENDMENT.

FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND FIRST AND FOREMOST, THE ASSOCIATED PRESS, AND I WORKED FOR THE ASSOCIATED PRESS, HAS A RIGOROUS PROGRAM AND POLICY OF HOW IT USES TERMINOLOGY AND LANGUAGE.

FOR EXAMPLE, THE TERM TERRORIST, THE TERM WAR, THE TERM, YOU KNOW, IF YOU SAY A POLITICIAN IS LYING.

THE A.P.

HAS STANDARDS.

AND THEY'RE VERY THOUGHTFUL STANDARDS.

SIMILARLY, ON RENAMING THE GULF OF MEXICO THE GULF OF AMERICA, THEY HAD -- THEY APPLIED THEIR STANDARDS, THEIR POLICY, AND THEY DECIDED THEY WERE GOING TO STICK WITH THE GULF OF MEXICO ALTHOUGH ACKNOWLEDGING THAT ALSO KNOWN AS OR HOWEVER THEY WERE CHARACTERIZING THE GULF OF AMERICA.

THE IDEA THAT THE WHITE HOUSE WOULD SAY NOT ONLY DO WE REJECT YOUR LANGUAGE AND YOUR POLICY, BUT NOW WE WILL PUNISH YOU AND WE WILL KEEP YOU OUT OF EVENTS THAT YOU HAVE COVERED FOR DECADES, AND KEEP YOU OUT OF THE POOL, AND BY THE WAY, THE ASSOCIATED PRESS HAS BEEN A PILLAR OF THE POOL BECAUSE THEY'RE A WIRE SERVICE.

THEY'RE NOT A NEWSPAPER OR ANOTHER PUBLICATION THAT OFTEN IS CONSIDERED TO HAVE AN EDITORIAL PAGE OR AN OPINION OR ANYTHING LIKE THIS.

THIS IS VERY SERIOUS.

AND IT DOES RAISE SERIOUS QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW PUNISHMENT FOR CENSORSHIP FOR LANGUAGE USED OR STORIES THAT THE WHITE HOUSE SIMPLY DOESN'T LIKE.

AND THAT'S WHAT'S VERY CONCERNING.

CONCERNING BOTH IN TERMS OF THE PUNISHMENT AND CONCERNING IN TERMS OF THE CHILLING EFFECT, WHICH IS I THINK WHAT THE WHITE HOUSE WANTS, ACTUALLY, TO SEND TO EVERY NEWS ORGANIZATION THAT MIGHT PUBLISH A STORY THAT THE WHITE HOUSE DOESN'T LIKE.

>> THE A.P.

HAS SINCE LAUNCHED A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, SOON AFTER THE BAN ON THE ASSOCIATED PRESS, THE WHITE HOUSE ANNOUNCED ITS OFFICIALS WOULD DETERMINE WHICH OUTLETS COULD PARTICIPATE IN THE PRESS POOL.

AND THE WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY KAROLINE LEAVITT SAID SHE FRAMED THE DECISION TO TAKE CONTROL OF ACCESS TO THE PRESS POOL AS SAYING THAT, QUOTE, A SELECT GROUP OF D.C. BASED JOURNALISTS SHOULD NO LONGER HAVE A MONOPOLY OVER THE PRIVILEGE OF PRESS ACCESS AT THE WHITE HOUSE.

WHAT DO YOU SAY TO THAT?

>> I DEFINITELY THINK THERE COULD BE MORE VOICES BROUGHT TO THE WHITE HOUSE AND OTHER BEATS.

I NO PARTICULAR PROBLEM IF YOU'RE BRINGING SOME OF THOSE VOICES AND THEY'RE INFLUENCERS OR OPINION LEADERS OR PODCASTERS IF THEY WANT TO HAVE THAT SACK SES, ALTHOUGH IT'S A VERY LIMITED SPACE, IN THE PAST, THE STANDARD HAS BEEN ARE YOU COVERING THIS PLACE JOURNALISTICALLY.

I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO DRAW A DISTINCTION OF UNDERSTANDING WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A JOURNALISTIC ORGANIZATION, A NEWS ORGANIZATION, AS WE CALL IT, AND A MEDIA ENTERPRISE.

A MEDIA ENTERPRISE CAN BE ANYBODY WITH A MICROPHONE OR A CAMERA.

THEY MAY OR MAY NOT BE OBLIGED TO TELL THE TRUTH OR TO SEEK THE TRUTH OR TO REPRESENT MULTIPLE SIDES OR TO HAVE SOURCES THAT CAN BE IDENTIFIED, WHETHER BY NAME OR ON BACKGROUND AS OFTEN IS THE CASE.

VERSUS NEWS ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN TRADITIONALLY THOSE WHO HAD THAT FRONT SEAT AT THE WHITE HOUSE.

WHICH ARE GOING TO MAINSTREAM AND MAJOR AUDIENCES.

THAT INCLUDES FOX NEWS, NBC, "THE NEW YORK TIMES," THE "WALL STREET JOURNAL," CONSERVATIVE AND WHATEVER IN THEIR OPINION SECTIONS.

BUT FUNDAMENTALLY DOING JOURNALISM IN THE WAY THEY PRESENT THE NEWS.

NOW, PLENTY OF PEOPLE WILL DISAGREE WITH THAT, AND THERE'S A GOOD PLACE FOR AN ARGUMENT.

BUT MY CONCERN IS BY BRINGING IN NEWS ORGANIZATIONS THAT -- MEDIA ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE NOT NEWS ORGANIZATIONS, THAT ARE NOT THERE TO SEEK TRUTH, TO CITE SOURCES, TO HOLD ALL POWER TO ACCOUNT, THAT WE THEN END UP WITH A PROPAGANDA SERVICE.

AND THAT'S WHAT I WORRY ABOUT.

>> THIS ADMINISTRATION HAS BEEN -- THEY HAVE MADE NO SECRET OF THE FACT THEY'RE AGGRESSIVELY GOING AFTER NEWS ORGANIZATIONS THEY DEEM TO BE PROPAGANDA ORGANIZATIONS FOR IDEOLOGIES OTHER THAN THEIR OWN.

I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY USE THE WORD PROPAGANDA BUT THAT'S THE IMPLICATION OF IT.

THESE NEWS ORGANIZATIONS, THESE LEGACY NEWS ORGANIZATIONS ARE NOT IN ALIGNMENT WITH THEIR VIEWS AND THEREFORE THEY ARE APPLYING EXTRA SCRUTINY TO THEM, FOR EXAMPLE, THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE HAS ANNOUNCED THAT "THE NEW YORK TIMES," NBC NEWS, NPR, AND POLITICO OFFICES AT THE PENTAGON ARE GOING TO BE REPLACED BY CONSERVATIVE OUTLETS LIKE BREITBART, OAN, THE NEW YORK POST.

AND THEN BRENDAN CARR, THE NEW CHAIR OF THE FE KRERX HAS LAUNCHED INVESTIGATIONS INTO MEDIA COMPANIES THAT TRUMP HAS HAD DISAGREEMENTS WITH.

ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, NPR, AND CARR HAS ALSO OPENED AN INQUIRY INTO COMCAST.

OF COURSE, IN THE SPEARs OF FULL DISCLOSURE, IT'S NOT A SECRET I HAVE A RELATIONSHIP WITH NPR AND PBS.

WE'RE SPEAKING ON A PBS OUTLET NOW.

THERE'S ALSO A CONGRESSIONAL INQUIRY INTO WHAT THEY CONSIDER BIAS OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS.

HOW DO YOU ASSESS THAT?

>> VERY CONCERNING.

THERE ARE PLENTY OF PLACES WHERE YOU CAN PICK AT THE COVERAGE THAT A PARTICULAR NEWS ORGANIZATIONS HAS PURSUED ON A STORY OR IT TAKES A POINT OF VIEW OR OVER THE TOP.

ACROSS THE BOARD, TO PAINT WITH THIS BIG BRUSH, TO DO WHAT'S BEING DONE IS ACTUALLY DOING WHAT MANY CONSERVATIVES HAVE SAID THEY HAVE BEEN SUFFERING FROM ALL ALONG, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, A CANCEL CULTURE.

THIS IS ACTUALLY A CANCEL AND PROSECUTE CULTURE.

AND I'M VERY WORRIED ABOUT THAT.

I THINK, AGAIN, IT'S SO IMPORTANT FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND THAT WHAT A NEWS ORGANIZATION IS MEANT TO DO, AND THIS IS ENSHRINED IN ETHICAL STANDARDS AND STANDARDS AND PRACTICES THAT MOST OF THEM HAVE, AND COMES FROM THE SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISTS AND ELSEWHERE, THEY SEEK THE TRUTH.

THEY PROVIDE CONTEXT.

THEY CORRECT ERRORS, AND THEY HOLD POWER TO ACCOUNT.

AND WHAT IS ESSENTIALLY HAPPENING HERE IS, THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION SAYING IF YOU DO A STORY THAT WE DON'T LIKE, WE'RE GOING TO SHOVE YOU ON THE OUTS.

WE'RE GOING TO PUSH YOU OUT OF THE PRESS ROOM, OUT OF YOUR TRADITIONAL SPACE.

IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT A BIAS, I THINK, THAT COULD BE DOCUMENTED CLEARLY.

IT'S ABOUT STORIES THEY DON'T LIKE.

AND THERE ARE AMPLE EXAMPLES OF THIS.

I THINK THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE TO RECOGNIZE.

THIS IS NOT HAPPENING IN A VACUUM.

SHORTLY AFTER THE TERRIBLE PLANE CRASH HERE IN WASHINGTON, THE NTSB SAID WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO PRESS CONFERENCES AND ISSUE PRESS RELEASES.

WE'RE GOING TO PUT OUT STATEMENTS ON X.

THE IDEA OF TAKING QUESTIONS, OF BEING ACCOUNTABLE, OF PROVIDING REALTIME INFORMATION IS NOT JUST ABOUT YOUR RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PRESS.

IT'S ABOUT THE RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PUBLIC.

BEING ACCESSIBLE, BEING ACCOUNTABLE, AND TAKING TOUGH QUESTIONS AT TOUGH TIMES.

AND THAT INCLUDES STORIES THAT ARE NOT COMPLIMENTARY BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS.

REALITY HAPPENS.

YOU KNOW, YOU AND I WERE AT THE WHITE HOUSE A LONG TIME AGO, AND I REMEMBER A PRESS SECRETARY UNDER PRESIDENT REAGAN WHO SAID, TELL YOU WHAT, YOU DON'T TELL ME HOW TO MANAGE THE NEWS.

I WON'T TELL YOU HOW TO REPORT THE NEWS.

AND THAT WAS A RECOGNITION THAT THERE IS AN ADVERSARIAL RELATIONSHIP BUILT IN TO THIS RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PRESS AND THE GOVERNMENT.

AT ANY LEVEL.

WHEN I WAS BUREAU CHIEF AT CNNY HAD AMPLE CALLS FROM THE WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY AND OTHERS WHO SCREAMED AT ME, WHO SAID WE DON'T LIKE THE STORY, THE WAY YOU HAVE DONE IT IS UNFAIR, AND WE WOULD HAVE A DIALOGUE AND SOMETIMES WE STOOD OUR GROUND AND SOMETIMES WE MADE A CHANGE.

BUT THAT IS A VERY DIFFERENT KIND OF RELATIONSHIP THAN THE ONE WE HAVE GOT NOW, WHERE THE GOVERNMENT IS USING LEVERS OF POWER AND THREAT TO INTIMIDATE AND TO CHANGE THE EDITORIAL NATURE OF THE REPORTING COMING FROM PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISTS.

>> A COUPLE QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS.

ONE, YOU KNOW, THE PRESIDENT HAS ACHIEVED SOME SUCCESSES IN HIS PERSONAL LEGAL BATTLES AGAINST NEWS ORGANIZATIONS.

I MEAN, IN DECEMBER, ABC AGREED TO PAY $15 MILLION TO SETTLE THIS DEFAMATION SUIT OVER ONE WORD UTTERED BY ANCHOR GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, CBS SEEMS TO BE POISED TO SETTLE A LAWSUIT OVER THE EDITING OF A "60 MINUTES" INTERVIEW WITH HIS POLITICAL OPPONENT, KAMALA HARRIS, BECAUSE THEY USED A SOUND BITE FROM ONE PART OF THE INTERVIEW TO PROMOTE IT ON ONE PLATFORM AND THEN A DIFFERENT QUOTE IN ANOTHER PLATFORM.

BOTH PART OF THE SAME INTERVIEW.

I MEAN, LISTEN, I'M HEARING FROM MY NEIGHBORS WHO ARE SAYING WHAT IS THIS?

YOU KNOW, THE MEDIA IS ROLLING OVER.

WHY SHOULD WE PAY ATTENTION TO YOU?

WHY SHOULD WE LISTEN TO THIS?

WHY SHOULD WE READ YOUR OUTLET?

WHY SHOULD WE WATCH YOUR NEWS?

>> GOOD QUESTIONS.

LOOK, I THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT TO SAY AT THE OUTSET THAT NEWS ORGANIZATIONS SHOULD ALSO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR WHAT THEY DO.

I MEAN, IF THEY'RE IN THE BUSINESS OF HOLDING POWER TO ACCOUNT, THEY SHOULD BE HELD TO ACCOUNT.

THERE ARE PLENTY OF INSTANCES WHERE THE MEDIA, NEWS ORGANIZATIONS, JOURNALISTS HAVE GOTTEN THE STORY WRONG, HAVE CONVEYED IT IN A LOPSIDED WAY, HAVE DONE FALSE EQUIVALENCIES OR WHATEVER, SO CALL THEM OUT FOR IT.

WHERE IT'S REALLY SERIOUS, GO FOR IT.

I SERVED AS THE EXPERT JOURNALIST IN THE TRIAL AGAINST FOX.

IT DIDN'T GO TO TRIAL BECAUSE FOX SETTLED FOR THREE QUARTERS OF A BILLION DOLLARS, BUT THERE WERE STANDARDS THERE.

DEFAMATION IN THAT CASE WAS A DELIBERATE, WILLFUL DISREGARD FOR THE TRUTH.

COULD YOU HAVE PROVEN AT TRIAL THERE WAS A WILLFUL DISREGARD FOR THE TRUTH?

AND THE ANSWER IS YES, WHICH IS ONE OF THE REASONS THEY SETTLED.

WHAT'S GOING ON WITH CBS AND ABC, ONE WORD IN A LIVE INTERVIEW OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, DOES THAT REACH THAT LEVEL OF A WILLFUL DISREGARD FOR THE TRUTH?

AND I THINK THERE ARE THOSE WHO WOULD SAY, YES, IT DOES.

AND HAVE THAT CONVERSATION.

I THINK THE THRESHOLD IS CONSIDERABLY LOWER IN THESE CASES.

I DON'T THINK THEY REACHED THAT THRESHOLD.

AND SO THESE CORPORATIONS HAVE SETTLED TO MAKE THE ISSUE GO AWAY.

THAT'S WHAT FOX DID, TOO, BY THE WAY.

THEY SETTLED TO MAKE IT GO AWAY, SO IT DIDN'T GO TO TRIAL.

WE CAN HAVE A CONVERSATION AND SHOULD ABOUT THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF MEDIA AND JOURNALISM AND WHAT THEY REPORT.

BUT THERE IS A VERY IMPORTANT AND FINE LINE BETWEEN THAT DEFAMATION NOTION AND FREE SPEECH, AND WE NEED TO BE MINDFUL OF WHERE THAT GETS SET BECAUSE IF WE GO TOO FAR ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, THEN WE ENDANGER FREE SPEECH, THAT I THINK IS WHAT IS HAPPENING.

>> TO THAT END, THAT WHOLE QUESTION OF TRUST.

TRUST IN THE MEDIA CONTINUES TO DECLINE, ACCORDING TO A GALLOP POLL, ONLY 31% OF AMERICANS EXPRESS CONFIDENCE IN THE NEWS TO REPORT FAIRLY.

WHY IS THAT?

WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THAT?

WHY IS TRUST IN THE MEDIA FALLING AS PRECIPITOUSLY AS IT SEEMS TO BE?

>> IN MANY CASES THE MEDIA HAVE BROUGHT IT ON.

THIS IS SEPARATE FROM WHAT THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION IS DOING, BUT LET'S TALK ABOUT THE MEDIA, TOO MANY IN THE MEDIA HAVE GONE FOR CLICKS AND RATINGS RATHER THAN CONTENT.

TOO MUCH WE SEE OPINION AND FACT MIXED SO THE AUDIENCE BECOMES CONFUSED.

CABLE TELEVISION WHERE I COME FROM HAS BECOME OPINION CENTRAL, WHERE IT'S MOSTLY COMBAT AND THERE'S NOT NEARLY ENOUGH REAL STORY TELLING IN JOURNALISM.

THERE'S SOME.

AND SOME OF IT IS QUITE GOOD.

BUT THERE ARE ALSO TIMES WHEN IT'S NOT.

SO THE MEDIA NEED TO DO A HARD LOOK AT THEMSELVES TOO, AND THEY ARE, BUT THEY NEED TO DO MORE OF IT, AND ACCEPT THEIR SHARE OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR WHY TRUST HAS DECLINED.

AND WHAT THEY CAN DO TO ADDRESS THAT AND REGAIN TRUST, WHICH I THINK REVOLVES LARGELY AROUND TRANSPARENCY.

WHY DO WE PICK THE STORIES WE DO, WHY DO WE COVER THEM THE WAY WE DO, WHO ARE THE SOURCES, WHY ARE THEY ANONYMOUS?

THERE HAVE BEEN EFFORTS IN THE MEDIA, IN NEWS ORGANIZATIONS TO CONVEY SOME OF THAT TO THE PUBLIC.

>> GIVEN WHAT YOU SAID, SOMEBODY LISTENING SAYS I HAVE ISSUES WITH THE MEDIA, WHY SHOULD THEY CARE?

>> FOR ALL THE FLAWS THAT ARE OUT THERE, PROFESSIONAL NEWS ORGANIZATIONS ACTUALLY ARE ACCOUNTABLE OR SHOULD BE ACCOUNTABLE AND GENERALLY ARE, FOR WHERE THEY MAKE MISTAKES.

THEY CORRECT ERRORS OR SHOULD.

THEY ARE SUBJECT TO PUBLIC PRESSURE BECAUSE THEY'RE PART OF A COMMUNITY.

THIS IS ESPECIALLY THE CASE IN LOCAL AND REGIONAL NEWS ORGANIZATIONS WHERE THEY ARE NEIGHBORS WITH THE PEOPLE THEY COVER.

BECAUSE THEY DO HAVE RULES IDENTIFYING SOURCES, CORRECTING ERRORS, PROVIDING CONTEXT.

UPDATING STORIES WITH NEW INFORMATION.

THERE ACTUALLY ARE THOSE RULES.

HERE'S THE THING, LET ME GIVE ANOTHER EXAMPLE.

WE PUT MEDIA A LOT IN THE POLITICAL NATIONAL CONTEXT.

YOU HAVE A LOCAL NEWS ORGANIZATION.

THE REPORTER THERE GETS WIND THAT SOMEBODY DOWN AT THE SUPERMARKET, AT THE GROCERY STORE IS COLORING THE MEAT SO THAT THE MEAT CAN BE SOLD PAST ITS SELL BY DATE AND MAYBE IT ISN'T GOOD.

DO YOU WANT THAT STORY REPORTED IF THAT STORY COMES FROM SOMEBODY BEHIND THE MEAT COUNTER WHO IS LEAKING TO THE MEAD JAW?

DO YOU WANT TO KNOW ABOUT THAT?

OF COURSE YOU DO.

IF THAT NEWS ORGANIZATION MAKES A MISTAKE ON THE HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL SCORE, THAT'S A PROBLEM, AND THAT'S AN ISSUE.

BUT DO YOU SHUT THE NEWS ORGANIZATION DOWN AND THEN NOT HAVE THAT STORY ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING AT THE LOCAL GROCERY STORE?

THERE ARE MANY, MANY THINGS TO CONSIDER HERE.

I DON'T MEAN TO MUDDY THE WATERS BUT LIFE IS COMPLICATED, AND FUNDAMENTALLY, WHAT PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISM IS SUPPOSED TO DO IS TELL THIS STORY AND SEEK THE TRUTH.

THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S PERFECT.

IT DOESN'T MEAN IT DOESN'T MAKE MISTAKES BUT TO THROW THAT BABY OUT WITH THE BATH WATER IS GOING TO DEPRIVE CITIZENS OF THE VEHICLES THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO BRING THEM INFORMATION ABOUT THEIR COMMUNITIES AND THEIR LIVES SO THEY CAN BE MORE ENGAGED CITIZENS, VOTERS, AND NEIGHBORS.

>> FRANK, THANKS SO MUCH FOR TALKING WITH US.

>> IT'S BEEN A PLEASURE.

I WISH YOU WELL.

>> FRANK IS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.

THAT'S IT FOR NOW.

THANK YOU FOR WATCHING.

GOOD-BYE FROM LONDON.