March 9, 2023

>>> HELLO EVERYONE AND WELCOME TO AMANPOUR AND COMPANY.

HERE IS WHAT IS COMING UP.

>> WE DESPERATELY NEED PRESIDENT BIDEN TO FINALLY HEAR US OUT.

FINALLY HEAR OUR CRY FOR HELP AND BRING US HOME.

>> A CRY FOR HELP FROM AN IRANIAN PRISON.

IN AN UNPRECEDENTED CONVERSATION I SPEAK WITH THE DETAINED IRANIAN AMERICANS FROM INSIDE THE PRISON.

HIS DESPERATE PLEA TO PRESIDENT BIDEN.

PLUS ANALYSIS WITH THE FORMER STATE DEPARTMENT ADVISOR.

>> YOU ARE DEALING WITH POTENTIAL ADVERSARY THAT HAS THE HOME-COURT ADVANTAGE.

IS THE UNITED STATES READY FOR THAT AN ERA OF GREAT POWER CONFLICT?

WE SPEAK TO MICHAEL GORDON FROM THE WALL STREET JOURNAL.

AMANPOUR AND COMPANY IS MADE POSSIBLE BY THE ANDERSON FAMILY FUND JIM ATWOOD AND LESLIE WILLIAMS.

THE FAMILY FOUNDATION OF LAYLA AND MICKEY STRAUSS.

COMMITTED TO BRIDGING CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN OUR COMMUNITY.

BARBARA HOPE ZUCKERBERG.

TRYING TO NOT MISS WHAT IS RIGHT IN FRONT OF US.

WE BELIEVE TAKING CARE OF TOMORROW CAN'T MAKE THE MOST OF TODAY.

MUTUAL AMERICA FINANCIAL GROUP.

RETIREMENT SERVICES INVESTMENTS.

ADDITIONAL SUPPORT PROVIDED BY THESE FUNDERS AND BY CONTRIBUTIONS BY YOUR PBS STATION FROM VIEWERS LIKE YOU.

>> WELCOME TO THE PROGRAM EVERYONE.

I AM CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR IN NEW YORK.

TONIGHT WE HAVE AN EXTREMELY DIFFICULT, IMPORTANT AND HIGHLY COMPELLING CONVERSATION IN HUGELY UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES.

SIAMAK NAMAZI IS A IRANIAN BUSINESSMAN IN PRISON IN IRAN FOR OVER SEVEN YEARS.

HE SPOKE TO ME OVER THE PHONE FROM INSIDE THE NOTORIOUS PRISON GIVING US A FIRSTHAND LOOK AT THE DESPERATION OF FOREIGN NATIONALS AND CITIZENS DETAINED IN THAT COUNTRY.

I FIRST INTERVIEWED SIAMAK NAMAZI IN THE EARLY 2000'S DURING THE REFORM ERA.

A VERY DIFFERENT AROUND THEN.

HE WAS A PROMINENT BUSINESS MAN AND AN ANALYST TRYING TO BUILD RELATIONS BETWEEN IRAN AND THE WORLD.

HE WAS ARRESTED DURING A 2013 BUSINESS TRIP AND CONVICTED OF COOPERATING WITH A HOSTILE FOREIGN GOVERNMENT.

THAT GOVERNMENT IS THE UNITED STATES AND HE IS A U.S. CITIZEN.

IT IS A CONVICTION THAT HE REFUTES.

DETAINEES HAVE BEEN RELEASED AS PART OF PRISONER SWAPS WITH THE UNITED STATES.

SIAMAK'S OWN FATHER WHO WAS ARRESTED IN 2016 WILL TRYING TO VISIT HIM IN PRISON WAS RELEASED ON MEDICAL GROUNDS LAST OCTOBER.

BUT, SIAMAK CONTINUES TO LANGUAGE IN PRISON EVEN GOING ON A WEEKLONG HUNGER STRIKE BACK IN JANUARY AND WRITING A LETTER TO PRESIDENT BIDEN.

NOW HE SAYS HE FEELS SO ALONE, SO ABANDONED AND SO OUT OF OPTIONS THAT HE HAS DECIDED TO COME TO US HOPING TO BESIEGE BIDEN TO HELP HIM AND THE OTHER IRANIAN AMERICANS AND HERE IS OUR EXTRAORDINARY PHONE CONVERSATION.

SIAMAK NAMAZI, IT IS A RARE THING TO HEAR FROM SOMEBODY INSIDE EVIN PRISON.

CAN I START BY ASKING YOU TO STATE YOUR NAME AND WHERE YOU ARE TALKING TO US FROM?

>> IT IS A LONG, LONG TIME SINCE WE LAST SPOKE WHEN WE MET IN IRAN AND I WANT TO SAY THAT THIS IS VERY, VERY UNUSUAL TO SPEAK TO SOMEBODY INSIDE EVIN PRISON.

WHY ARE YOU SPEAKING TO US IN THIS WAY.

WHY ARE YOU SPEAKING OUT NOW?

>> SIAMAK, LET ME FOLLOW UP ON THAT.

YOU DID WRITE AN OP-ED THAT WAS PUBLISHED IN THE NEW YORK TIMES IN THE SUMMER IN WHICH YOU SAID THAT THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION'S APPROACH TO RESCUING AMERICANS IN DISTRESS IN IRAN HAS FAILED SPECTACULARLY SO FAR.

AND YOU HAVE RECENTLY GONE ON I BELIEVE A ONE WEEK HUNGER STRIKE TO DRAW ATTENTION.

TELL ME WHAT YOU MEAN BY FAILED SPECTACULARLY SO FAR.

WILL >> I'M GOING TO TRY TO ASK YOU ABOUT THAT.

WHAT IS IT GOING TO TAKE?

BUT FIRST, YOU ARE ONE OF THREE AMERICANS IN EVIN PRISON.

THEY ARE DETAINED ON SO-CALLED CHARGES OF ESPIONAGE BUT YOU ARE NOT.

YOU ARE DETAINED AND SENTENCED ON OTHER CHARGES.

DO YOU HAVE ANY -- >> YES, I WANT TO KNOW WHETHER YOU ARE IN THE SAME LOCATION AS THE OTHER AMERICANS?

>> DO YOU HOPE TO ALL BE RELEASED TOGETHER?

>> SIAMAK, YOU WROTE THIS LETTER TO PRESIDENT BIDEN RECENTLY AND I'M GOING TO QUOTE A LITTLE BIT FROM IT.

DAY AFTER DAY I IGNORED THE INTENSE PAIN THAT I ALWAYS CARRY WITH ME AND DO THE BEST TO FIGHT THIS GRAVE INJUSTICE.

ALL I WANT, SIR, IS ONE MINUTE OF YOUR DAYS TIME FOR THE NEXT SEVEN DAYS DEVOTED TO THINKING ABOUT THE TRIBULATIONS OF THE U.S.

HOSTAGES IN IRAN.

DID YOU GET ANY PERSONAL RESPONSE TO THAT LETTER, SIAMAK?

>> I NEVER HAD ANY RESPONSE.

THIS IS WHAT MAKES THINGS PARTICULARLY PAINFUL.

PRESIDENT BIDEN HAS BEEN IN OFFICE FOR 25 MONTHS NOW.

>> I KNOW IT IS HARD.

>> CAN I ASK YOU ABOUT YOUR OWN PHYSICAL COMFORT?

I WANT TO KNOW HOW YOU ARE BEING TREATED IF YOU CAN.

HOW IS EVERYDAY LIFE FOR YOU THERE?

HOW DO YOU GET THROUGH THE DAYS IN EVIN?

WILL >> SIAMAK, YOU ARE UNDER EXTREME DURESS.

>> YOU ARE ABLE TO MAKE THOSE QUIPS AND THERE IS SOME POSITIVITY TO HEARING THAT YOU ARE STILL ROBUST AND YOU STILL HAVE YOUR STRENGTH.

I WANT TO ASK YOU ABOUT THE OTHER AMERICANS.

WHAT YOU HAVE SAID IS YOU JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY YOU HAVE BEEN LEFT BEHIND PARTICULARLY OVER A PERIOD OF YEARS IN WHICH OTHER AMERICANS HAVE BEEN RELEASED IN DEALS BETWEEN IRAN AND THE UNITED STATES.

THERE WAS A RELEASE IN 2016 AROUND THE IRAN NUCLEAR DEAL INCLUDING JASON, THE JOURNALIST.

THEN AGAIN IN 2019 AND 2020.

EACH TIME YOU WERE LEFT BEHIND.

YOU KNOW WHY?

DO YOU KNOW WHY YOU ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THAT GROUP?

>> IT MUST BE SO, SO HARD FOR YOU.

I CAN'T EVEN IMAGINE.

YOU MENTIONED YOUR FATHER.

OF COURSE, HE WAS ARRESTED AND HE AS YOU SAY AND ELDERLY RETIRED UNICEF OFFICIAL WHEN HE CAME TO TRY TO VISIT YOU IN PRISON.

HE WAS IN PRISON FOR TWO YEARS FOLLOWING THAT.

PREVENTED FROM LEAVING THE COUNTRY FOR FIVE YEARS UNTIL HE WAS FINALLY RELEASED THIS PAST OCTOBER AND YOU THEN WERE GIVEN A BRIEF FURLOUGH TO SEE HIM BEFORE HE WAS ALLOWED TO LEAVE THE COUNTRY.

YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO LEAVE.

I GUESS I JUST WANT TO KNOW HOW IT FELT WHEN YOU WERE ABLE TO SEE HIM AND THAT YOU CAN SEE HIM AT LEAST GOING TO SAFETY AND WHETHER YOU HOPE AND THINK >> IF YOU WANT TO GET ME BALLING WILL WILL BOTH WILL >> SIAMAK, WE WILL GET YOUR MESSAGE OUT TO THE WORLD AND THANK YOU FOR BEING SO BRAVE AS TO TALK TO US AT THIS TIME.

>> GO AHEAD.

>> GO AHEAD, SIAMAK.

MESSAGE OUT, SIAMAK.

AND I HOPE WE CAN TALK AGAIN.

DON'T BE SORRY.

THANK YOU FOR DOING THIS.

YOU TAKE CARE, SIAMAK.

BYE-BYE.

SO, WE DO FIGHT ANYBODY NOT TO BE MOVED BY THAT CRY FROM PRISON.

OF COURSE WE REACHED OUT TO THE WHITE HOUSE FOR COMMENT ON THIS CONVERSATION AND THEY DID GIVE US THE FOLLOWING RESPONSE.

THEY BASICALLY SAID IRAN'S UNJUST IMPRISONMENT AND EXPLOITATION OF U.S. CITIZENS FOR USE AS POLITICAL LEVERAGE IS OUTRAGEOUS, INHUMANE AND CONTRARY TO INTERNATIONAL NORMS.

THE UNITED STATES WILL ALWAYS STAND UP FOR THE RIGHTS OF OUR CITIZENS WRONGFULLY DETAINED OVERSEAS INCLUDING SIAMAK NAMAZI.

SENIOR OFFICIALS FROM BOTH THE WHITE HOUSE AND THE STATE DEPARTMENT MEET AND CONSULT REGULARLY WITH THE NAMAZI FAMILY AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO DO SO.

UNTIL THIS UNACCEPTABLE DETENTION ENDS AND SIAMAK IS REUNITED WITH HIS FAMILY.

WE HAVE ALSO REACHED OUT TO THE IRANIAN FOREIGN MINISTRY ABOUT SIAMAK AND HIS FELLOW AMERICAN DETAINEES AND WE ARE STILL WAITING THEIR RESPONSE.

LET'S DIG A LITTLE DEEPER NOW ON THEIR PLIGHT WITH NASSER.

HE IS THE FORMER SENIOR ADVISOR AT THE STATE DEPARTMENT AND NOW A PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS AT JOHN HOPKINS AFFAIRS.

WELCOME BACK TO OUR PROGRAM TODAY FROM SAN DIEGO.

MY QUESTION HAS TO BE YOUR REACTION TO THAT DEEPLY TOUCHING AND DESPERATE PLEA FROM SIAMAK NAMAZI.

>> THANK YOU, CHRISTIANE.

THAT WAS A VERY DIFFICULT INTERVIEW TO LISTEN TO.

BRAVERY, COURAGE AND ELOQUENCE TO REACH OUT NOT ONLY ABOUT HIS OWN SITUATION BUT THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF HIS FELLOW PRISONERS AND HOSTAGES INSIDE IRAN.

I THINK WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO SIAMAK AND THE OTHERS IS BOTH CRUEL AND UNCONSCIONABLE AND IT IS REALLY THE RESPONSIBLE OF THE IRANIAN GOVERNMENT TO SHOW JUSTICE AND TO RELEASE THEM AND TO RIGHT THIS WRONG THAT HAS BEEN DONE TO THEM.

BUT I ALSO THINK IT IS IMPORTANT FOR THE UNITED STATES TO DO EVERYTHING THAT IS NECESSARY TO BRING SIAMAK AND HIS FELLOW PRISONERS HOME.

THERE IS A DEAL THAT IS BEING NEGOTIATED END OF THE DAY IT WILL FALL ON PRESIDENT BIDEN TO APPROVE THAT DEAL I HOPE THE UNITED STATES WILL DO THAT AND >> DO KNOW THE NATURE OF THAT DEAL?

WHAT WOULD IT INCLUDE?

WE HAVE SEEN BEFORE WHETHER IT IS THE AMERICANS OR THE BRITS, THEY HAVE GOT MANY OTHER HOSTAGES BACK.

THERE IMPRISONED NATIONALS BACK THROUGH FINANCIAL DEALS GIVING BACK MONEY THAT IS OWED TO IRAN BECAUSE OF MONEY THAT WAS FROZEN AFTER THE RESOLUTION.

WHAT KIND OF A DEAL COULD YOU ENVISION THAT MIGHT BE UNDERWAY TO RELEASE THIS BATCH OF HOSTAGES, SIAMAK AND HIS FELLOW DETAINEES?

>> FROM MY UNDERSTANDING THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN ON THE TABLE SINCE AT LEAST JUNE 2021 WHEN TALKS OF THE NUCLEAR DEAL WERE ONGOING.

IT WAS IN EXCHANGE FOR RELEASE OF THESE PRISONERS THAT IRAN WILL HAVE ACCESS, OR GET BACK SEVEN THEN A HALF BILLION DOLLARS OF ITS OIL REVENUE PROCEEDS THAT ARE FROZEN IN SOUTH KOREAN BANKS.

THAT DEAL DIDN'T GO THROUGH IN THE SUMMER IT LARGELY BECAUSE THE UNITED STATES POSITION WAS A DEAL ON THE PRISONERS SHOULD HAPPEN IN TANDEM WITH THE NUCLEAR DEAL.

THE NUCLEAR DEAL FELL THROUGH IN SEPTEMBER OF 2022 AND WE ENDED UP IN A SITUATION WHERE PROTESTS IN IRAN, RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN EUROPE AND IRAN WENT SOUR AND WESTERN GOVERNMENTS, THE UNITED STATES INCLUDED, ARE EXTREMELY SKITTISH ABOUT ANY DEAL THAT WOULD GIVE IRAN MONEY BECAUSE OF THE BACKLASH IN CONGRESS AND PUBLIC OPINION IN THE UNITED STATES.

I HOPE IN ADDITION TO THE WHITE HOUSE PEOPLE IN CONGRESS AND MEDIA ALSO HEAR YOUR INTERVIEW WITH SIAMAK AND UNDERSTAND THE GRAVITY OF THE SITUATION.

UNFORTUNATELY THERE IS NO WAY TO RELEASE THESE PRISONERS ULTIMATELY THE WHITE HOUSE HAS TO MAKE THAT DECISION THAT CONGRESS SHOULD SUPPORT THEM.

IN THE LAST FEW MONTHS THE GOVERNMENT OF QATAR HAS STEPPED IN AND BEEN NEGOTIATING DIRECTLY WITH BOTH SIDES TRYING TO COME UP WITH MECHANISMS TO ENSURE THAT THE MONEY IRAN WOULD GET WITH ONLY AND ONLY BE SPENT ON PHARMACEUTICAL AND FOOD ISSUES AND IRAN WOULD NOT HAVE ACCESS TO THAT MONEY FREELY.

AND AS WE ARE SPEAKING, THAT DEAL, THAT NEGOTIATION HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR SOME TIME.

IT IS PROBABLY TOWARD THE END.

WHEN ALL THE TECHNICALITIES HAVE BEEN SORTED OUT BETWEEN TEHRAN AND WASHINGTON OF COURSE TEHRAN HAS TO MAKE A DECISION IF THEY ARE GOING TO SIGN BUT IT REALLY COMES DOWN TO PRESIDENT BIDEN ALSO MAKING THE DECISION HE WILL SIGN AND PAY WHATEVER POLITICAL COST COMES WITH CRITICISMS IN CONGRESS DOMESTICALLY.

I HOPE THAT HE HEARS SIAMAK AS HE THINKS ABOUT THE NECESSITY OF MAKING THAT STEP.

>> YOU ARE BEING VERY FORWARD LEANING THERE.

CLEARLY YOU BELIEVE IN YOUR FORMER GOVERNMENT ADVISORS SO YOU GET THE SENSITIVITIES AND COMPLICATIONS.

AS A SHORTHAND, AS DISTASTEFUL AS IT MIGHT BE TO MAKE A DEAL AS YOU OUTLINE, SURELY A GOVERNMENT AND PARTICULARLY A SUPERPOWER NEEDS TO BE ABLE TO WALK AND CHEW GUM AT THE SAME TIME.

IN OTHER WORDS TO COMPARTMENTALIZE.

AS ODIOUS AS THE CRACKDOWN ON HUMAN RIGHTS IN IRAN, AS ODIOUS AS THE ALLEGATIONS OF SENDING WEAPONRY TO RUSSIA FOR ITS WAR AGAINST CIVILIANS IN UKRAINE, IS THERE NOT A WAY, AND I ASK YOU IS A FORMER GOVERNMENT ADVISOR TO SAY YES, JUST LIKE WITH THE SOVIET UNION WE CONDEMNED AND RESISTED COMMUNISM AND ITS TYRANNY BUT WE ALSO HAD A HOTLINE AND ARMS- CONTROL DEALS AND NEGOTIATIONS.

THEY NEED TO BE ABLE TO HAVE HUMANITARIAN OUTREACH AND BRING BACK THEIR CITIZENS?

HOW COULD THAT NOT BE SEEN AS THE RIGHT THING TO DO BY AMERICAN POLITICIANS AND AMERICAN PEOPLE?

BUT ALSO, TO ENTER A NUCLEAR DEAL THAT WOULD KEEP THE WORLD SAFER.

>> TO YOUR LAST POINT, IF THEY CANNOT HAVE A PRISONER DEAL THEY ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE A NUCLEAR DEAL.

SO, THERE IS AN URGENCY TO SEEING THIS PRISONER DEAL DONE BECAUSE THERE ARE EVEN LARGER ISSUES ATTACHED TO IT.

PRESIDENT BIDEN END OF THE DAY MADE A PRISONER DEAL WITH RUSSIA WITH A GOVERNMENT THAT IS KILLING CIVILIANS AND DESTROYING AND PULVERIZING AN ENTIRE COUNTRY AGAINST INTERNATIONAL LAW.

AND THE PRESIDENT MADE A DEAL FOR A PRISONER EXCHANGE AND BROUGHT BACK HOME AND AMERICAN PRISONER THAT WAS HELD IN RUSSIA.

AND I THINK SIAMAK IS RIGHT.

THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES SHOULD TAKE THAT UNFORTUNATELY DEALING WITH THE GOVERNMENT LIKE THAT OF IRAN, IT MEANS THEY ARE NOT GOING TO RELEASE THE PRISONERS OUT OF THE KINDNESS OF THEIR HEART.

THEY ARE GOING TO WANT SOMETHING IN EXCHANGE.

THERE IS GOING TO BE CRITICISM OF PRESIDENT BIDEN IF HE DOES MAKE THAT EXCHANGE.

BUT, THE SITUATION FOR SIAMAK AND HIS FELLOW PRISONERS IS GRAY AND ULTIMATELY THERE ARE MORAL, POLITICAL, HUMANITARIAN RESPONSIBILITY FOR US TO SEE THIS THROUGH.

AND, AS WE ARE SPEAKING, THERE IS A PROCESS HAPPENING.

I'M NOT PRIVY TO WHERE THAT PROCESSES BUT I KNOW AT SOME POINT THIS PROCESS ENDS UP ON THE DESK OF THE PRESIDENT AND THE PRESIDENT HAS TO SIGN.

I ALSO DO AGREE WITH SIAMAK THAT THE ADMINISTRATION HAS NOT REALLY REACHED OUT TO THE FAMILIES OF THE PRISONERS IN THE WAY THAT IT SHOULD.

IT HAS MET WITH MANY DISSIDENTS WHEN THE PROTESTS WERE GOING ON IN IRAN BUT IT DIDN'T TAKE THE FAMILIES OF THOSE WHO ARE HELD IN IRAN.

AND I DO THINK THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY AT THIS MOMENT IN TIME TO USE THE PROCESS TO FINISH THIS REALLY HORRENDOUS ORDEAL THAT THESE PRISONERS HAVE GONE THROUGH AND BRING THEM HOME.

>> SENIOR OFFICIALS RESPONDED TO OUR REQUEST FOR COMMENT AND THEY DO SAY OFFICIALS FROM THE WHITE HOUSE AND STATE DEPARTMENT MEET AND CONSULT REGULARLY.

OF COURSE PRESIDENT BIDEN HASN'T.

IN JUNE ON THIS PROGRAM WE HAD ROB MALLEY.

AND PUT THE SAME QUESTIONS TO HIM AND PARTICULARLY WHY SIAMAK WAS LEFT OUT OF THE PREVIOUS THREE HOSTAGE PRISONER SWAPS THAT WE JUST MENTIONED.

THIS IS WHAT ROB MALLEY SAID.

>> HE NEEDS TO COME HOME.

EVERY DAY HE IS NOT HOME IS A DAY THAT WE HAVE FAILED TO BRING AND IT IS SOMETHING WE WORK ON'S HARD AS WE WORK ON ANY OTHER ISSUE.

THE REASON HE IS THERE AND NOT HOME BECAUSE IRAN IS HOLDING HIM AS A POND.

THEY WANT TO EXTRACT CONCESSIONS AND IT IS UNCONSCIONABLE.

WE HAVE ENGAGED WITH IRAN THROUGH A THIRD-PARTY TO TRY TO GET THEM HOME AND WE ARE MAKING EVERY EFFORT TO GET HIM HOME, HIM AND HIS THREE COLLEAGUES AND WILL CONTINUE TO DO THAT.

UNTIL WE HAVE DONE THAT, WE KNOW THAT WE HAVE THAT VERY HEAVY RESPONSIBILITY AND BURDEN TO BRING THEM HOME.

>> THAT WAS IN THE SUMMER.

JUST WONDERING WHY AND HE DOESN'T KNOW WHY.

DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHY HE WAS EXCLUDED FROM THE LAST THREE PRISONER SWAPS?

>> I CANNOT TELL.

BUT ROB IS RIGHT.

BECAUSE PRISONERS ARE USED AS PAWNS, IRANIANS OR RUSSIANS IN THE CASE THAT THERE WAS A PRISONER LEFT BEHIND WITH THE LAST DEAL IN RUSSIA TO HOLD ONTO THESE PRISONERS FOR THE NEXT DEAL AND EXCHANGE.

THAT CLEARLY IS UNCONSCIONABLE AS ROB MALLEY SAYS BUT IT IS THE WORLD WE ARE DEALING WITH.

AND THE AMERICAN PRISONERS IN IRAN AND RUSSIA ARE PAYING THE PRICE FOR THIS.

AND THERE IS A POINT AT WHICH WE HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION THAT WE HAVE TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO ARRIVE AT A DEAL THAT WOULD BRING THEM HOME.

I AM HOPEFUL THAT IF AMERICANS IN THE WHITE HOUSE, CONGRESS AND MEDIA ELSEWHERE HEAR WHAT SIAMAK HAD TO SAY TODAY, THAT THEY WOULD LOOK AT THIS ISSUE WITH GREATER URGENCY.

>> REALLY IMPORTANT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR PERSPECTIVE AND YOUR KNOWLEDGE ON THIS ISSUE.

WE DO HOPE SOMETHING DOES HAPPEN TO BRING THOSE PEOPLE HOME.

NOW AS U.S.

TENSIONS WITH COUNTRIES LIKE IRAN GROW, OUR COULD BE ENTERING AN ERA OF GREAT POWER CONFLICT.

ONE THAT COULD SEE THE UNITED STATES FACE OFF WITH CHINA AND RUSSIA.

IT IS A CONFLICT THAT HE SAYS THE U.S. IS NOT YET READY FOR.

THE WALL STREET JOURNALS NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT MICHAEL R GORDON HAS BEEN REPORTING ON THE UNITED STATES MILITARY FOR DECADES AND HE TELLS WALTER ISAACSON THAT AMERICA IS TO COME UP WITH NEW WAYS OF WAGING WAR.

>> THINK YOU CHRISTIANE, AND WELCOME TO THE SHOW.

>> GLAD TO BE HERE.

>> YOU HAVE THIS AMAZING PIECE IN THE WALL STREET JOURNAL ABOUT HOW THE ERA OF GREAT POWER COMPETITION IS REEMERGING.

WE WENT THROUGH THAT IN THE COLD WAR AND AFTER 1989 WITH RUSSIA AND THEN 9/11 MADE IT THAT WE WERE FIGHTING INSURGENCIES.

TELL ME WHAT YOU MEAN ABOUT THE RISE OF THE SUPERPOWER CONFRONTATIONS.

THE PENTAGON AND HAS BEEN SINCE 2018.

FOLLOWING THE AMERICAN WARS IN IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN AND TO A CERTAIN DEGREE IN SYRIA AGAINST ISIS, THERE WAS A STOCK TAKING AT THE PENTAGON AND THE REEVALUATION OF WHAT THE NEXT MISSIONS WOULD BE AND IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE PENTAGON REALLY NEEDED TO GEAR UP FOR WHAT THEY CALL THE WORLD OF GREAT POWER COMPETITION WHICH WAS A THIN EUPHEMISM FOR CHINA AND RUSSIA.

THAT WAS A STRATEGY THAT WAS PROMULGATED BY THEN DEFENSE SECRETARY, JIM MATTIS AT THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION HAS DOUBLED DOWN ON IT IN ITS OWN VERSION OF STRATEGY WHICH IT ISSUED LAST YEAR.

>> DOES THAT MEAN THE WAY WE CHANGE THE WAY WE PROCURE WEAPONS WITH THE FOCUS ON THE FACT THAT WE MAY BE FIGHTING RUSSIA AND CHINA NOT INSURGENCY WARS?

>> IT REQUIRES A VERY SUBSTANTIAL TRANSFORMATION OF IN TERMS OF WHERE WE PUT OUR FORCES.

THE KIND OF MILITARY TECHNOLOGY AND WEAPONS THAT THE U.S. BUYS THE VERY STRUCTURE OF SOME OF THE ARMED FORCES HAS TO BE RETHOUGHT.

THEY HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO CONNECT THEM ALL UP SO THEY CAN SHARE TARGETING INFORMATION IN REAL TIME.

THE TASK OF DETERRING CHINA WHICH IS THE PRIMARY THREAT ACCORDING TO THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION'S PENTAGON IS JUST AN ENORMOUS UNDERTAKING WHERE YOU ARE DEALING WITH A POTENTIAL ADVERSARY REALLY THAT HAS THE HOME-COURT ADVANTAGE WITH TAIWAN JUST 100 MILES FROM THE COASTLINE OF CHINA.

>> YOU ARE A GREAT MILITARY HISTORIAN.

YOU GO BACK TO BISMARCK AND YOU TALK ABOUT GREAT POWER COMPETITION.

THE REAL WARNING THEY ALWAYS HAVE HIS NEVER GET INTO A GREAT POWER COMPETITION WITH TWO DIFFERENT GREAT POWER ADVERSARIES A SPECIAL ARE PUSHING THEM CLOSER TO EACH OTHER.

ARE WE MAKING THAT MISTAKE OF MOVING RUSSIA AND CHINA CLOSER TO EACH OTHER AS WE BECOME ADVERSARIES OF BOTH?

>> THEY HAVE MOVED THEMSELVES CLOSER TO EACH OTHER.

I DON'T THINK YOU CAN FAULT THE UNITED STATES.

WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE WORLD AS IT IS NOT AS WE WOULD LIKE IT TO BE.

IN THIS WORLD CHINA AND ITS MILITARY MIGHT HAS BEEN DRAWING SUBSTANTIALLY.

IT HAS A STRATEGY OF TRYING TO COERCE TAIWAN POLITICALLY TO REJOIN CHINA AND TO EXTEND ITS JURISDICTION OVER THAT.

AT THE SAME TIME VLADIMIR PUTIN HAS HIS OWN AGENDA WHICH YOU HAVE SEEN PLAY OUT IN UKRAINE TO PUSH BACK NATO.

THESE TWO COUNTRIES HAVE FOUND COMMON CAUSE WITH EACH OTHER AGAINST THE UNITED STATES.

I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU COULD CALL IT A FORMAL ALLIANCE, BUT THEY CLEARLY SEE BENEFIT IN COOPERATING TO A CERTAIN DEGREE IN THEIR BROADER PROJECT TO DIMINISH AMERICAN INFLUENCE AROUND THE WORLD.

SO, THIS IS AN ENORMOUSLY CHALLENGING THING FOR THE PENTAGON BECAUSE IT HAS TO BE PREPARED TO DETER CONFLICT IN THE WESTERN PERSPECTIVE THICK THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF MILES AWAY FROM THE UNITED STATES AND SIMULTANEOUSLY TO HER CONFLICT IN EASTERN EUROPE HALFWAY AROUND THE GLOBE.

WHAT MAKES IT EVEN MORE COMPLICATED IS THAT CHINA AND RUSSIA HAVE BOTH STUDIED HOW THE UNITED STATES WENT TO WAR IN DESERT STORM AGAINST IRAQ AND THEY HAVE DEVISED NOVEL STRATEGIES AND TACTICS TO FRUSTRATE THE U.S. >> YOU HAVE WRITTEN A BOOK RECENTLY CALLED DEGRADE AND DESTROY WHICH IS ABOUT THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST ISIS THAT WE ARE FIGHTING.

IT COMES OUT IN PAPERBACK SOON.

TELL ME WHAT LESSONS WE LEARN FROM THESE INSURGENCY WARS OR MAYBE BAD LESSONS WE LEARN THAT APPLY TODAY.

FIGHTING ISIS AND AL QAEDA AND EVEN FIGHTING THE TALIBAN IN AFGHANISTAN THAT WE DON'T ENJOY AGAINST CHINA.

FOR EXAMPLE IN THOSE CONFLICTS WE HAD TOTALLY UNRIVALED, UNCONTESTED AIR SUPREMACY.

THESE INSURGENT AND MILITANT FORCES DIDN'T HAVE AN AIR FORCE.

THEY DIDN'T REALLY HAVE EFFECTIVE SERVICE TO AIR CAPABILITIES.

SO WE HAD AIR DOMINANCE.

NONE OF THAT WOULD APPLY IN A WAR WITH CHINA.

SECOND OF ALL WE HAD BASES THROUGHOUT THE REGION FROM WHICH WE COULD PROJECT POWER, GROUND POWER, AIRPOWER AND THE LIKE.

THESE BASES WERE LARGELY IMMUNE FROM ENEMY ATTACK.

THAT ALSO WOULDN'T BE THE CASE IN A CONFLICT WITH CHINA.

THEY WOULD GO AFTER OUR BASES IN JAPAN AND GUAM FROM THE GET- GO.

SO, THE WAR AGAINST ISIS WAS BUT THERE ARE SOME LESSONS WHICH IS THAT IN THE WAR AGAINST ISIS WE RELIED EXTENSIVELY ON THE IRAQI MILITARY AND SYRIAN FORCES TO BE THE GROUND ELEMENT.

WE DIDN'T PUT A LOT OF AMERICAN FORCES IN COMBAT.

THERE WERE SOME BUT NOT A LOT.

SO WE LET THEM DO THE MAIN FIGHTING.

I THINK THAT IS THE WAY OF THE FUTURE FOR WARS IN THE MIDDLE EAST.

WHY IS THAT?

BECAUSE OUR MAIN FOCUS IS GOING TO BE ON CHINA AND RUSSIA.

IF WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO TANGLE WITH MILITANT FORCES IN THE MIDDLE EAST, AT LEAST WE ARE GOING TO WANT TO RELY HEAVILY ON PARTNERS ON THE GROUND INSTEAD OF OUR OWN TROOPS.

ONE EXCEPTION WOULD BE IF THERE IS EVER A WAR WITH IRAN.

I THINK ONE OF THE LESSONS IS THE WAR AGAINST ISIS SHOWED HOW WE NEED TO FIGHT IN THE MIDDLE EAST IF WE ARE GOING TO PUT MOST OF OUR EFFORT INTO DETERRING CHINA AND RUSSIA.

>> ARE WE IN AN INEVITABLE CONFLICT WITH CHINA?

>> IT IS HARD TO FORETELL WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN IN THE AMERICAN RELATIONSHIP WITH CHINA.

BUT IN THE CASE OF CHINA THERE PROJECT TO EXTEND THEIR INFLUENCE AND CONTROL OVER TAIWAN IS AT VARIANCE WITH THE AMERICAN POSTURE IN THE WESTERN PACIFIC WHICH IS TO DEFEND FREE TRADE, TO PROTECT ALLIES LIKE JAPAN IN THE REGION WHOSE SECURITY WOULD BE GREATLY COMPROMISED IF THE CHINESE WERE IN CONTROL OF TAIWAN.

>> TO THINK PRESIDENT BIDEN HAS TAKEN THAT A LITTLE FURTHER IN DEFENSE OF TAIWAN?

>> HE HAS TAKEN IT A LOT FURTHER BECAUSE THE POLICY, THE OFFICIAL POLICY IS STILL ONE OF STRATEGIC AMBIGUITY.

WHAT IS THE POLICY?

WE PROVIDE ARMS AND WEAPONS TO TAIWAN.

WE PROVIDE A LIMITED NUMBER OF TRAINERS.

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL RECENTLY HAD A STORY.

THAT WAS GOING TO BE EXPANDED THAT IT IS A SMALL NUMBER.

WE ARE TRYING TO GIVE TAIWAN THE CAPABILITY TO DEFEND ITSELF AGAINST CHINA.

IN ORDER TO DETER CHINA FROM EVER TAKE OVER THAT ISLAND.

WHERE THE AMBIGUITY COMES IN IS THE U.S. IS LEFT UNCLEAR WHETHER WE WOULD EMPLOY ITS OWN FORCES TO COME TO TAIWAN'S AID.

WHAT PRESIDENT BIDEN HAS SAID ON MORE THAN ONE OCCASION IS THAT THE U.S. WOULD AND THE PENTAGON IN FACT IS PLANNING TO DO SO.

NOT BECAUSE A DECISION TO DO SO HAS BEEN MADE THAT BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE PLANS AND THE CAPABILITIES AT HAND IN ADVANCE IN CASE YOU ARE CALLED ON TO DO SO.

ONE THING THAT IS IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE IS THE PENTAGON DOESN'T THINK CHINA CAN TAKE TAIWAN TODAY.

IT WOULD BE AN ENORMOUSLY CHALLENGING TASK FOR CHINA.

THEY WOULD HAVE TO DO AN AMPHIBIOUS LANDING EACH THEY HAVE NEVER REALLY DONE.

CHINA FORCES HAVEN'T FOUGHT WITH THE AMERICANS REALLY SINCE THE KOREAN WAR.

SO, IT IS HIGHLY AMBITIOUS.

IN FACT ACCORDING TO THE CIA THE CURRENT CHINESE MILITARY LEADERSHIP IS NOT CONFIDENT COULD CARRY OUT SUCH AN OPERATION TODAY.

FORCES HAVE BEEN INSTRUCTED TO BE READY TO DO SO IN 2027 ACCORDING TO THE CIA.

THAT DOESN'T MEAN THEY WOULD DO SO BUT IT MEANS THAT HE WANTS TO HAVE AT LEAST THAT OPTION AT A MINIMUM FOR POLITICAL COERCION AND PERHAPS MORE THAN THAT.

SO WHAT IS GOING ON NOW IS THERE IS A RACE.

BETWEEN THE CHINESE TO DEVELOP THIS OPTION AND A RACE BY THE PENTAGON TO DEVELOP THE CAPABILITY TO COUNTER THE OPTION SO THE CHINESE DON'T EMPLOY IT.

IN THIS RACE, WE ARE TRYING TO DEVELOP NEW CAPABILITIES AND DEPLOY ADDITIONAL FORCES.

MANY OF THESE PROGRAMS WON'T COME TO FRUITION UNTIL THE 2030S.

THE NEXT FIVE YEARS ARE A PRETTY ANXIOUS PERIOD FOR THAT PART OF THE WORLD.

>> YOU WROTE IN YOUR PIECE ABOUT WARGAMES THAT WE PLAY SOMETIMES.

YOU CAN EXPLAIN WHAT A WARGAME THAT IT IS SOMETHING THE PENTAGON DOES.

TELL ME ABOUT THE WARGAMES THAT HAVE BEEN HAPPENING ON THE CONCEPT OF STRUGGLING TAIWAN.

>> THE PENTAGON DOES HIGHLY CLASSIFIED WARGAMES OR SIMULATIONS.

THEY ARE ALL DONE IN COMPUTER SIMULATIONS AND CONFERENCE ROOMS AND MILITARY BASES.

IN MY RECENT ARTICLE I RECOUNT ONE THAT WAS DONE IN 2018.

THERE IS AN AIR FORCE GENERAL, LIEUTENANT GENERAL AND HE HAD RECENTLY BEEN ASSIGNED FROM THE MIDDLE EAST TO COME BACK TO THE PENTAGON AND BE ONE OF THE PEOPLE PLANNING THE FUTURE OF THE AIR FORCE.

IN FACT TODAY HE IS IN CHARGE OF THAT TASK.

HE IS AIR FORCE FUTURES WHICH IS WHAT THE OFFICE IS CALLED.

HE CAME BACK AND HE TOLD ME ON THE RECORD THAT WHEN HE FIRST SAW THE RESULTS OF THE WARGAME OF HOW WE WOULD FARE IN A CONFLICT WITH CHINA, THE EXPRESSION HE USED WAS HOLY CRAP WE ARE GOING TO LOSE IF WE FIGHT LIKE THAT.

>> SO WHAT WENT WRONG?

WHAT WERE WE MISSING?

>> UNLIKE THE CONFLICT IN THE MIDDLE EAST IF YOU ASSUME WE ARE AT WAR WITH CHINA, OUR AIRBASES IN JAPAN WILL COME UNDER MISSILE ATTACK ALMOST IMMEDIATELY.

OUR NAVAL BASE IN GUAM IS GOING TO COME UNDER ATTACK IMMEDIATELY.

THIS WILL INTERFERE WITH OUR ABILITY TO REPLENISH SUBMARINES AT SEA AND SUBS ARE REALLY IMPORTANT.

OUR ABILITY TO SUPPLY OUR OWN TROOPS WITH LOGISTICS IS GOING TO COME UNDER FIRE.

THERE IS TERMINOLOGY FOR THIS IN THE PENTAGON.

THEY CALL IT CONTESTED LOGISTICS.

NONE OF THAT WAS TRUE WITH OUR WARS IN THE MIDDLE EAST.

WE ASSEMBLED FORCES OVER SIX MONTHS IF YOU REMEMBER THE GOAL FOR.

NO ONE INTERFERED WITH THAT.

WE PICKED A TIME TO INITIATE THE CONFLICT AND THEN WE DID WITHOUT ANY INTERFERENCE.

THAT WOULDN'T HOLD IN A WAR WITH CHINA.

WHAT THE GENERAL WAS POINTING TO WAS THAT THESE ASSUMPTIONS WITH THE PREVIOUS CONFLICTS WOULD NO LONGER OBTAIN.

YOU NEED A TOTALLY NEW CONCEPT FOR HOW TO DO THIS.

YOU NEED TO HAVE SOME FORCES THAT COULD SURVIVE WITHIN RANGE OF THE CHINESE MISSILES.

THAT IS WHAT MARINES ARE TRYING TO DO NOW.

YOU HAVE TO HAVE LONG-RANGE MISSILES THAT YOU CAN FIRE FROM A SAFE DISTANCE INTO THERE.

YOU HAVE TO INTEGRATE THESE CAPABILITIES IN NOVEL WAYS.

IT IS NOT MERELY ABOUT SHIFTING OUR CURRENT MILITARY TO ANOTHER PART OF THE WORLD, IT IS A MATTER OF COMING UP WITH WHAT THE PENTAGON CALLS NEW OPERATIONAL CONCEPTS.

NEW FORCES AND NEW WAYS OF EMPLOYING THE FORCES TO DEAL WITH THE THREAT THAT IS ENTIRELY DIFFERENT FROM THE ONE WE HAVE BEEN INVOLVED WITH FOR THE PAST FEW DECADES AND THEN YOU HAVE TO FACTOR INTO THIS THE POSSIBILITY THAT IF RUSSIA AND CHINA, WE WERE CAUGHT UP IN A CONFLICT IN THE WESTERN PACIFIC, RUSSIA MIGHT ACT OPPORTUNISTICALLY TO PURSUE SOME AIMS IN EASTERN EUROPE.

WE KNOW THE RUSSIANS HAVE HAD A HARD GO IN UKRAINE BUT YOU STILL HAVE TO PREPARE FOR THE CONTINGENCY THAT LET'S SAY A DECADE OR TWO FROM NOW THEY MIGHT STRIKE OUT SOMEWHERE ELSE THINKING WE WERE BOGGED DOWN IN THE WESTERN PACIFIC.

IT IS REALLY A FORMIDABLE CHALLENGE.

>> WE TALKED ABOUT ONE OF THE BATTLES COMING UP THAT IS THE BUDGET BATTLE AND THAT IS BEGINNING THIS WEEK AND NEXT WEEK.

SO MANY TIMES OVER THE PAST DECADE THE BUDGET BATTLES HAVE CAUSED US TO SPEND MORE IN SOME WAYS ON WEAPONS EVEN AS WE TRY TO SPEND LESS.

WE SPEND AS MUCH AS THE NEXT NINE MILITARIES COMBINED AND YET WE DON'T GET A WHOLE LOT OF BANG FOR THE BUCK.

WHAT DO YOU THINK IS THE PROBLEMS WE ARE FACING WITH OUR BUDGETING STRATEGY?

>> I DO THINK WE GET A LOT OF BANG FOR THE BUCK.

THE IDEA OF COMPARING AMERICAN SPENDING TO OTHER COUNTRIES IS A LITTLE MISLEADING BECAUSE FIRST OF ALL WE HAVE A PROFESSIONAL MILITARY THAT PAYS A LOT MORE THAN THE CHINESE MILITARY PACE.

PERSONNEL COST EAT UP A LOT AS DOES HEALTHCARE.

ALSO THE UNITED STATES HAVE GLOBAL RESPONSIBILITIES.

THEY ARE TRYING TO DETER CHINESE AGGRESSION AND RUSSIA AGGRESSION IN TOTALLY DISPARATE PARTS OF THE WORLD.

THERE IS NO OTHER COUNTRY THAT HAS THAT AS A MISSION.

TO COMPARE OUR BUDGET WITH COUNTRIES THAT HAVE NICHE CAPABILITIES AND LIMITED RESPONSIBILITY I DON'T THINK IS DIRECTLY RELEVANT.

CONGRESS HAS SOMETIMES BEEN HELPFUL TO THE PENTAGON.

HERE IS AN EXAMPLE.

THEY HAVE ADDED MONEY TO THE PENTAGON BUDGET IN RECENT YEARS BY MERRILY BECAUSE OF THEIR CONCERN OVER THE CHINA THREAT.

LAST YEAR WHEN THE PENTAGON PROPOSED RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT BUDGET OF $130 BILLION, THAT IS AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF MONEY.

THE HIGHEST R&D BUDGET IN PENTAGON HISTORY.

THE CONGRESS ADDED 10 BILLION TO THAT SAYING WE HAVE TO DO MORE IN HYPERSONIC AND OTHER TECHNOLOGIES.

>> THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION PUT $25 BILLION I THINK IN WEAPONRY INTO THE UKRAINE CONFLICT.

TELL ME HOW THAT HAS AFFECTED THE STRATEGY AND OUR MILITARY READINESS?

>> I DON'T THINK IT HAS AFFECTED OUR MILITARY READINESS IN A BAD WAY.

I MAY HAVE A SLIGHTLY VIEW ON THIS.

WE HAVE SPENT A LOT OF RESOURCES IN UKRAINE BUT A LOT OF THE WEAPONS WE WERE GIVING UKRAINE FROM DRAWDOWNS AND OUR OWN STOCKS, 155 ARTILLERY SHELLS, JAVELINS AND THE THINGS OF THAT SORT.

THOSE ARE NOT THE WEAPONS THE U.S. MILITARY IS GOING TO USE IN A WAR WITH CHINA.

WE ARE NOT FIGHTING A LAND WAR WITH CHINA.

WE WOULD BE OPERATING WITH LONG- RANGE ANTI-SHIP MISSILES OR MARINE FORCES AND ANTI-SHIP MISSILES AND HYPERSONIC MISSILES.

WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE FIGHTING TRENCH WARFARE WITH THE CHINESE.

SOME OF THESE WEAPONS BEING PROVIDED TO UKRAINE ARE NOT RELEVANT FOR U.S. FIGHT WITH CHINA.

THE SECOND POINT I WOULD MAKE IS THE RUSSIANS HAVE LOST MORE THAN 1000 TANKS.

THEY HAVE LOST A SUBSTANTIAL PART OF THEIR ARMED FORCES.

THEY HAVE HAD MORE THAN 100,000 KILLED AND WOUNDED.

THERE MILITARY CAPABILITY HAS BEEN DIMINISHED SIGNIFICANTLY.

THAT IS A POSITIVE THING FROM THE U.S. PERSPECTIVE.

YES, WE HAVE GIVEN UKRAINE A LOT OF WEAPONS BUT THEY HAVE BEEN USED TO DIMINISH RUSSIA'S CAPABILITY FOR AT LEAST CONVENTIONAL MILITARY CAPABILITIES.

THEY STILL HAVE NUCLEAR CAPABILITY SO THAT IS A PLUS FROM A U.S. STRATEGIC STANDPOINT.

BUT HERE IS THE PROBLEM FOR THE U.S. WHAT THE UKRAINE WAR HAS SHOWN IS IN A CONVENTIONAL CONFLICT WEAPONS CAN BE CONSUMED AT ENORMOUS RATES.

I THINK MUCH MORE THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH THE AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL BASE WITH KEEPING THE WEAPONS FLOWING.

IT IS NOT ENOUGH TO HAVE SMALL NUMBERS OF THESE THINGS.

YOU HAVE TO HAVE MASSIVE NUMBERS TO KEEP UP THE VOLUME.

ONE OF THE HURDLES TO IMPLEMENTING THE NEW STRATEGY IS TO REVAMP THE DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL BASE.

TAKE SUBMARINES THAT ARE PRODUCING 1.5 SUBMARINES PER YEAR.

THERE IS A DEFICIT OF SUBMARINES.

THAT IS NOT A PROBLEM THAT IS EASY TO QUICKLY REMEDY.

IT IS A PRODUCT OF CONCLUDING THAT THE COLD WAR WAS OVER AND SPIKING THE BALL IN THE END ZONE A LITTLE TOO SOON.

THESE ARE THE BIGGER CHALLENGES THAT HAVE TO BE MET IF YOU ARE GOING TO MAKE THE STRATEGY REAL.

IT IS ONE THING TO ANNOUNCE THE STRATEGY.

THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION DID THAT IS THE EASY PART.

THE HARD PART IS IMPLEMENTING THE STRATEGY AND DOING SO CONSISTENTLY OVER THE PERIOD OF A DECADE OR LONGER.

>> MICHAEL GORDON, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE OPPORTUNITY.

>> FINALLY TONIGHT AMID THE NEWS OF A STRENUOUS PUSHBACK AGAINST THE ARRAY Z IS REALLY COALITION FIGHT ON DEMOCRACY, THERE IS A FOND FAREWELL TO AN ACTOR WHO HAS PASSED AWAY AT THE AGE OF 87.

HE STARRED AS THE MILKMAN IN FIDDLER ON THE ROOF ON STAGE AND ON SCREEN.

HERE HE IS IN A CLIP FROM THE FILM EXPLAINING HOW WE ARE ALL IN OUR OWN WAY FIDDLERS ON THE ROOF.

>> THE FIDDLER ON THE ROOF, SOUNDS CRAZY, NO?

>> YOU MIGHT SAY EVERY ONE OF TRYING TO SCRATCH OUT A PLEASANT, SIMPLE TUNE WITHOUT BREAKING HIS NECK.

>> PERHAPS NEEDED NOW MORE THAN EVER HE IS ISRAEL'S BEST KNOWN ACTOR.

HE APPEARED IN WORKS THAT RANGED OVER MANY.

TO HIS FANS, HE IS THE MILKMAN IN FIDDLER ON THE ROOF.

THAT IS OUR PROGRAM FOR TONIGHT.

IF YOU WANT TO FIND OUT WHAT IS COMING UP ON THE SHOW, SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER AT PBS.ORG.

THANKS FOR WATCHING AMANPOUR AND COMPANY.

JOIN US AGAIN TOMORROW NIGHT.