Return to Transcripts main page
Amanpour
Interview with Former Republican Lieutenant Governor of Georgia Geoff Duncan; Interview with Comedian and Pod Save the U.K. Co-Host Nish Kumar; Interview with Author and Pod Save the U.K. Co-Host Coco Khan; Interview with University of Michigan Professor of Public Policy and Economics Betsey Stevenson; Interview with "At the Edge of Empire" Author and The New York Times Diplomatic Correspondent Edward Wong. Aired 1-2p ET
Aired August 06, 2024 - 13:00:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[13:00:00]
BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN HOST: Hello, everyone, and welcome to "Amanpour." Here's what's coming up. Kamala Harris makes her pick. We break down what
her choice for VP will mean for the 2024 election. I'm joined by Geoff Duncan, a former Republican lieutenant governor, who says he's voting for
Harris over Trump.
Then, riots and racism plague the U.K. after a surge in far-right protests. We discuss how this happened with comedian Nish Kumar and journalist Coco
Khan.
Also, ahead, panic on the markets from Tokyo to Wall Street. But what's really the state of the global economy? I asked Betsy Stevenson, who served
as a top economic adviser to President Obama.
And --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
EDWARD WONG, AUTHOR, "AT THE EDGE OF EMPIRE" AND DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENT, THE NEW YORK TIMES: He realized he had no future in China. That China was
heading in the wrong direction at the time. Mao had kept his grip on power for too long.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: -- "At the Edge of Empire." Author Edward Wong talks to Walter Isaacson about his father's reckoning with China.
Welcome to the program everyone. I'm Bianna Golodryga in New York, sitting in for Christiane Amanpour.
Well, it's Minnesota Governor Tim Walz. After what feels like endless speculation, though, really, it's only been about two weeks, Kamala Harris
has chosen her vice-presidential candidate, and it seems to have been a personal choice.
People saying Harris was drawn to Walz's happy-go-lucky attitude, and it doesn't hurt that he has a track record of winning, even in conservative
leaning districts. Of course, she'll also want her new VP to sharpen the contrast between her and Donald Trump and the controversial Republican VP
pick of J. D. Vance. The Trump campaign has already begun its campaign against Walz, labeling him a dangerous radical.
So, let's get into all of this now with Geoff Duncan, a Republican who served as the lieutenant governor of Georgia until last year. Now, he says
that he'll vote for Harris over Trump defying the party.
Geoff Duncan, welcome to the program. It's good to see you. First, your reaction to this pic of Tim Walz?
GEOFF DUNCAN, FORMER REPUBLICAN LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR OF GEORGIA: Yes, I think Governor Wallace is a solid pick for Vice President Harris. I think,
you know, he's a man's man. His background is just average, which is great. I think it appeals to so many. He was a teacher. He went to college on the
GI Bill. He was a football coach.
And you know, whether you agree with his policies or not, from top to bottom, he is an authentic leader. And I think that's what America's going
to get to meet over the coming months.
GOLODRYGA: Well, of course, his policies are what the Trump fans ticket are picking up on right away. And they keep talking about the fact that he
is progressive, comparing him to a radical leftist and now putting him in the same camp as they've described Kamala Harris as sort of a failed leader
of a West Coast state, namely California. And now, they're doing the same with Minnesota.
This is a question that Walz was asked recently when he was interviewed on State of the Union on this specific issue. Here's what Jake asked him.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOV. TIM WALZ (D-MN) AND DEMOCRATIC VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: What a monster. Kids are eating and having full bellies so they can go learn. And
women are making their own healthcare decisions. And we're a top five business state. And we also rank in the top three of happiness.
So, yes, my kids are going to eat here. And you're going to have a chance to go to college. And you're going to have an opportunity to live where
we're working on reducing carbon emissions. Oh, and by the way, you're going to have personal incomes that are higher and you're going to have
health insurance. So, if that's where they want to label me, I'm more than happy to take the label.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: That's in response to his support of universal free school bills for students, voting rights for the formerly incarcerated, driver's
license for migrants who cross the border illegally, recreational marijuana signed a law that made abortion fundamental right as well. Do you think
this in any way will be a liability specifically for the voters that Harris is targeting, and that is moderate undecided voters, never Trumpers like
yourself?
DUNCAN: Well, I think those are authentic answers. Whether I agree with each one of them or not is a different story, but they're authentic. And I
think that's really what America's going to get drawn to. I continue to say over and over again, this 10 percent in the middle that's going to decide
this election aren't all aligned on policies. But I think what we're -- what our gravitational pull is going to be towards genuine leadership,
authenticness, somebody who acts like a president, somebody who acts like a vice president, and tweets like a president and a vice president.
[13:05:00]
To me, I have a much better chance of seeing that happen out of a Tim Walz than I would out of a J. D. Vance or a Kamala Harris versus a Donald Trump.
I mean, we watched what happened. Donald Trump gets a microphone, and he comes to Atlanta and he can't help himself but probably cost himself
Georgia with just an hour-long rally.
GOLODRYGA: We know that Tim Walz really made a name for himself on social media in the last few weeks after coining the description of weird for
Trump and J. D. Vance. And he also made clear though, in an interview with The New York Times, that he differentiates a Trump voter and Republican
voters from Trump himself and Vance himself, and he doesn't want to fall into the same categorization that Hillary Clinton was being criticized for
after she labeled Trump voters as a basket full of deplorables.
And here's what he said. He said, I keep coming back to this. If they're not voting for us, there's not something wrong with them, there's something
that's not quite clicking. So, don't assume that they're just not clever enough to understand what you're selling.
How does that messaging resonate with you? And how can he take that along now with Kamala Harris on the campaign trail for voters?
DUNCAN: I think that's a very mature answer. I think it's an answer that reflects, you know, not the deep-rooted political game plan that so many
people have followed for so long. That is an inviting tone to invite those that don't agree with you 100 percent of the time to join the journey.
For me, the journey is I'm going to vote for a Democrat and try to beat Donald Trump because I want my Republican Party back that I actually
recognize. And I'm willing to make the investment in the four years of not being in control as a party so that we can take the time, the necessary
time to fix what's broken. I think that is a very mature positioning by Governor Walz.
GOLODRYGA: We heard from J. D. Vance today following this news. He said that he called Governor Walz, left him a voicemail. He also said that he is
looking forward to debating him. So, it may well be that we may have a vice-presidential debate locked in sooner than we have a presidential
debate. What do you make of these two facing off?
DUNCAN: Well, I think it's great. I mean, I think it's an important opportunity to not only see substance of what their answers are, but how
they deliver those answers. I mean, we certainly saw how important debates were with President Biden and Former President Trump and how decisive that
was to actually force Joe Biden out of the race because of his performance.
But, no, the more debates, I think it's important. It does feel like there's a lot of theater that's wrapped up in trying to schedule these
debates, but at the end of the day, put them on stage, let them go head-to- head, and let's see who comes out the victor.
GOLODRYGA: We can't lose sight of the fact that you are a lifelong Republican, and you yourself have endorsed Kamala Harris. And here's what
you said. You said, I'm committed to beating Donald Trump. The only vehicle left for me to do that is with the Democratic Party. If that requires me to
vote for, speak for, or endorse Kamala Harris, then count me in.
Now, in response, Trump posted this about you. We have to purge the party of people that go against our candidates and make it harder for a popular
Republican president to beat the radical left lunatics. Geoff Duncan is a loser who is disintegrating in -- on his own. How do you respond to that?
DUNCAN: Well, I actually have a conservative record that's way more conservative than Donald Trump. In fact, I've got kids that have been
Republicans longer than Donald Trump has been. So, he's entitled to his opinion, but I don't want to be any part of his Republican Party because
it's really based on hate and anger. It's not based on conservatism.
So, I'm willing to vote for somebody else and support somebody else, speak for somebody else just to get the pass to not have to have Donald Trump in
the Oval Office for four more years.
GOLODRYGA: How exactly do you envision a Harris win as an opportunity to rehabilitate and rebuild the Republican Party?
DUNCAN: Well, I think it has to serve as a pivot point and a wakeup call. I mean, how many times can this guy lose or cause people to lose? I mean,
Georgia is a prime example. We have two Democratic U.S. senators, not because this is a Democratic state, but because Donald Trump tainted the
water. And came in here and tried to influence the race and people just, you know, the -- enough votes mattered where we revolted. That's what
Donald Trump keeps doing.
So, my hope is that we finally wake up as a party, realize, my gosh, there's got to be a better way forward. And we do exactly that. We pick
people who are actually honorable, pick people who are actually morally focused on a direction better than the gutter.
GOLODRYGA: There appear to be an internal debate within the Democratic Party between the moderates and the more progressives as to who Kamala
Harris would have been better suited to pick as her vice president. And many saying that Josh Shapiro was an obvious choice given that he's a very
popular governor in Pennsylvania. I'm wondering what you're hearing from Republicans in the sense that at least on social media and publicly, they
were -- they appear to be quite concerned about a Shapiro pick.
DUNCAN: Yes, I think the snap response has been, you know, exactly that. That Governor Shapiro would have been a tougher opponent to beat than
Governor Walz. But at the end of the day, I'm sure the Harris team did -- in fact, I'm certain they did better research than Donald Trump did on J.
D. Vance. But Governor Waltz is going to be a fine VP teammate to go through this.
[13:10:00]
But yes, at the end of the day -- I mean, the early easy math for me was Pennsylvania. But of course, the Harris team, you know, didn't see that
decision to be the top decision. But at the end of the day, Josh Shapiro is still going to be on the team, and he's still, I believe, going to deliver
Pennsylvania for the Harris ticket.
GOLODRYGA: Another popular governor is the governor, Republican Governor Brian Kemp of your home State of Georgia. And it does appear that for
whatever reason, Donald Trump, in -- at least hoping to win this state, which he has a high likelihood of doing, continues to keep shooting himself
in the foot by knocking Governor Kemp directly, personally, it appears he just can't let go of the 2020 election and his attempt to overturn it, in
that state. Brian Kemp defiantly not going along with that. Here's what he had to say about the governor just over the weekend.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT AND REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Kemp is very bad for the Republican Party. He wouldn't do anything. He
could have ended the travesty with a phone call because I did nothing wrong. He's a bad guy, he's a disloyal guy, and he's a very average
governor. Little Brian. Little Brian Kemp.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: He also went after Governor Kemp's wife, we should note. How is all of this playing in the State of Georgia in particular with Republican
voters?
DUNCAN: Not well for Donald Trump. Those words were not received well, and in my opinion, are complete gross negligence for a Republican to pick on
Brian Kemp and his record of conservative leadership over the last six years. I mean, he's done a phenomenal job through some of the toughest
moments in time. I was honored to be able to serve alongside him for a number of years during that process.
Look, it's not playing well for Donald Trump. I would beg to argue that this is now a huge turning point in Georgia. And there's really no way to
say Donald Trump is going to walk away with Georgia. I think it's now back up for grabs. And if Kamala Harris continues to gain momentum, I think she
wins Georgia and she wins a number of other swing states.
Donald Trump cannot help himself. Those statements were not about being a Republican, they were about being a self-centered jerk, and they were about
being somebody that was only addicted to the spotlight and not actually leadership.
GOLODRYGA: So, you really think George is back at play now?
DUNCAN: Absolutely it's in play. The suburbs where I live, 30, 40 miles north of Atlanta, are disgusted with what they heard from Donald Trump.
They're disgusted with the continued play after play after play, just trying to point to himself.
I mean, just me alone, I've gotten a lot of pushback from Republicans about not supporting him and supporting Kamala Harris, but now, I've started
getting notes and text messages and phone calls from others like, I get it, I get it. This guy's reckless on a good day, dangerous on a bad day.
GOLODRYGA: Wow. Interesting. Geoff Duncan, thank you so much for joining us. Appreciate your time.
DUNCAN: Thank you.
GOLODRYGA: Well, next to the United Kingdom, where far-right rhetoric has fueled the flame of racial hatred triggering riots across the country.
Mosques have been attacked, hotels, housing asylum seekers damaged and broken into, and police have been targeted with petrol bombs.
The source of it all is a tragic stabbing that saw three young girls killed last month. As the community was still grieving, misinformation began to
spread on social media, claiming that the suspect was a Muslim refugee. The suspect currently is in custody, was born in Wales to Rwandan parents.
Well, with this all playing out on Britain's streets, how can people feel safe again? Joining me on this is comedian and broadcaster Nish Kumar and
journalist Coco Khan. They both host the podcast Pod Save the U.K. Nish and Coco, thank you so much for joining the program.
Sadly, this is a story that hasn't gotten as much media attention here in the United States if for no other reason than we're in the midst of the
presidential election season and obviously, a lot of other international coverage.
So, set the scene for us, Nish, if you can, just the impact that this has had on the country there, and particularly with minority communities over
the past few days.
NISH KUMAR, COMEDIAN AND CO-HOST, POD SAVE THE U.K.: I think for -- I think it's been a terrifying week for minority communities. I think, you
know, the WhatsApp groups are filled with very concerned people. These are not -- you know, there's this phrase that keeps getting stewed around about
people's legitimate concerns about immigration. I mean, these are not legitimate concerns. These are people on the streets explicitly chanting
racist slogans. Some of them are visibly showing, you know, Hitler salutes. They have visible Nazi tattoos. None of these are legitimate concerns.
But the only thing that I would say about this is that most of the minority communities I know are not surprised. This has been brewing for a number of
years now, and I think it's very important to state that this has not come out of nowhere. There's been a real push to kind of portray this as an act
that nobody could possibly have seen coming.
[13:15:00]
But in reality, the normalization of far-right rhetoric has been happening steadily over the past decade and a half. A lot of it coalesced, Bianna, in
2016. And there has been a kind of casual use of anti-immigrant rhetoric by not just far-right politicians, but mainstream conservative politicians,
some mainstream politicians from the Labour Party, which is our center left party.
And there've been huge volumes of anti-immigrant sentiment churned out by mainstream conservative media outlets. There are op-ed pieces that have
just been filled with bile about immigrants to try and shift the blame for the difficult economic circumstances we've endured for the last decade in
this country on immigrant communities and refugees.
So, I would say, certainly amongst the people that I am speaking to, the mood is profound concern, extreme disquiet, but not surprise.
GOLODRYGA: Coco, would you agree? Are you not surprised, sadly, by what we've seen?
COCO KHAN, AUTHOR AND CO-HOST, POD SAVE THE U.K.: No, I'm not surprised. I mean, as I think Nisha articulated very well there, we've seen a drip feed
of anti-immigrant sentiment for many, many years. That's been -- it's almost like an eco-sphere of politicians saying it, repeated in certain
sectors of the press. And then, of course, you have the social media aspect and how certain platforms, you know, elevate these extreme views.
I think there is a lack of distinction between migrants, asylum seekers, and just people of color. And I think there has been an unwillingness to
try and create separation between those things. I think it's been politically expedient particularly for the Conservative Party that's been
our ruling party for 14 years until relatively recently. I think it's been politically expedient for them to tap into these racial anxieties and not
make distinctions about people who were born here, people who are legally here because they need to do a job in our NHS or prop up our failing
university system and so on and so forth.
So, I think it's been a long time coming. I think probably the surprise element of it, if there is indeed any, was the organization of it. Like,
not to trade in stereotypes about, like -- let's be honest, like, a mob of people that aren't that different to football hooligans, who we know very
much -- very well in Britain, you know, like, they are traditionally quite disorderly and quite chaotic, they've been very organized this time, and
that is quite chilling. And they don't seem to be relenting despite the pushback from not only the police, but from local communities who -- where
they can, are turning up in force to defend, you know, asylum seeker homes, even just their own high street.
So, I think that, that bit's been a bit shocking. You would normally look at the kind of, let's be honest, drunk football lads who are just looking
for a punch up and think, oh, yes, they'll go home, they'll get bored soon. But they haven't. And yes, they've organized themselves very quickly.
GOLODRYGA: And, Nish, this has been a real test, you could say, for the new government here, for this new prime minister the past few weeks. How
has the newly elected Labour Party, in your view, handled what we've seen on the streets? Because there has been criticism that action wasn't taken
soon enough.
KUMAR: Yes, I think there is some disquiet about the way that it's been handled, and the initial reluctance to give what this is a name, which is
explicitly Islamophobic and racist rhetoric that's coming out of these mobs. I think it definitely presents a massive challenge for Keir Starmer,
and Keir Starmer has sort of run on a platform of being strong on law and order. He is a former prosecutor, and he -- that's a big part of the record
that he ran on for prime minister.
He has now come out and made a sort of unequivocal statement condemning what he called the kind of thuggery, the far-right thuggery of a lot of
these groups. And he's also warned that there will be consequences, not just for the people participating in the riots, but for the people whipping
up violence online.
The challenge that that presents is the challenge that is presented to so many governments around the world, which is how do you regulate these
unaccountable tech platforms, you know, the website formerly known as Twitter is owned by Elon Musk, who not only has continued to platform hard
right figures that, under his previous ownership, Twitter have actually suspended, but has himself been stoking the fires that are burning across
my country at the moment and making comments on the inevitability of a civil war.
I think that there are meetings of a kind of security council, which we call COBRA, and there are ideas that the police are going to be deployed
across the country because there are more riots being planned, supposedly, to happen tomorrow, which is Wednesday.
[13:20:00]
That policing element of it obviously presents a big challenge for Keir Starmer. There is an opportunity, I think, for him to explicitly call this
what it is, and call this racism, and call this Islamophobia, and actually start a dialogue that could begin to reunify this country after a decade
and a half of divisiveness.
The challenge that he's facing that I don't really know how he's going to be able to resolve, only because it's a challenge that faces almost every
government across the world at the moment, is how to regulate and combat misinformation as it spreads online. So, the suspect is in custody, as
you've already stated, you know, is not part of the groups that are largely being held accountable for this. This is a person that was born in Britain.
The newspapers believe is a religious affiliation to be Christian, though it's unclear. Though we should always say that even if he was a Muslim
immigrant, that's no excuse for demonizing either of those two entire groups of people. But the specific problem here is that all kinds of
misinformation was spread about his identity online.
And the problem is that these social networking sites are both perditious (ph) for information, but also for organization and coordination. These are
not, as Coco was saying, just mobs of drunk men causing problems, these are coordinated groups of organized Nazi protesters who have gone to specific
locations, like, for example, two hotels where they believe refugees and asylum seekers are being housed, and they attack those hotels, set one of
them on fire.
The scary thing here is that social media both promulgates false information, but also the capacity to organize within these organizations
and movements.
GOLODRYGA: And it spreads so quickly. I mean, not to take away from what I'm sure are many bad actors in England, but Russia, as we know, for
example, has played a role in spreading misinformation and disinformation over the past few years to incite this type of violence and just chaos in
countries and democracies in particular.
We've seen, Coco, over the last year, a spike in anti-Semitism, a spike in Islamophobia in a country that is well known to be quite a diverse country.
I'm wondering from your perspective, what do you think are some of the first remedies that can be done to address this huge concern?
KHAN: Well, I think the first thing that needs to be done is get the -- get this disorder under control. There's no ability to rebuild peace and
rebuild communities if stuff is on fire and people are scared to leave their house. So, I think that's the first thing that needs to happen.
You mentioned there the Russian disinformation. It has been really chilling to see this play out so quickly. Just in case any of your, you know,
viewers are unfamiliar. There was evidence that this particular rumor, and there's often rumors that blame and assign blame to migrants or British
Muslims or whatever it might be that are false. But this particular one about this -- who was the culprit behind this horrible child killing, that
came from a channel called Channel 3 Now.
When you see it, it looks like an American cable channel, but it's not. When the Times, one of our newspapers here, tracked it down, it was tracked
down to Lithuania, and we have reason to believe it's attached to the Kremlin. So, they were reporting it before the police were even reporting
it. The police couldn't report it because the culprit is under 18, and we have reporting restrictions around that because they are legally a child.
So, there was lots of things kind of going on there.
And so, I think, to return to your original question about what can be done to heal it. One, get this under control. Two, look very closely at the tech
giants. Go for individual profiles who are whipping up hate, if you can get them if you're British and you've got the evidence for it. Obviously, the
problem of controlling tech giants is a large one, and I don't necessarily know if it will be resolved.
But I also would love to see some diplomacy on this from the international stage. I don't know what can be done. I don't claim to be an international
diplomat, but I think these are conversations that our foreign secretary must have and must form part of our longer international commitments and
work because this is a problem that is affecting everyone and is not going to go away.
GOLODRYGA: On a personal level, I'll ask both of you quickly as we close here. I'll start with you, Coco. As a British Asian, how does this make you
feel?
KHAN: Well, I mean, it feels awful. So, I'm, you know, a Muslim family as well. And it's been -- I think, one of the things that, like -- it's quite
interesting, because in the U.K., obviously the U.K. was a colonial power, and the vast majority of British people had no understanding about the
empire. Presumably, I think, because they think it will make people feel bad or something.
[13:25:00]
But actually, you know, when you learn about the empire, you learn also about stories of overthrowing the empire, getting your own independence,
and about the role of solidarity. But the number one tactic the British had was divide and rule, right? Pit communities against each other, make them
feel like, oh, you know, we're different to you, and even though we're all immigrants and marginalized, you know, we're slightly better. And that is
playing out right now. And that, I think, has been the most painful thing.
Aside from the fact that, yes, it is indeed my own community who are the ones who are being demonized and held up as being awful, but beyond that as
well, it's not just them, it's all people of color. And the idea that we are losing our solidarity with each other as a project that's been going on
for definitely at least 10 years of sort of saying, oh, no, the Muslims are the bad ones, not these ones. These ones are OK, or these ones are fine.
It's been so horrible to see that play out.
And in a way, this is the kind of logical end because when communities are made weaker by destroying the solidarity from other groups, they are, of
course, easy to be picked on. And I think that's sort of what's happened here. So, that's what breaks my heart the most, not just my own community,
but also just the wider story of being a migrant and being a person of color in this country and how lonely that really feels it is now.
GOLODRYGA: Nish, quickly your thoughts?
KUMAR: I feel -- you know, I feel very angry and disconnected from my country today in much the same way I did in 2016 when a sitting politician
was assassinated by a man who subsequently gave his name as Freedom for Britain. The sitting politician in question, Jo Cox, was an explicit
advocate of rights for immigrants and refugees.
And I have a similar feeling of alienation from my country today. I also feel a great deal of frustration. Many of us have tried to raise an alarm
about mainstream and inverted commas, respectable media outlets. Fanning the flames of extremism, and a lot of us have tried to raise those concerns
and been shouted down quite aggressively and told that we were panicking and that we were fabricating these conversations. And repeatedly, I've been
accused of importing U.S. style race politics to Britain and pushing an idea that Britain is racist when Britain could not be racist at all.
I will say the only positive to come out of this right now is everything is on the table, seeing truly what we're up against, and there are a lot of us
who won't be gaslit by that kind of rhetoric anymore.
GOLODRYGA: Well, the world is watching. Thank you both, Nish Kumar and Coco Khan. Really appreciate it.
KUMAR: Thank you.
GOLODRYGA: Well, now, across the world, markets bounced back a bit this morning after an incredibly bumpy Monday, which saw the Japanese Nikkei
plunging to its largest one day drop in nearly 37 years, and Wall Street stocks sinking 3 percent.
For months, there has been increased confidence of a so-called soft landing, the Fed managing to tame inflation without causing a recession.
But is that still possible? Joining me now on this is Betsy Stevenson. She previously served on President Obama's Council on Economic Advisers and is
now a professor at the University of Michigan.
Betsy, it is great to see you. I should just note, I interviewed your partner Justin Wolfers yesterday who described a rather rosier picture from
his perspective, calling this economy boring, for lack of a better word. I'm wondering if you concur.
BETSEY STEVENSON, PROFESSOR OF PUBLIC POLICY AND ECONOMICS, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: I think we have subtle differences in our view. What I see is an
economy that's been slowing down for the last year. I don't think we got big news on Friday. So, it's kind of surprising we had a big reaction to
what was really not big news.
The labor market is normalizing and the Fed chair has been saying he's seeing a normalizing labor market. I think it was just the first-time
people realized, oh, wait, this economy is slower. And maybe the Fed should have already acted to cut rates.
And I think putting those two behind, maybe there was some questioning of Fed credibility that just led to a little bit of a freak out. I don't think
that the Fed is way behind. I think they're maybe days behind, weeks behind, not as behind as they were when inflation first took off. So, I
think we're still on track for a soft landing. I think you'll see them pivot pretty quickly.
And I think the argument for them to cut rates in September and maybe even sooner is that the kind of tightening they need to reduce demand, we still
have that going on because we still have a lot of economic growth. The economy is strong. But what's happening in credit markets is producing its
own form of tightening. And if credit markets are going to do that, then the Fed can pull back a little.
[13:30:00]
GOLODRYGA: We saw a perfect storm over the last few days, obviously that massive selloff in Japan. And then as you said, what many didn't view is
that shocking or terrible of a jobs report. Nonetheless, we saw how the markets reacted. Can you just separate for our viewers what's happening in
Japan right now with the U.S.?
STEVENSON: Well, you know, Japan -- first of all, I think it's important for the viewers to understand that every country around the world thinks
when the U.S. sneezes, everybody else could get pneumonia. And so, there is a lot of concern about the U.S. goes into recession and how that's going to
ricochet through.
Japan is an economy that has been struggling for a lot longer than the United States and it has a really set of fundamental problems. But even
there, you know, again, we've seen the bounce back today. So, you know, it's not the same economy. It is an economy with, I think, I would say,
bigger problems. Bigger problems of slow sluggish growth. And you know, they've had their own inflationary problems, which I think is tougher for
Japan to handle.
GOLODRYGA: As we know, there are obviously models to follow in terms of specifically calling a recession, but some of this can be self-reinforcing.
And if you continue to talk about it and these concerns continue, and we continue to see sell-offs around the world, and now, obviously, concerns
about unemployment taking up, does that raise the alarm bells for you at all in terms of maybe you not seeing a recession right now but perhaps
another uncertainty developing, perhaps a war in the Middle East, a larger scale war that could impact oil prices? How do you factor all of that in?
STEVENSON: So, I want to be really clear about something. Stock markets have nothing really to do with the recession in the sense that's traders,
that's a bunch of people who are making investments, making bets, and all of a sudden, they think maybe those bets aren't going to pay off as well as
they previously thought.
You know, when it comes to a recession, we're talking about main street, we're talking about, are we producing as much stuff as we have been in the
past? And right now, the forecast for Q3 of this year is 2.6 percent growth. That's pretty far from a recession.
So, I don't think that we've got anywhere, you know, recession around the corner. I do think that we've seen a slowing economy and we have the Fed a
little bit behind and that raises the risks of a recession compared to, say, eight months ago, but I still think that the risk of a recession is
pretty low.
And I love that you mentioned wars, because what causes a recession is a big negative shock that does, you know, cause us all to pull back our
spending simultaneously at the same time in a way that causes the entire economy to shrink.
Now, there's one caveat that I do want to add, though, which is, you know, a lot of businesses out there, they're just going along, they're doing
their things. The fundamentals are fine. But they're seeing a falling share price. And I think the thing we need to avoid a recession is to make sure
that there aren't companies making dumb decisions too because of a falling share price, if they've got the fundamentals right.
Have a second look, make sure you've got the fundamentals right. But if you're overreacting to your share price, well, you could do something
that's less efficient. And if a bunch of companies do that, that could push us into a recession, because all of a sudden, companies start doing dumb
things that mean that they're less productive.
GOLODRYGA: Well, as you know, we are in an election season right now, and the economy traditionally is the number one issue for voters. As somebody
who worked in a Democratic administration, I'm curious to get your thoughts as to how Kamala Harris, going out on the campaign trail now, can focus
specifically on concerns the voters may have about the economy, about job security, about inflation even.
STEVENSON: Well, you know, Kamala Harris has a tough job because she needs to both take responsibility for the good things that happened in the Biden-
Harris administration and distance herself from things people don't like. She's fortunate in that she gets that option, but I think it is tough.
You know, what we're seeing is inflation has come down. In order to beat inflation, we typically do have to have a slowing economy. We've managed to
do it. That's soft landing without having a recession, that's amazing. But nobody actually likes inflation or a slowing economy.
So, even though they've been complaining about inflation, she can -- you know, the cure is not something they like either. So, what she's got to do
is emphasize the things that are really going on, which is we still have record low unemployment. It has risen. That's a change.
[13:35:00]
But you know, the public typically pays attention to levels. How many people have jobs? How many people don't have jobs? And what we have is a
share of the population that is unemployed, that's still at record historic lows. And if I was her, I would be talking about that and talking about
what she's going to do to continue to create excellent job opportunities in the United States.
GOLODRYGA: Yes, and it's going to be much trickier, as you know, against an opponent like Donald Trump, who takes credit for all good economic news
and blames the other side when there's bad news. Betsey Stevenson, thank you so much for joining us. It's really good to see you again. Say hi to
Justin for us.
Well, as market jitters in the U.S., the shockwaves are being closely watched in China, calculating how changes in the stock markets and the
White House could affect the future of the world's second largest economy.
China's economic leadership has been built atop decades of communist authoritarian rule. And few people have experienced this transformation as
closely and personally as author Edward Wong. In his book, "At the Edge of Empire," he chronicles how his family and the nation grappled with the
political evolution that paved China's path to global ascendance. He joined Walter Isaacson to discuss his latest work.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
WALTER ISAACSON, CO-HOST, AMANPOUR AND CO.: Edward Wong, welcome to the show.
EDWARD WONG, AUTHOR, "AT THE EDGE OF EMPIRE" AND DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENT, THE NEW YORK TIMES: Great to see you again, Walter.
ISAACSON: I want to read a sentence from near the beginning of your new book, and you say, when I was in my 20s, father showed me a small black and
white photograph of himself that I'd never seen before. He placed it in my hand as we sat together in the living room of my childhood home outside of
Washington, D.C. It had been taken in China in 1953. His eyes glimmered, and skin had none of the lines of age. He wore a plain military uniform and
a cap. I ran a finger over a darkened spot in the center of the shadow there. Father said, that's where the red star had been. A symbol of the
People's Liberation Army.
This starts you on this journey finding out about your family and how it's interwoven with Chinese history. Tell me how that propelled you.
WONG: Well, when I was in my 20s, I started getting much more interested in China. I went to study Mandarin in Beijing. I took courses in Chinese
history and politics in grad school. And so, I thought at the time, I learned a little bit more about what my parents have been up to during
these great years of upheaval on their Mao's regime.
I learned that my mother fled China fairly early age because they were landowners, the communists persecuted them. My father had a much more
complicated history and he started telling me a bit of that. He told me about how he had served in the army and he eventually fled to Hong Kong.
Now, I knew some of the general contours of that.
But it wasn't until after I finished a long tour in China for The New York Times, I was there from 2008 until the end of 2016, and then moved back to
Washington, that I really started probing deeper into his story, because it was only after living in China and going to many of the places where my
parents had lived, where my father had served in the army, in the Northeast of Manchuria, in the Northwest, in Xinjiang, that I could understand the
context for the questions that I wanted to ask him.
And so, I probed deeper into how and why he had joined the army and also what he did out there as part of this military occupation of Xinjiang that
Mao ordered from the very beginning of communist rule.
ISAACSON: You talk about your father and his brother and his subtitle is a family's reckoning with China. Your father's brother, Sam, goes the other
way, leaves China. Why was that and how's that reflected -- they're both still alive today. How's that reflected in their outlook?
WONG: Sure. Sam got a scholarship when he graduated from high school, right before the Chinese Civil War ended, Walter, right before 1949, when
the communists took over. And he decided to go back to Hong Kong, where he had been born and then go from there to America.
He -- part of the irony of the story, of course, is that he eventually becomes an engineer for the U.S. military, first in the army, and then for
decades in the Navy. Whereas, my father went in the opposite direction. He graduated from high school in Southern China a few years after Sam. And
instead of going to Hong Kong, where he had been born and forced to leave during the Japanese occupation, he decides to go to Beijing instead.
And the reason for that is because he had become enamored of the communist revolution. He thought that Mao was authentic in wanting to bring change to
China and wanting to transform China and put it on par with Britain and with America at the time. And he thought that the communist could unite
China and make it strong while the nationalists had failed because of corruption in their government, because of their mismanagement, because of
their poor economic policies. So, my father really believed that he could help build China into a stronger nation.
[13:40:00]
And that's when he went to Beijing, took part in a military parade, also parade of students and workers in front of Mao in Tiananmen Square in 1950.
And then, very shortly afterwards, signed up to join the new air force in order to fight the Americans on the Korean peninsula.
ISAACSON: But they send them off to Xinjiang Province, up Kashgar as a city (ph). I remember being in Kashgar once, and they use the great Chinese
phrase, the heaven is high and the emperor is far away. In other words, they're not -- they're on the edge of empire. And of course, that's what
your book's title is. What is it about China that has all these edges of empire, including where your father was sent?
WONG: You know, one of the themes I wanted to really bring out in the book was that, in a way, China is defined by these frontier regions. And they're
not really frontiers when you think about it. The areas of Xinjiang, the Tibetan areas, they make up a third of China. And when you think about it,
China really is the last of the big Eurasian empires to survive. The British, the Ottomans, the Russians, they all fell apart because of the
world wars.
China, on the other hand, was able to reconstitute itself as an empire under the communists when Mao took over. And then, when he sent troops into
Xinjiang, into Tibet to occupy those regions, my father was in the vanguard of those troops being sent out in the early '50s. He became part of that
military occupation.
And in my assessment of this, much of the rule of the communist party is defined by this idea that they have to hold on to the empire. They have to
make sure that doesn't fall apart. One of the main narrative tracks of the book is contemporary China from 2008 onward and the rule of Xi Jinping and
how that's changed under him.
And I say in the book that one of Xi's big fears is what happens to Soviet Union, and he's -- he talked about that privately with President Biden in a
dinner in 2011 in China. He's talked about that in private speeches with communist party officials. I dug all that out for the book. And when he
talks about that he has in his head this idea of the Soviet territories, like the Central Asian territories, really leaving the empire. And I think
he has a great fear of that in China.
And so, the increasing use of force and paranoia and the idea of China as a state that must maintain internal security is ever present for Xi because
of this.
ISAACSON: You talk about your father marching through Tiananmen Square where the troops being reviewed by Mao Zedong. And then, of course, when
you go to China as a correspondent for The New York Times, you're there. You see the same thing. You watch the troops. Did you hearken back to your
father's experience? And you use in the book a wonderful phrase about a Mobius strip of your family's history and China's intertwining.
WONG: Yes, I mean, that really struck me. I've seen a military parade twice now in Tiananmen Square where Xi presiding over at both times. And,
of course, you're struck by the physicality of it, Walter. You see these long lines of troops, of all the armored vehicles, of even the ballistic
missiles that they roll out.
My father obviously saw something on a smaller scale. But I did feel that there is a certain echo of history here. I really felt when I stood there,
oh, my father must have been just a few yards or a few 100 yards away from me, and actually in the parade, march in front of Mao, just like these
troops are doing, wanting to see some sort of sign of approval from the great leader, all acting out of patriotism or nationalism, and I really
felt that sense there in Tiananmen Square.
So, I feel like a lot of the feelings of China becoming a stronger nation, of the nationalism that courses through many Chinese citizens and through
the City of Beijing today, it has their foundations earlier, much earlier in the Mao era.
ISAACSON: So, you think there's a direct line from Mao to Xi Jinping?
WONG: I do think that. I think she himself sees that I think he has proclaimed himself a core leader, just like Mao and Deng Xiaoping were
considered core leaders. And he sees himself as a guardian of the legacy of the communist revolution and of the party's power. I think he sees that
more sharply than some of his predecessors.
He comes from red royalty. He's a princeling. His father was one of Mao's compatriots and was a senior leader in the communist party, even though for
a certain period he was persecuted by Mao. And I think Xi sees himself as the guarantor of all that.
ISAACSON: So, your father wants to join the communist party. He's excited when it seems like a possibility. He's been part of the People's Liberation
Army. And yet, he doesn't get selected to join the communist party. And that's a hinge in the book, where he sort of gets disillusioned. What
happened?
[13:45:00]
WONG: The roots go back to when he was in Manchuria, hoping to go with the Air Force into Korea to fight the Americans. And instead, he gets sent to
Xinjiang, as you pointed out. And he suspected something was up at that time. He suspected he was being sent into exile. Then in Xinjiang, over six
years or so, he wins the confidence of military commanders. He gets a chance to go back into interior China to study engineering. He wants to
build military aircraft for the country. And he's got a pending application to be a party member. Some senior officials in Xinjiang have recommended
that he be allowed to join the party, and he has high hopes for doing that.
Then he discovers through conversations with other officials that they still don't trust him. He has something in his background dossier, and he
realizes it's because he comes from a merchant family that lived in Hong Kong. He was born there in the British colony, and his brother, as you
know, had gone to America to study there.
And so, the communists suspected this about his background. At the time in Maoist China, there was hunts for subversives. There were campaigns against
counter revolutionaries. And you never knew who might be cast under this shadow of suspicion. And so, my father realized there's something
structurally wrong with that -- with the party, that someone like himself, who had made all these sacrifices for the party and for the army, could not
be trusted.
And I think he realized that because of this dynamic of power and of fear and suspicion, that he would never be trusted. He also experienced the
great famine that happened when Mao instituted his disastrous economic policies under the Great Leap Forward. 30 to 40 million Chinese died during
that period. My father fell ill, as did his classmates.
And those along with a few other factors, like Mao's purges of military commanders, then spurred him to make a flight to Hong Kong. He realized he
had no future in China. That China was heading in the wrong direction at the time. Mao had kept his grip on power for too long, and he needed to get
out of the country.
ISAACSON: Partway through the book, Reinhold Niebuhr, the Protestant theologian, sort of pops into your mind, I think. And you do a reflection
on how Niebuhr looked at America's perception of its own innocence. And you also say that struck you about China as well. Explain that to me.
WONG: Yes, I think there are a lot of parallels between America and China. I think this is one thing that many Americans miss, even once analysts in
Washington, for example, I think that both countries see themselves as great powers. And I don't mean just the leaders, I mean, the leaders and
the citizens. They see themselves as powers that have something to give to the world and that the world should accept that and appreciate it as well.
And I think Americans feel strongly that way. They -- America, as you know, has a certain missionary zeal in its foreign policy. It wants to spread
democracy in the world. We see that as recently as Biden, who's framed his foreign policy as democracy versus autocracy. They say they don't want
regime change in other countries. But at the same time, when you look at all the rhetoric that comes out of American leaders and policymakers, they
would prefer it if other countries adopted democratic systems and certain norms.
I think China isn't trying to impose its exact political system on other countries, but it would like other countries to accept certain things that
China is giving it. I think China believes its economic system might be better than that of many other countries, including the United States. I
think it feels that if other countries adopted its vision of economic performance of trade, and to a certain degree of politics, then those
countries would benefit. And I think neither country sees the negative consequences that could result from trying to persuade or impose these
policies on other nations.
ISAACSON: What does China feel, its leadership, and maybe even its people, about the possibility of Donald Trump being president again?
WONG: That's a complicated question. I don't -- I'm not in the heads of the leaders, but I have spoken to some Chinese scholars and analysts who
are close to the party and close to some decision makers. They say that there is a feeling that Trump being head of the United States will be
better for China's interests in the long-term.
[13:50:00]
And they say this because when they look at what Biden has done, they see that Biden has strengthened the military alliances of the U.S. around Asia.
They feel that there's a policy of containment now that Biden has been pushing. And they -- and also, Biden kept the tariffs that Trump imposed on
China in place while also starting a new policy of trying to restrict very sensitive high-tech components to China, semiconductors, advanced
semiconductor tooling equipment, things that all countries need in order to make the next great technological leap. And so, China sees this policy of
what they call containment as much more cohesive in the Biden administration than was under Trump.
Now, they had no love for what Trump did. Trump, of course, imposed tariffs, started this trade war, and they -- there was much anxiety about
that. But I think they see that as a lesser problem than the more holistic policy that Biden has started. And they also think that Trump cannot
strengthen America's alliances in the same way that Biden has done.
In fact, if anything, they think that Trump erodes America's alliances and sows distrust among American allies in the U.S. And I think they feel that
benefits them in the long run.
ISAACSON: Xi Jinping has embraced a nationalism and an authoritarianism in order to rule China with more power. But we've also seen that around the
world. This seems to be a trend, whether it's Putin or Orban or many others, we even see that a bit in the United States. To what extent do you
think this is a trend, and what do the Chinese think about that?
WONG: I do think that there is momentum right now in the world for rethinking of democracy and of whether authoritarianism is the way to go
for many of these countries. I mean, it goes back and forth. Walter, we've seen, for example some setbacks to the far-right in recent elections in
Europe. But I also think that in the U.S., we're now grappling with this idea of, you know, whether certain authoritarian ways of governing might be
better than messy democracy.
And I think you see this not just in the push and pull between the Republicans and the Democrats, but if you look at polling among
millennials, you see a lot of them say, for example, democracy isn't necessarily that important to the governance of the United States. I think
a large part of it is an erosion of our memories from the mid-20th century, Walter, that there's a -- as the older generations fade away younger people
forget the wars that were fought in the 20th century and of the rise of authoritarianism.
I do think that China does present, to a certain degree, a model for some people because of the economic boom that the communist party has managed to
oversee in China. And the fact that the party, oftentimes, in recent decades, has seemed adaptable. We have to admit that, that it has been able
to pick and choose policies and put in place ones that have allowed the country to grow, even as it maintains this repressive security state in
many parts of China, especially in the western regions, as we talked about.
And one example is the recent zero-COVID policy that Xi adopted. It was very strict. People took to the streets in order to protest it, and then Xi
immediately dropped it. It's amazing. Like he just turned around. Many analysists, including here in the U.S., were skeptical he would drop that
policy. They said it was a personal policy to seize. But instead, as soon as he realized that pressure built a certain point, he immediately reversed
course and went the exact opposite direction.
And I think that that's an example of this adaptation that we see in the communist party and that type of policymaking might have appeal to some
people in other parts of the world.
ISAACSON: Edward Wong, thank you so much for joining us.
WONG: Thanks a lot, Walter.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GOLODRYGA: And finally, we wanted to leave you with a few inspirational stories from the Olympics so far. Boxer Cindy Ngamba has made history by
securing the first ever medal for the refugee team. As a gay woman, she can't return to her home country of Cameroon, where homosexuality is
illegal. She's guaranteed at least a bronze medal for the team.
And Kamia Yousufi is an Afghan runner who, after running her race, held up a sign that declared, education, sport, our rights, sending a powerful
message on women's rights to the ruling Taliban.
And swimmer Valerie Tarazi, who carried the Palestinian flag during the opening ceremony, spoke to Correspondent Amanda Davies about her using the
platform to advocate for peace.
[13:55:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VALERIE TARAZI, PALESTINIAN SWIMMER: My little bit of fear is not the fear for my life. You have people in Gaza, in the West Bank, that have to fear
for their life every single day. So, me speaking out and doing it, again, in the most peaceful manner, I don't think that's an issue.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: Such incredible stories of athletes defying all odds and promoting peace and equality.
Well, that is it for now. If you ever miss our show, you can find the latest episode shortly after it airs on our podcast. And remember, you can
always catch us online, on our website, and all-over social media. Thanks so much for watching, and goodbye from New York.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:00:00]
END
