♪♪ >>> HELLO, EVERYONE AND WELCOME TO "AMANPOUR & COMPANY."

HERE'S WHAT'S COMING UP.

>> THE COURT HAS ARRIVED AT A JUDGMENT IN STRICT ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW AND THE EVIDENCE.

>> 20 YEARS FOR JIMMY LAI.

WHAT THE SENTENCING OF THE HONG KONG DEMOCRACY ACTIVIST TELLS US ABOUT CHINA TODAY.

>>> THEN, TRUMP WANTS THE RUSSIA- UKRAINE WAR TO END BY THE SUMMER.

IS IT POSSIBLE?

I ASKED EXPERT DARA MASSICOT.

>>> PLUS -- >> IT'S MUCH EASIER TO COUNT MISSILES AND COUNT WARHEADS THAN IT IS TO DETERMINE AI CAPABILITY.

>> JAKE SULLIVAN, BIDEN'S NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER, TELLS WALTER ISAACSON, THAT ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE THE U.S.

IS AT SERIOUS RISK OF BEING OVERTAKEN BY CHINA.

♪♪ >> "AMANPOUR & COMPANY" IS MADE POSSIBLE BY --THE ANDERSON FAMILY ENDOWMENT.

JIM ATTWOOD AND LESLIE WILLIAMS.

CANDACE KING WEIR.

THE SYLVIA A. AND SIMON B. POYTA PROGRAMMING ENDOWMENT TO FIGHT ANTISEMITISM.

THE STRAUS FAMILY FOUNDATION.

THE PETER G. PETERSON AND JOAN GANZ COONEY FUND.

CHARLES ROSENBLUM.

MONIQUE SCHOEN WARSHAW.

KOO AND PATRICIA YUEN, COMMITTED TO BRIDGING CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN OUR COMMUNITIES.

BARBARA HOPE ZUCKERBERG.

AND BY CONTRIBUTIONS TO YOUR PBS STATION FROM VIEWERS LIKE YOU.

THANK YOU.

>>> WELCOME TO THE PROGRAM, EVERYONE.

I'M BIANNA GOLODRYGA IN NEW YORK SITTING IN FOR CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR.

IT'S A DEATH SENTENCE.

IT'S HEARTBREAKINGLY CRUEL.

THOSE ARE THE WORDS OF THE CHILDREN OF HONG KONG DEMOCRACY ACTIVIST JIMMY LAI AFTER THEIR 78-YEAR-OLD AILING FATHER WAS SENTENCED TO 20 YEARS IN JAIL FOR VIOLATING NATIONAL SECURITY LAWS.

>> THE HEAVY SENTENCE CLEARLY REFLECTS THE VERY SERIOUS NATURE OF THE OFFENSE COMMITTED BY LAI CHI YING.

THE COURT'S JUDGMENT ILLUSTRATE THAT THE RULE OF LAW IN HONG KONG IS ROBUST.

CRIMINAL ACTS WILL NEVER BE TOLERATED.

AND NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW.

>> LAI, WHO IS A BRITISH CITIZEN, DENIES ALL CHARGES, SAYING HE'S A POLITICAL PRISONER.

THE TARGET OF PERSECUTION FROM BEIJING.

BRITAIN'S FOREIGN MINISTER REACTED TO THE NEWS INSISTING THAT LONDON WILL RAPIDLY ENGAGE FURTHER ON LAI'S CASE.

YOU MAY RECALL LAI, A SELF-MADE BILLIONAIRE, RAN THE NOW-SHUTTERED FIERCELY PRO-DEMOCRACY TABLOID NEWSPAPER "APPLE DAILY" THAT HAD LONG MADE HIM A THORN IN BEIJING'S SIDE.

KRISTIE LU STOUT IS IN HONG KONG WITH MORE.

>> I'M STANDING OUTSIDE THE COURT WHERE THE FORMER HONG KONG MEDIA MOGUL AND LONG- TIME CRITIC OF CHINA JIMMY LAI HAS BEEN SENTENCED TO 20 YEARS IN PRISON.

IN DECEMBER HE WAS FOUND GUILTY OF SEDITION AND TWO COUNTS OF COLLUDING WITH FOREIGN FORCES.

NOW, COLLUSION HERE IN HONG KONG UNDER THE BEIJING-IMPOSED NATIONAL SECURITY LAW IS A VERY SERIOUS CRIME PUNISHABLE BY UP TO LIFE IN PRISON.

JIMMY LAI EARLIER HAD PLEADED NOT GUILTY TO ALL THE CHARGES.

IN DECEMBER THE THREE JUDGES PRESIDING OVER THE CASE CONVICTED JIMMY LAI.

THEY CALLED HIM A, QUOTE, MASTERMIND OF CONSPIRACIES.

THEY POINTED OUT HIS LOBBYING OF U.S.

POLITICIANS DURING PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP'S FIRST TERM AS WELL AS HOW HE USED HIS EMPIRE, NAMELY HIS "APPLE DAILY" NEWSPAPER TO CALL FOR INTERNATIONAL SANCTIONS AGAINST CHINA AND HONG KONG DURING THE 2019 PROTESTS.

NOW, THIS HAS BEEN THE MOST HIGH-PROFILE NATIONAL SECURITY CASE SINCE THE LAW WAS IMPOSED BY BEIJING ON HONG KONG IN 2020.

IT HAS BEEN ROUNDLY CRITICIZED BY WESTERN GOVERNMENTS.

THE U.S.

AND OTHER COUNTRIES HAVE CALLED FOR THE RELEASE OF JIMMY LAI.

IN FACT, U.S.

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP REPORTEDLY PRESSED CHINESE LEADER XI JINPING TO FREE JIMMY LAI DURING THEIR TALKS LAST YEAR.

CHINA HAS REPEATEDLY WARNED AGAINST ANY INTERFERENCE AND HONG KONG HAS INSISTED JIMMY LAI HAS RECEIVED A FAIR TRIAL.

SO WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?

AN APPEAL CAN BE A LONG-DRAWN-OUT PROCESS WITH A LOW SUCCESS RATE.

AS FOR JIMMY LAI, HE IS 78 YEARS OLD AND HAS ALREADY SPENT MORE THAN FIVE YEARS IN PRISON.

>> OUR THANKS TO KRISTIE LU STOUT REPORTING FROM HONG KONG.

NOW LET'S GO TO RUSH DOSHI, AN EXPERT ON CHINA, A PROFESSOR AT GEORGETOWN, AND A SENIOR FELLOW ON THE COUNSEL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS.

RUSH, WELCOME TO THE PROGRAM.

AS "THE NEW YORK TIMES" NOTES, THIS 20- YEAR SENTENCE IS HARSH EVEN BY MAINLAND STANDARDS.

AND YOU LOOK AT SIX FORMER APPLE DAILY EMPLOYEES WHO WERE SENTENCED TO UP TO TEN YEARS.

WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF THE MESSAGE THAT PERHAPS CHINA AND THESE COURTS ARE SENDING BY IMPOSING SUCH A HARSH SENTENCE ON LAI?

>> WELL, IT'S GREAT TO BE WITH YOU.

AND LET'S START WITH A BASIC FACT.

JIMMY LAI WAS A SELF- MADE MAN.

HE MADE A FORTUNE IN THE TEXTILE BUSINESS.

HE FLED FROM MAOIST CHINA TO HONG KONG.

AND HE CHOSE TO USE THAT FORTUNE TO PROMOTE LIBERAL VALUES, DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS IN HONG KONG RIGHT AFTER THE TIANANMEN SQUARE MASSACRE.

SO HE'S BEEN VIEWED AS A THORN IN BEIJING'S SIDE FOR A VERY LONG TIME.

AND REALLY IN THE LAST FEW YEARS WE'VE SEEN BEIJING THROUGH A SERIES OF CHARGES AGAINST HIM BECAUSE THEY WANT TO SHUT HIM UP AND THEY WANTED TO SHUT HIM DOWN.

THE SIGNAL THAT THEY WANT TO SEND TO THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY IN HONG KONG BUT ALSO WITHIN CHINA AND AROUND THE WORLD IS IF YOU CRITICIZE CHINA YOU'LL FACE CONSEQUENCES.

>> AND WE SHOULD NOTE THAT LAI WAS TRIED BY A HAND-PICKED PANEL OF JUDGES WITHOUT A JURY.

AND AS YOU NOTE, HE HAS BEEN A THORN IN THE GOVERNMENT'S SIDE NOW FOR YEARS, WRITING SCATHING OP-EDS.

I SPOKE WITH ONE OF HIS ATTORNEYS IN THE SUMMER OF LAST YEAR AS WE WERE AWAITING NOT ONLY THE TRIAL BUT THEN OBVIOUSLY THIS SENTENCING, AND HERE'S WHAT SHE TOLD ME.

>> WHAT WE'VE ESSENTIALLY SEEN SO FAR WITH JIMMY LAI'S CASE HAS BEEN HIM FACING CHARGES UNDER THE NATIONAL SECURITY LAW, WHICH ESSENTIALLY AMOUNT TO CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT JOURNALISM.

SO UNDER THE NATIONAL SECURITY LAW DISSENT HAS ESSENTIALLY BEEN CRIMINALIZED AND JIMMY LAI HAS BEEN TARGETED FOR RUNNING A NEWSPAPER, FOR EXERCISING INTERNATIONALLY PROTECTED RIGHTS, AND FOR STANDING UP FOR DEMOCRATIC VALUES WHICH THE WORLD HOLDS DEAR.

>> WHAT DOES THE SENTENCING OF JIMMY LAI MEAN FOR WHATEVER REMAINS OF HONG KONG'S MEDIA AND BUSINESS ELITE?

>> YEAH, THIS IS THE FINAL NAIL IN THE COFFIN TO THE IDEA THAT HONG KONG STILL HAS FREE SPEECH.

20 YEARS AGO HONG KONG RANKED IN THE TOP 20 FOR PRESS FREEDOMS.

TODAY IT'S SOMETHING LIKE 150.

THIS IS PRETTY CONSEQUENTIAL.

I'LL JUST NOTE THAT THE VIEW YOU JUST HEARD ISN'T JUST THE VIEW OF JIMMY LAI'S LAWYERS.

IT'S ALSO THE VIEW OF THE UNITED NATIONS.

THE UNITED NATIONS HAS CONSISTENTLY CALLED FOR JIMMY LAI'S RELEASE.

THEY SAID THIS PROSECUTION WAS IN FACT A KIND OF CRIMINALIZATION OF JOURNALISM, THAT IT'S AT ODDS WITH THE RIGHTS THAT JIMMY LAI HAS, THAT THE U.N.

ESSENTIALLY ENSHRINES.

AND AS A DIRECT RESULT WE SAW JUST RECENTLY THAT THE U.N.

HIGH COMMISSIONER ON HUMAN RIGHTS BASICALLY SAID THAT THIS VERDICT SHOULD BE OVERTURNED, THIS IS WRONG, THE SENTENCING IS WRONG.

AND THAT'S NOT THE ONLY CASE.

THE SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE U.N.

COMPLAND AND RAISED CONCERNS THAT ESSENTIALLY CHINA WAS COERCING JIMMY LAI'S CHILDREN AND LEGAL TEAM TO NOT BASICALLY ENGAGE WITH THE UNITED NATIONS AT ALL.

SO OFTEN PEOPLE WILL POINT OUT THAT THE U.S., THE UK, THE EU HAVE RAISED CONCERNS ABOUT JIMMY LAI'S TREATMENT.

BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT IT'S ALSO THE UNITED NATIONS TOO.

>> RIGHT.

AND YOU MENTIONED JIMMY LAI'S CHILDREN.

I'D LIKE TO PLAY SOUND FROM WHAT HIS SON SEBASTIAN TOLD ME IN AN INTERVIEW LAST YEAR AS WELL ALONGSIDE THAT OF HIS ATTORNEY.

>> MENTALLY AND SPIRITUALLY HE IS STRONG.

YOU KNOW, HE KNOWS THAT HE DID THE RIGHT THING.

HE KNOWS THAT IN STANDING UP FOR FREEDOM, IN STANDING UP FOR A FREE PRESS, IN STAYING IN HONG KONG AND DEFENDING HIS COLLEAGUES AND OTHER PRO- DEMOCRACY PROTESTERS THAT THAT WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

I'M INCREDIBLY PROUD OF HIM.

AND I THINK HE KNOWS THAT THE WORLD IS WATCHING AND THAT HE IS IS --THAT HIS COURAGE IS INSPIRING.

>> AND THAT COURAGE REMAINS EVEN THROUGH THE SENTENCING, AS WAS REPORTED THE REACTION IN THE ROOM, HIS WIFE CRIED UPON HEARING THE 20- YEAR SENTENCE AND LAI MANAGED A SMILE OUT OF IT.

THIS MAN IS A BRITISH CITIZEN.

HE COULD HAVE LEFT HONG KONG.

AND YET HE CHOSE TO STAY.

GIVEN WHAT WE'VE NOW HEARD FROM GOVERNMENTS AND OTHER WESTERN COUNTRIES FROM THE UNITED KINGDOM, PRESIDENT TRUMP EVEN WEIGHED IN ON THIS BEFORE THE LAST ELECTION, SAYING THAT HE WOULD 100% FOCUS ON GETTING LAI RELEASED.

MARCO RUBIO TWEETED --POSTED ON X JUST THIS MORNING THAT THE SENTENCING OF JIMMY LAI IN HONG KONG IS AN UNJUST AND TRAGIC CONCLUSION TO THIS CASE.

WE URGE AUTHORITIES TO GRANT LAI HUMANITARIAN PAROLE.

DO YOU THINK THIS IS CHINA USING HIM AS A BARGAINING CHIP FOR WHATEVER THEY ARE HOPING TO GET OUT OF ONGOING NEGOTIATIONS WITH EITHER THE U.S.

OR OTHER EUROPEAN COUNTRIES?

>> WELL, LET'S LOOK AT THE TIMELINE.

REMEMBER, CHINA WENT AFTER JIMMY LAI IN A BIG WAY IN 2020, WHEN HE WAS ARRESTED IN DECEMBER 2020 AND HE HASN'T BEEN RELEASED EVER SINCE.

HE'S BEEN IN DETENTION FOR 1800 DAYS EVER SINCE THEN.

THEY'VE COME UP WITH A SERIES OF DIFFERENT CLAIMS ABOUT WHAT HE'S DONE WRONG.

AT ONE POINT THE ACCUSATION WAS HE WAS GUILTY OF FRAUD.

AT ANOTHER POINT THERE WERE IRREGULARITIES WITH ONE OF HIS LEASES.

LATER ON IT WAS OF COURSE THIS IDEA THAT HE'S BEEN INVOLVED IN COLLUSION WITH FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS.

THE FACT THE CHARGES KEPT CHANGING SHOWS ONE THING, THAT THE GOAL HAS ALWAYS BEEN TO SILENCE HIM AND REMOVE A THORN FROM THEIR SIDE AND ALSO TO CONSOLIDATE CONTROL OVER HONG KONG.

HONG KONG IS NO LONGER THE SAME INTERNATIONAL CITY THAT IT WAS SEVEN, EIGHT, NINE YEARS AGO.

THAT PROCESS HAS NOW FINALLY CONCLUDED WITH JIMMY LAI'S SENTENCING IN A VERY SIGNIFICANT WAY.

SO IS THIS ABOUT LEVERAGE?

MAYBE.

BUT I THINK MOST FUNDAMENTALLY IT'S ABOUT CHINA ASSERTING CONTROL OVER A CITY THAT FRANKLY IT FEELS IT NEVER FULLY CONTROLLED UNTIL NOW.

>> SO IF ONE COUNTRY TWO SYSTEMS WAS VIEWED AS DEAD LAST YEAR OR THE LAST FEW YEARS FOLLOWING THOSE PROTESTS, WHERE IS IT NOW?

>> IT LOOKS MORE LIKE ONE COUNTRY ONE SYSTEM.

REMEMBER THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT JUST HAPPENED OVERNIGHT.

BEGINNING IN 2014 BEIJING DECIDED THAT ESSENTIALLY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF HONG KONG SHOULD BE PREVETTED BY BEIJING.

VOTERS MIGHT HAVE A CHOICE BUT THEY WOULD ONLY BE ABLE TO CHOOSE BEIJING'S SELECTED CANDIDATES.

PEOPLE PROTESTED THAT.

IN 2019 THEY CAME UP WITH ESSENTIALLY THIS EXTRADITION LAW IN HONG KONG WHICH WOULD ALLOW FOLKS IN HONG KONG TO BE EXTRADITED TO THE MAINLAND WHERE THEY COULD BE TRIED AND SENTENCED BY THE MAINLAND'S LEGAL SYSTEM, ELIMINATING ANY SENSE THAT HONG KONG WAS SOMEHOW SEPARATE FROM CHINA WHERE IT COUNTS.

AND THEN IN 2020 AFTER A SERIES OF PROTESTS THE GOVERNMENT OF HONG KONG YOU PUT FORWARD THE NATIONAL SECURITY LAW.

AND ALL OF THIS HAS FUNDAMENTALLY SHRUNK THE SPACE FOR CIVIL SOCIETY, DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, LIBERAL EXPRESSION, FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY WITHIN HONG KONG.

IT'S NOT A RECOGNIZABLE CITY POLITICALLY THE SAME WAY IT WAS MORE THAN TEN YEARS AGO.

AND I THINK THIS HAS REALLY IMPLICATIONS.

HONG KONG'S SPECIAL STATUS HAS ALWAYS BEEN GROUNDED IN THE RESPECT FOR THE RULE OF LAW.

AND YET NOW WE SEE THAT THE RULE OF LAW IS ESSENTIALLY WHAT BEIJING SAYS IT IS.

YOU NOTED THERE WAS NO JURY FOR THIS TRIAL.

THAT'S RIGHT.

THAT'S UNUSUAL.

IN ADDITION, ALL THE JUDGES WERE HAND-SELECTED BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE, WHO HIMSELF WAS HAND-SELECTED BY BEIJING WITH NO OPPOSITION.

SO IN THE END BEIJING IS PICK THE JUDGE, THEY'RE ESSENTIALLY PICKING THE JURY, THEY'RE ALSO PICKING THE SENTENCING.

IT'S ALL CONTROLLED BY BEIJING.

>> SO THEN LOOKING FORWARD NOW FIVE, TEN YEARS FROM TODAY, WHAT IS THE MEDIA ECOSYSTEM LOOK LIKE IN HONG KONG?

>> I THINK WE HAVE TO BE REALISTIC THAT THIS IS THE END OF ANY FREE MEDIA ECOSYSTEM.

ACTUALLY, EVEN THE CONVERSATION WE'RE HAVING RIGHT NOW COULD BE CHARGED UNDER ARTICLE 38 OF THE NATIONAL SECURITY LAW IF IT'S FOUND THAT EITHER YOU OR I ARE SOMEHOW CRITICAL OF THIS DECISION BY BEIJING OR CRITICAL OF THE SENTENCING OF JIMMY LAI.

THAT ALLOWS ESSENTIALLY THE CRIMINALIZATION OF CONDUCT OUTSIDE THE BORDERS OF HONG KONG IF IT'S SEEN TO BE KIND OF ANTITHETICAL TO HONG KONG'S SECURITY.

YOU'VE SEEN RIGHT NOW THAT HONG KONG ESSENTIALLY HAS ISSUED BOUNTIES FOR AMERICAN AND BRITISH CITIZENS FOR BEING CRITICAL OF HONG KONG.

ALL OF THAT IS A SIGN OF WHAT'S TO COME.

AND IF YOU'RE IN HONG KONG HOW COULD YOU POSSIBLY REPORT FREELY WHEN IF YOU'RE OUTSIDE OF HONG KONG YOU'RE ALSO BEING TARGETED.

AND EVEN THOSE DISSIDENTS THAT HAVE LEFT THE CITY, THEIR FAMILIES REMAIN IN HONG KONG AND ARE TARGETED, SOMETIMES EVEN PROSECUTED FOR THEIR ACTIVITY ABROAD.

SO THIS IS AN ENVIRONMENT WHICH I THINK INCREASINGLY RESEMBLES MAINLAND CHINA AND IT RAISES QUESTIONS ABOUT WHETHER COMPANIES OPERATING IN HONG KONG SHOULD CONTINUE TO ACT AND TREAT THAT JURISDICTION AS IF IT'S SOMEHOW DIFFERENT, SOMEHOW SPECIAL AND SOMEHOW PROTECTIVE.

>> I THINK THEY'VE ALREADY WOKEN UP TO THAT REALITY AND QUESTIONED THAT VERY POINT YOU JUST MADE SEVERAL YEARS AGO.

RUSH DOSHI, THANK YOU SO MUCH.

GOOD TO SEE YOU.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>> WELL, NOW JIMMY LAI HOLDS BRITISH CITIZENSHIP AS WE'VE NOTED AND THE UK GOVERNMENT HAS RESPONDED WITH A STATEMENT OF CONCERN.

BUT CAN PRIME MINISTER KEIR STARMER DO ANYTHING MORE?

TODAY HE'S FIGHTING TO KEEP HIS JOB AS OUTRAGE CONTINUES OVER HIS APPOINTMENT OF PETER MANDELSON AS UK AMBASSADOR TO WASHINGTON.

EVEN AFTER MANDELSON WAS FOUND TO HAVE CLOSE TIES TO JEFFREY EPSTEIN.

LET'S TURN NOW TO BRITISH MP TOM TUGENDHAT FOR MORE.

TOM, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR TAKING THE TIME TO JOIN US.

FIRST YOUR REACTION TO LAI'S SENTENCING OF 20 YEARS.

HE IS A BRITISH CITIZEN.

>> WELL, IT'S QUITE CLEARLY A DISGRACE.

LET'S BE HONEST, IT'S NOT A SURPRISE.

CHINA CEASED TO APPLY THE RULE OF LAW TO HONG KONG ABOUT TEN YEARS AGO AND STARTED TO TREAT IT AS JUST ANOTHER PART OF CHINA AND WE KNOW THAT IN CHINA YOU'VE GOT THE MASS ARRESTS OF UIGHUR MUSLIMS, FORCED LABOR, SLAVE CAMPS, EXECUTIONS, MORE EXECUTIONS IN FACT THAN ALMOST ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD, AND SO MANY POLITICAL PRISONERS IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO COUNT.

TIBETANS, CHRISTIANS, ANYBODY ELSE REALLY FRANKLY WHO COMES UP AGAINST THE CHINESE COMMUNIST PARTY.

IT HASN'T CHANGED IN 70, 80 YEARS, AND IT'S STILL TORTURING THE CHINESE PEOPLE MUCH AS IT HAS DONE FOR MUCH OF THIS CENTURY.

>> AND THE UK GOVERNMENT SAYS THAT IT HAS RAISED LAI'S CASE, QUOTE, AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS.

DURING THE PRIME MINISTER'S RECENT ENGAGEMENT WITH BEIJING IN HIS VISIT WITH XI JINPING WE SHOULD NOTE THAT XI JINPING PRIOR TO THE PRIME MINISTER'S VISIT ON JANUARY 13 HAD LIFTED SANCTIONS ON SIX MPs, YOU BEING ONE OF THEM.

BUT YOU'VE CONTINUED TO SAY THAT YOU THINK THE PRIME MINISTER SHOULD NOT HAVE GONE TO MEET WITH PRESIDENT XI JINPING UNLESS HE COULD HAVE SECURED THE RELEASE OF JIMMY LAI.

>> I THINK THAT'S RIGHT.

I DON'T SEE ANY REASON WHY THE PRIME MINISTER SHOULD HAVE GIVEN A SORT OF DIPLOMATIC WIN TO CHAIRMAN XI, YOU KNOW, IN EXCHANGE FOR WHAT?

IN EXCHANGE FOR LIFTING SANCTIONS ON ME?

I DON'T CARE.

I DON'T HAVE ANY INTERESTS IN CHINA.

I'M NEVER GOING TO GO TO MACAW.

I DON'T HAVE ANY MONEY IN CHINESE BANK ACCOUNTS.

I REALLY DON'T CARE WHETHER THEY SANCTION ME OR NOT.

WHAT I DO CARE ABOUT IS THE FACT THAT A BRITISH CITIZEN, JIMMY LAI, IS BEING HELD FOR MORE THAN 1,000 DAYS IN VIOLATION OF HIS RIGHTS, REMOVED FROM ANY POSSIBILITY OF RECEIVING COMMUNION.

HE'S A PRACTICING ROMAN CATHOLIC AND HE'S NOT ABLE TO GO TO MASS.

AND HE'S NOT ABLE TO SEE HIS GRANDCHILDREN.

AND NOW HE'S BEING GIVEN A 20-YEAR SENTENCE, THE LONGEST SENTENCE EVER GIVEN UNDER THE NATIONAL SECURITY LAW, WHICH MEANS THAT HE WON'T HAVE A LIFE SENTENCE, HE'LL HAVE A DEATH SENTENCE.

THIS IS A 78-YEAR-OLD MAN.

>> SO DO YOU SUPPOSE THAT HAD KEIR STARMER BEEN DEFIANT IN SAYING THAT HE WOULD NOT GO TO CHINA WITHOUT THE RELEASE OF LAI, DO YOU THINK THAT THINGS WOULD HAVE BEEN DIFFERENT, WHETHER IT'S HOW THIS VERDICT WOULD HAVE COME DOWN, OR DO YOU THINK THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN A SCENARIO WHERE XI JINPING WOULD HAVE INTERVENED PERHAPS IN THIS CASE?

BECAUSE THE FLIP SIDE OF THIS IS THAT YES, THERE'S A BRITISH CITIZEN.

ONE CAN QUESTION WHETHER HIS RIGHTS HAVE BEEN UPHELD.

ON THE OTHER HAND, THE COUNTRY IS IN A PRECARIOUS ECONOMIC SITUATION WITH BILLIONS OF DOLLARS AT STAKE AS IT RELATES TO TIES WITH CHINA.

>> WELL, HE DIDN'T SUCCEED ON THAT EITHER.

THE ONLY INVESTMENT HE MANAGED TO GET WAS ASTRAZENECA INVESTING IN CHINA.

SO FRANKLY THAT WAS UTTERLY USELESS FOR THE BRITISH PEOPLE AS WELL.

I MEAN, ALL THAT HE DID WAS MAKE BRITAIN LOOK WEAK ON THE INTERNATIONAL SCENE.

HE ALLOWED THE CHINESE PRESIDENT --CHINESE --SORRY.

HE'S NOT REALLY A PRESIDENT, IS HE?

HE'S CHAIRMAN OF THE CHINESE MILITARY COMMISSION, WHICH IS HOW HE HOLDS HIS POWER, LET'S NOT FORGET.

CHAIRMAN XI HOLDS HIS POWER THROUGH THE BARREL OF A GUN, NOT THROUGH ANYTHING ELSE.

ALL HE DID WAS ALLOW HIMSELF TO BE BELITTLED.

IT WAS A PATHETIC TRIP REALLY BY AN ABSOLUTE NOBODY OF A PRIME MINISTER.

MADE TO LOOK PATHETIC BY A CHINESE DICTATOR.

SO HE SHOULDN'T HAVE GONE.

AND HE CERTAINLY SHOULDN'T HAVE GONE WHILE A BRITISH CITIZEN WAS IN PRISON.

>> SO THEN HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO THOSE WHO SAY THAT IT WASN'T SO LONG AGO THAT A MEMBER OF YOUR OWN PARTY WAS IN THAT VERY OFFICE AS KEIR STARMER WAS AND JIMMY LAI WAS STILL HELD.

HE'S BEEN HELD FOR FOUR YEARS NOW BEHIND BARS IN HONG KONG.

NOTHING WAS DONE TO SEE HIS RELEASE THEN BY YOUR OWN PARTY.

>> I WAS CRITICAL OF IT THEN.

IF YOU WANT TO PLAY PARTY POLITICS WITH THIS, WE CAN PLAY PARTY POLITICS.

I THINK THAT'S PRETTY PATHETIC TOO.

FRANKLY, AS A BRITISH CITIZEN WHO'S BEEN IMPRISONED FOR 1,000 DAYS I DON'T CARE WHO'S IN GOVERNMENT.

I DON'T CARE WHICH PARTY IT IS.

I THINK THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT HAS A RESPONSIBILITY TO TAKE ACTION ON IT.

I WAS THE FIRST MINISTER WHEN I WAS APPOINTED SECURITY MINISTER TO MEET JIMMY'S FAMILY.

WHEN I CHAIRED THE FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE I RAISED THIS ALL THE TIME.

YOU KNOW, IF YOU WANT TO PLAY PARTY POLITICS, FINE.

BUT I THINK IT'S RATHER BORING.

>> I'M NOT PLAYING PARTY POLITICS.

I'M JUST STATING THE OBVIOUS, AND THAT IS THAT YOU ARE IN THE OPPOSING PARTY NOW AND AS WE KNOW IN EVERY COUNTRY HERE IN THE UNITED STATES INCLUDED IT'S MUCH EASIER FOR SOMEBODY FROM AN OPPOSING PARTY TO CRITICIZE DECISIONS AND ACTIONS MADE BY THE SITTING GOVERNMENT.

AND SO -- IT'S NOTABLE THAT YOU SAY YOU CRITICIZED YOUR OWN GOVERNMENT -- >> I DID IT WHEN MY PARTY WAS IN THE GOVERNMENT.

>> YES.

LET ME ASK YOU ABOUT THE WARNING THAT YOU DELIVERED ABOUT THE CHINESE MEGA-EMBASSY WHICH YOU SAY COULD BECOME A BASE FOR HOSTILE ACTIVITY.

DO YOU THINK THAT THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT UNDER KEIR STARMER HAS PERHAPS TRADED AWAY LEVERAGE ON THAT FRONT AS WELL PRIOR TO THE VISIT TO CHINA?

>> YES.

YES, TOTALLY.

FRANKLY, KEIR STARMER GAVE THE CHINESE EVERYTHING THEY ASKED FOR AND THEN WAS SURPRISED HE GOT NOTHING IN RETURN.

HE WAS CLEARLY NEVER INTERESTED IN NEGOTIATION BEFORE.

HE PUT ALL HIS CARDS ON THE TABLE FACE UP AND IS SURPRISED THAT HE LOST THE HAND.

>> AT THE SAME TIME WE NOW SEE THE UK HAS EXPANDED VISAS FOR HONG KONG RESIDENTS.

OFFICIALS ESTIMATE THAT ABOUT 26,000 MORE ARRIVALS OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS WILL BE ON THE DOCK MORE THAN 230,000 VISAS HAVE ALREADY BEEN GRANTED SINCE 2020.

DO YOU EXPECT THESE NUMBERS TO EVEN RISE HIGHER NOW FOLLOWING LAI'S SENTENCE?

>> LET'S JUST BE CLEAR.

THESE ARE NOT VISAS FOR HONG KONG RESIDENTS.

THESE ARE RIGHTS GRANTED TO BRITISH NATIONALS UNDER THE OLD LAW BRITISH NATIONALS OVERSEAS.

IN 1984 WHEN THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT NEGOTIATED THE RETURN OF HONG KONG TO CHINA ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DID THEN WHICH WAS AN ERROR, WE SHOULD NOT HAVE DONE, WAS THAT WE CHANGED THE STATUS OF BRITISH CITIZENS.

BEFORE 1984 BRITISH CITIZENS WERE BRITISH CITIZENS WHEREVER THEY WERE IN THE WORLD.

AFTER 1984 WE CREATED A DIFFERENT FORM OF CITIZENSHIP CALLED BRITISH NATIONALS OVERSEAS.

WHAT THIS DOES IS CORRECT THAT WRONG.

IT ALLOWS BRITISH NATIONALS TO COME TO THE UNITED KINGDOM LIKE ANY OTHER UK CITIZEN.

SO IT'S NOT A VISA.

>> DID YOU EXPECT THESE NUMBERS, THEN, TO STILL RISE FOR THOSE SEEKING TO LEAVE HONG KONG AND MOVE TO THE UK?

>> WE'RE SEEING HONG KONGERS --WE'RE SEEING HONG KONGERS LEAVE HONG KONG ALL THE TIME.

THERE ARE MANY WHO COME TO THE UK AND THEY'RE VERY WELCOME HERE.

THERE'S BRITISH NATIONALS WHO WERE BORN AND BROUGHT UP IN HONG KONG.

AND WE'VE SEEN MANY GO TO OTHER COUNTRIES INCLUDING CANADA AND SOME TO THE UNITED STATES.

SO IT'S NOT REALLY SURPRISING BECAUSE WHAT WE'VE SEEN IS THE COMPLETE EROSION OF THE RULE OF LAW AND OF COURSE THE NEXT THING THAT WILL FOLLOW OR IS ALREADY FOLLOWING IS THE EROSION OF THE HONG KONG ECONOMY WHICH IS BEING VERY BADLY DAMAGED NOW.

SOME COUNTRIES LIKE SINGAPORE ARE DOING VERY WELL OUT OF THAT BECAUSE A LOT OF THE MONEY HAS MOVED THERE.

AND INDEED QUITE A LOT OF THE CHINESE PRINCELINGS INCLUDING XI'S OWN MONEY HAS MOVED OUT OF HONG KONG INTO SINGAPORE, INTO THE AMERICAS.

WHERE XI'S DAUGHTER IS LIVING LIKE I ABILLIONAIRE.

IN THE UNITED STATES, WHICH IS LUCKY BECAUSE ALL THAT MONEY HAS BEEN STOLEN OFF THE CHINESE PEOPLE BY THE DICTATOR OF CHINA.

>> YEAH, AND OBVIOUSLY THIS IS A BRITISH CITIZEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BUT THERE ARE QUESTIONS AS TO WHAT MORE THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, WHO ARGUABLY HAS EVEN MORE LEVERAGE OVER XI JINPING, WHAT HE COULD BE DOING NOW, ESPECIALLY GIVEN HIS PREVIOUS COMMENTS THAT HE WOULD TRY TO 100% SEE THE RELEASE OF JIMMY LAI.

THAT WAS PRIOR TO THE ELECTION OF LAST YEAR WE KNOW THERE'S A STATE VISIT UPCOMING BETWEEN PRESIDENT TRUMP AND XI JINPING IN BEIJING AS WELL.

I DO WANT TO FINALLY ASK YOU ABOUT THE GROWING TURMOIL AND SCANDAL REGARDING KEIR STARMER AND THE QUESTION OVER HIS POTENTIAL POTENTIAL LEADERSHIP AND HOW MUCH LONGER HE CAN STAY IN OFFICE GIVEN WHAT WE'VE SEEN HAPPEN WITH PETER MANDELSON AND HIS TIES TO JEFFREY EPSTEIN.

THE MORE INFORMATION THAT HAS COME OUT ABOUT HOW MUCH KEIR STARMER DID OR DIDN'T KNOW BEFORE APPOINTING HIM AS AMBASSADOR TO THE U.S.

>> WELL, THE PROBLEM THAT KEIR STARMER'S GOT IS THAT EVERYBODY KNEW INCLUDING KEIR STARMER.

HE DIDN'T DENY IT WHEN ASKED ABOUT IT BY KIMMY BADENOCK THE OTHER DAY IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.

HE SAID HE DID KNOW THAT PETER MANDELSON HAD MAINTAINED HIS RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PEDOPHILE JEFFREY EPSTEIN.

THE PROBLEM WITH THESE FILES IS THEY DEMONSTRATE THAT JEFFREY EPSTEIN WAS NOT JUST A PEDOPHILE AND CHALD TRAFFICKER.

HE ALSO VERY CLEARLY HAD VERY STRONG CONNECTIONS TO THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT AND INDEED TO THE RUSSIAN INTELLIGENCE SERVICES.

AND IT LOOKS LIKE PETER MANDELSON AND OTHERS IN FEEDING INFORMATION TO JEFFREY EPSTEIN MAY ALSO HAVE BEEN FEEDING THEM INTO THE KREMLIN.

SO ALL THOSE WHO WERE CLOSE FRIENDS OF JEFFREY EPSTEIN FOR 20, 30 YEARS LOOK LIKE THEY'VE HAD VERY CLOSE, VERY PERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE RUSSIAN MOB AND INDEED WITH THE KREMLIN, WHICH DOES RAISE QUESTIONS IN MANY OTHER GOVERNMENTS, NOT JUST OUR OWN.

>> YOUR FINAL SECONDS, YOUR PREDICTION, WILL KEIR STARMER BE ABLE TO RETAIN HIS JOB LET'S SAY SIX MONTHS FROM NOW?

>> I COULDN'T GIVE YOU A DATE, BUT HE COULD BE GONE BY THE END OF THE WEEK.

HE COULD BE GONE IN A FEW MONTHS.

BUT IT'S QUITE CLEAR HE DOESN'T HAVE THE SUPPORT OF HIS OWN PARTY LET ALONE THE COUNTRY.

>> TOM TUGENDHAT, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE TIME.

REALLY APPRECIATE IT TIME.

>> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

>>> WILL FOUR YEARS OF WAR BE OVER IN THE NEXT FOUR MONTHS?

THAT'S WHAT DONALD TRUMP WANTS ACCORDING TO UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY.

A NEW ROUND OF RUSSIA-UKRAINE TALKS COULD SOON TAKE PLACE IN MIAMI.

BUT WITH KREMLIN'S RELENTLESS ASSAULTS ON ITS NEIGHBOR AND SO MANY STICKING POINTS REMAINING, ESPECIALLY OVER TERRITORY STILL UNRESOLVED, IS ENDING THE WAR BEFORE THE SUMMER JUST A PIPE DREAM?

LET'S BRING IN DARA MASSICOT FROM THE CARNEGIE ENDOWMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL PEACE.

DARA, IT'S GOOD TO SEE YOU.

WELCOME FROM WASHINGTON, D.C.

SO LET'S START THERE.

I DO REMEMBER THE LAST TIME I SPOKE WITH MICHAEL KAUFMAN, YOUR COLLEAGUE.

HE HAD PREDICTED AND RIGHTLY SO, SADLY, THAT THIS WAR WOULD DEFINITELY GO THROUGH 2026.

AND HERE WE ARE NOW, THE PRESIDENT, PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS SET ANOTHER DEADLINE, THAT HE WOULD LIKE THIS WAR TO END BY THE SUMMER.

DO YOU SEE THAT AS A FEASIBLE TIMELINE AND IF SO IF WE DO GET TO A CEASEFIRE WHO STANDS TO BENEFIT MORE HERE?

IS IT RUSSIA OR UKRAINE?

>> WELL, THANKS SO MUCH FOR HAVING ME BACK.

WHEN IT COMES TO THE JUNE TIMELINE, I THINK A LOT OF IT DEPENDS ON WHAT TYPE OF FLEXIBILITY MOSCOW IS GOING TO SHOW.

THERE ARE A FEW KEY STICKING POINTS IN THE DISCUSSIONS.

AND EVEN THOUGH WE'RE ON THE EIGHTH OR NINTH ROUNDS OF TALKS IT REMAINS CONTROL OVER UKRAINE'S DONETSK REGION.

MOSCOW HAS NOT RELENTED OR SHOWN ANY FLEXIBILITY ON WHO SHOULD CONTROL THAT.

KYIV HAS SIGNALED ITS WILLINGNESS TO HAVE IT BE A DEMILITARIZED ZONE.

MOSCOW STILL INSISTS ON FULL CONTROL AND DEPENDING ON WHICH DAY WE HEAR RUMORS THAT THEY'RE STILL INSISTING ON INTERNATIONAL RECOGNITION.

THE SECOND POINT IS MOSCOW'S RESISTANCE TO ANY FOREIGN PRESENCE THERE.

>> SO TO THE FIRST POINT, IF MOSCOW DOES EVEN AGREE TO CREATING A DEMILITARIZED ZONE, IF YOU LOOK AT THEIR PAST ACTIONS IN GEORGIA AND OTHER INCURSIONS LIKE THIS, EVEN PAST AGREEMENTS THAT RUSSIA HAS MADE, THEY HAVEN'T HONORED THEM.

AND HERE YOU HAVE PRESIDENT TRUMP CONTINUING TO LOOK FOR WAYS TO SHOW THAT PRESIDENT PUTIN IS COMPLYING WITH HIM.

SO WHAT DOES THAT SAY ABOUT THE LIKELIHOOD THAT EVEN IF MOSCOW DOES AGREE TO SOME SORT OF DEAL TODAY THAT THEY WILL UPHOLD THAT DEAL TOMORROW?

>> I PLACE VERY LITTLE FAITH IN THEIR CLAIMS.

THEY CLAIM TO WANT TO CONTROL THAT WHOLE REGION, MAYBE MONITORING IT WITH NATIONAL GUARD OR OTHER FORCES.

AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT THE RUSSIAN NATIONAL GUARD IS A VERY HEAVILY MILITARIZED FORCE.

THAT FORCE WOULD LOOK LIKE A MILITARY.

AND IT WOULD ALLOW THEM TO INCREASE THEIR POSITIONS CLOSER TO UKRAINE PROPER.

I JUST DON'T THINK THEY WOULD HOLD IT.

AND IN OTHER AREAS LIKE GEORGIA THEY HAVE A TENDENCY TO SLOWLY WALK THE LINE BACK METER BY METER OVER TIME AND HOPE THAT NO ONE NOTICES.

SO IT WOULD BE DISADVANTAGEOUS FOR RUSSIA TO OCCUPY EVERYTHING UP TO THE BORDER OF DONETSK.

THAT'S WHY THEY'RE FIGHTING SO HARD AGAINST THIS.

>> EVEN THIS IDEA OF A DEMILITARIZED ZONE IN DONBAS, IN PRACTICAL TERMS JUST TALK ABOUT WHAT'S BEING DISCUSSED NOW.

HOW THAT WOULD LOOK.

LET'S JUST SAY FOR ARGUMENT'S SAKE THAT RUSSIA WOULD UPHOLD THIS AGREEMENT.

>> SURE.

SO THAT MEANS THAT THE LINES WOULD REMAIN THE SAME AS THEY ARE AT THE DATE OF CEASEFIRE AGREEMENT.

RUSSIA WOULD NOT TRY TO COME FORWARD ANY FAR FORWARD THAN IT IS AT THAT EXACT MOMENT.

AND UKRAINE WOULD AGREE NOT TO CHALLENGE THAT DEMILITARIZED ZONE OF THE REST OF DONETSK IF THAT IS WHAT IS BEING DISCUSSED IS SOMETHING THAT COULD BE MONITORED BY A COMBINATION OF SATELLITE IMAGERY AND DRONES, PROBABLY A FOREIGN PRESENCE.

SO THIS VERY QUICKLY BECOMES DIFFICULT TO VERIFY.

RUSSIA HAS ADVANCED WAYS OF DECEIVING ALL OF THOSE MECHANISMS.

SO THIS IS INCREDIBLY TRICKY, INCREDIBLY COMPLICATED, AND THE KREMLIN IS NOT ENGAGING AS A GOOD FAITH ACTOR ON THIS AND IS STALLING OUT NEGOTIATIONS WHILE THEY TRY TO CHANGE REALITY ON THE GROUND.

>> YOU MENTIONED A POTENTIAL FOREIGN PRESENCE THERE MONITORING IN ADDITION TO DRONES, ET CETERA.

RUSSIA HAS BEEN EXPLICIT THAT ANY EUROPEAN PRESENCE IN UKRAINE, ANY NATO PRESENCE IN UKRAINE WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT IS OFF THE TABLE FOR THEM.

SO WHO WOULD THIS THIRD PARTY BE?

>> IT'S UNCLEAR.

THEY REMAIN RESISTANT TO THIS.

I HAVE HEARD AND IT'S BEEN PUBLICLY DISCUSSED AS WELL THAT THE UK AND FRANCE MIGHT HAVE A LIMITED CONTINGENT IN UKRAINE.

IT'S NOT CLEAR TO ME EXACTLY WHERE THEY WOULD BE.

AS FAR AS I CAN TELL THERE IS NO CONVERSATION ABOUT U.S.

BOOTS ON THE GROUND AS PART OF THAT MONITORING GROUP.

SO IT'S NOT REALLY CLEAR TO ME YET WHO THE WEST HAS IN MIND TO FULFILL THAT ROLE.

I KNOW THOSE THINGS ARE BEING DISCUSSED EXTENSIVELY BEHIND CLOSED DOORS.

>> GIVE US A STATE OF PLAY ON THE BATTLEFIELD RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THERE'S A NARRATIVE AND IT'S BEEN IN PLACE NOW FOR MANY MONTHS THAT UKRAINE IS LOSING AND LOSING BADLY.

THIS IS WHAT IS BEING DESCRIBED AS A WAR OF ATTRITION.

AT THIS POINT NEITHER SIDE IS REALLY WINNING.

BUT IS UKRAINE LOSING THE WAY THAT RUSSIA WOULD LIKE THE WORLD TO THINK?

>> NO.

I WOULDN'T AGREE WITH THAT.

THE CASUALTIES ON THE RUSSIAN SIDE, THE NUMBER THAT I HEAR MOST OFTEN FROM DIFFERENT QUARTERS IS 30,000 CASUALTIES A MONTH.

THERE'S SOME IES THERE ON WHAT THAT MEANS IN TERMS OF KILLED OR PERMANENTLY DISABLED AND CAN'T RETURN TO THE FIGHT.

BUT I THINK THE THING TO NOTE ABOUT THAT IS THESE ARE SOME OF THE HIGHEST RUSSIAN CASUALTIES WE'VE SEEN IN FOUR YEARS AT A TIME WHEN THE UKRAINIAN ARMED FORCES ARE STRUGGLING WITH MANPOWER.

SO EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE IN A PRETTY DAMAGED SHAPE AT THE MOMENT THEY'RE STILL INFLICTING THESE MASSIVE LOSSES ON THE RUSSIAN FORCES THAT ALTHOUGH RUSSIA CAN TWEAK THINGS HERE AND THERE THIS IS A REAL PROBLEM FOR THEM TO MAINTAIN FORCE LEVELS AS THEY ARE.

SO I WOULDN'T AGREE ON THE GROUND THAT THEY ARE LOSING.

I DON'T KNOW THAT UKRAINE AT THIS POINT IN TIME HAS THE ABILITY TO MOUNT ANY LARGE- SCALE COUNTEROFFENSIVE.

SO THE LINES ARE NOT MOVING IN THE WAY THAT UKRAINE WANTS.

THEY'RE NOT MOVING IN THE WAY THE KREMLIN WOULD LIKE EITHER.

THE SECOND PART OF THIS, THOUGH, THAT I THINK IS REALLY ACUTE AT THE MOMENT IS RUSSIA'S MISSILE AND DRONE STRIKE CAMPAIGN AGAINST UKRAINE'S ENERGY GRID.

THEY'RE REALLY DAMAGING IT.

THEY'RE LETHAL, QUITE EFFECTIVE.

AND IN KYIV IN PARTICULAR IS THE MAIN TARGET.

COUPLED WITH FREEZING TEMPERATURES.

I THINK RIGHT NOW IT'S 6 DEGREES IN KYIV, NEGATIVE 1 TONIGHT.

IT'S REALLY HURTING THE CIVILIAN POPULATION.

AND THERE'S AN AIR DEFENSE PROBLEM WHICH IS CAUSING THIS AND CONTRIBUTING TO THIS.

>> WHICH IS WHY SO MANY ARE DESCRIBING AS RUSSIA'S TACT IKDS NOW AND FOCUS ON TARGETING THE ENERGY GRID A WAR CRIME.

THE "WALL STREET JOURNAL" SUGGESTS AT THIS POINT NOW, FOUR YEARS INTO THIS WAR, THAT UKRAINE NEEDS A PLAN BEYOND SIMPLY ATTRITION.

AND WHAT THEY'RE SAYING IS THAT RUSSIA'S BATTLEGROUND -- OR BATTLEFIELD DRONE STRATEGY IS FOCUSED ANYWHERE ON MEDIUM RANGE OF 12 TO 50 MILES, PRIORITIZING TARGETS LIKE UKRAINE'S DRONE OPERATIONS AS WELL AS LOGISTICS.

WE'VE SPENT SO MANY TIMES TALKING ABOUT THE WAYS THAT UKRAINE HAS REALLY INNOVATED AND TAKEN LEAD ON DRONE WARFARE.

WELL, RUSSIA AT THIS POINT HAS CAUGHT UP.

THE ARGUMENT THAT THE "WALL STREET JOURNAL" IS MAKING IS THAT WHILE RUSSIA'S FOCUSED ON THAT THAT THE UKRAINIANS CONTINUE TO FOCUS JUST ON KILLING AS MANY RUSSIAN TROOPS AS POSSIBLE, KILLING AS YOU NOTED TENS OF THOUSANDS A MONTH.

FOUR YEARS INTO THIS WAR, IS IT TIME DO YOU THINK, DO YOU AGREE WITH THE "WALL STREET JOURNAL'S" ANALYSIS THAT IT'S TIME FOR UKRAINE TO REFOCUS ITS PRIORITIES?

>> POSSIBLY.

SO I WOULD SAY ON THE METHODS THAT THEY'RE USING RIGHT NOW IT IS CAUSING REAL PROBLEMS FOR THE RUSSIANS.

BY THEIR OWN ADMISSION THEY CANNOT FIX THIS PROBLEM ON THE BATTLEFIELD.

EVERY TIME THEY TRY TO GATHER TOGETHER FOR AN OFFENSIVE OF ANY KIND, WHETHER IT'S ON FOOT OR USING TANKS, THE UKRAINIANS ARE ABLE TO TARGET THEM AND DESTROY THEM.

SO THERE IS A REAL CHALLENGE FOR THE RUSSIANS WITH THE WAY UKRAINE IS FIGHTING.

I THINK SOME OF THE OTHER CHALLENGES, THOUGH, LIKE JUST THE MASSIVE NUMBER OF INCREASINGLY THE USE OF BALLISTIC MISSILES IN PARTICULAR REQUIRES A DIFFERENT AIR DEFENSE SOLUTION.

UKRAINE IS RUNNING LOW ON INTERCEPTORS.

THE SHEER NUMBER OF SHAHED DRONES AND THE MODIFICATIONS TO SHAHED DRONES REQUIRES A SOLUTION AND I THINK THERE ARE SOME IN WORK ON UKRAINE'S SIDE.

BUT ELIMINATING SOME OF THAT STRIKE POWER WOULD PROVIDE RELIEF.

I'D SAY THE POSITIVE THING ABOUT THE DRONES, JUST TALKING ABOUT THAT, THE DISRUPTION TO STARLINK, REMOVING ILLICIT RUSSIAN USE OF STARLINK HAS DISABLED SOME OF THOSE STRIKES, PARTICULARLY AT THAT 50-KILOMETER RANGE THAT'S BEEN SO DANGEROUS FOR UKRAINIAN LOGISTICS.

SO THERE'S A TEMPORARY REPRIEVE THERE UNTIL THE RUSSIANS FIGURE OUT HOW TO BYPASS THAT BLOCK.

>> SO IN TERMS OF THE AIR DEFENSE THAT UKRAINE IS DESPERATELY IN NEED OF AT THIS POINT, WE KNOW THAT THE EUROPEANS HAVE REALLY COME FORWARD BOTH IN TERMS OF THEIR LANGUAGE AND PLEDGES TO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE UKRAINE WITH MILITARY AID AND IN BUYING SOME OF THOSE WEAPONS FROM THE UNITED STATES.

BUT MINUS THE UNITED STATES REALLY STEPPING UP, I MEAN, HOW MUCH DO YOU THINK EUROPE CAN ACTUALLY CONTRIBUTE HERE WITHOUT THE U.S.

DOING MORE AND PROVIDING MORE AID, MORE WEAPONS?

>> WELL, THERE ARE SOME EUROPEAN SYSTEMS WHICH ARE HIGHLY EFFECTIVE LIKE THE IRIS-T SYSTEM AND OTHERS TARGETING.

BUT UNFORTUNATELY THEY DON'T HAVE THE CAPACITY TO TARGET RUSSIAN BALLISTIC MISSILES LIKE THE PATRIOT CAN.

THE PATRIOT IS THE ONLY ONE THAT IS CONFIRMED TO HAVE A KILL OF THAT TYPE OF MISSILE.

EXCUSE ME.

AND THE RUSSIANS UNFORTUNATELY HAVE FIGURED OUT THAT THEIR CRUISE MISSILES ARE BEING INTERCEPTED AT A VERY HIGH RATE AND ARE INCREASINGLY TURNING TO THOSE BALLISTICS.

SO UKRAINE NEEDS ADDITIONAL INTERCEPTOR MISSILES.

THEY ALSO NEED ADDITIONAL INTERCEPTOR SYSTEMS.

AND TO THE EXTENT THAT EUROPE IS WILLING TO PART WITH ADDITIONAL ASSETS LIKE THAT, IT IS REALLY CRITICAL.

IT IS REALLY CRITICAL THE NEXT COUPLE WEEKS TO PROVIDE INTERCEPTORS IF THEY'VE BEEN APPROVED BECAUSE THE WEATHER IS SO COLD RIGHT NOW THROUGH EARLY MARCH, MID MARCH, THEY REALLY NEED THE ABILITY TO DEFEND WHAT REMAINS OF THE ENERGY GRID NEAR KYIV.

>> AND OBVIOUSLY THESE EUROPEAN COUNTRIES ARE ALSO ACCOUNTABLE TO THEIR OWN CONSTITUENTS.

SO AS YOU SAID, THEY'VE GOT TO ANSWER TO THEM AS WELL IN TERMS OF JUST HOW MANY RESOURCES THEY CONTINUE TO SUPPLY UKRAINE WITH WITHOUT THE UNITED STATES LEADING THIS CHARGE.

UKRAINE'S FOREIGN MINISTER SAID THAT THE UNITED STATES IS NOW PREPARED TO RATIFY SECURITY GUARANTEES THROUGH CONGRESS WITHOUT U.S.

TROOPS ON THE GROUND.

I KNOW YOU AND YOUR COLLEAGUES ARE SKEPTICAL ABOUT ANY SORT OF U.S.

SECURITY GUARANTEES IN THIS ARTICLE 5-LIKE PLEDGE.

AND I'M WONDERING IF YOU CAN JUST EXPLAIN MORE ABOUT SOME OF YOUR QUESTIONS AND SKEPTICISM ABOUT WHAT THAT PLEDGE COULD LOOK LIKE WITH SUCH VAGUE LANGUAGE.

NO SPECIFIC DETAILS AS TO WHAT THOSE GUARANTEES ACTUALLY WOULD BE.

>> YEAH, I'M NOT SURE WHAT ARTICLE 5- LIKE MEANS.

ARTICLE 5 IS BASICALLY A CALL TO HAVE A CONVERSATION AND NATIONAL GOVERNMENTS DECIDE TOGETHER TO DEFEND NATO TERRITORY.

SO I'M NOT REALLY SURE WHAT ARTICLE 5-LIKE GUARANTEES MEANS IN THE CONTEXT OF UKRAINE, WHICH IS NOT IN NATO.

I THINK THE UNITED STATES IS VERY RETICENT TO CONTRIBUTE BOOTS ON THE GROUND TO UKRAINE.

THEY'RE WILLING TO PROVIDE SUPPORT IN OTHER WAYS, OTHER MEANINGFUL WAYS, LIKE INTELLIGENCE SUPPORT AND OTHER TYPES OF SUPPORT THAT ARE NOT NECESSARILY VISIBLE OR PUBLIC.

THOSE THINGS ARE VITAL TO UKRAINE.

SO THAT CAN CONTINUE.

I THINK VERY EASILY WITHOUT POLITICAL RISK OF ANY TYPE.

I DO REMAIN SKEPTICAL THAT WHEN WE USE THIS VAGUE LANGUAGE OF ARTICLE 5-LIKE GUARANTEES IT IS JUST A CODE WORD FOR WIGGLE ROOM TO GET OUT OF ANY MEANINGFUL CONTRIBUTION TO THE FUTURE SECURITY OF UKRAINE.

SO I THINK WE CAN PROBABLY DO A BIT BETTER AND COME UP WITH A DIFFERENT FRAME --OR DIFFERENT LANGUAGE FOR THAT FRAMEWORK.

>> SO GIVEN ALL OF THE VAGARIES THAT STILL EXIST NOW AND THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU JUST RAISED, WHAT'S THE LIKELIHOOD THAT YOU THINK THAT WITHIN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS AND POSSIBLY EVEN BY JUNE WE COULD SEE AN ACTUAL CEASEFIRE?

>> I THINK THE UKRAINIAN DELEGATION HAS SHOWN A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY IN THINGS THAT ARE STICKING POINTS, MOST PARTICULARLY THE DONETSK REGION.

I AM NOT SEEING THE PRESSURE APPLIED TO RUSSIA THAT MAKES THEM CHANGE THEIR MIND ON HOW RECALCITRANT THEY ARE AT THE NEGOTIATION TABLE.

THERE HAVE BEEN SANCTIONS AGAINST RUSSIA.

THE UNITED STATES AND OTHERS ARE BOARDING SHADOW SHIPS AROUND THE GLOBE.

THAT IS SOME PRESSURE ON THE MARGINS.

BUT UNFORTUNATELY IT IS NOT ENOUGH TO MAKE MOSCOW COME TO THE TABLE.

THERE ARE SOME CARROTS THAT WE COULD DANGLE TO THEM ONCE THEY AGREE TO A CEASEFIRE.

BUT AGAIN, THEY ARE NOT SHOWING ANY WILLINGNESS TO DO SO.

AND I THINK THEY BELIEVE THAT THEY CAN PROCEED FORWARD ON THE GROUND AND EVENTUALLY TAKE THE DONETSK REGION BY FORCE.

AT AN INCREDIBLE COST TO THEMSELVES.

AND I DON'T THINK THEY CAN DO IT BY JUNE EITHER.

SO WE'LL SEE.

I THINK MORE PRESSURE IS NEEDED ON MOSCOW TO GET THEM TO SOFTEN UP ON SOME OF THEIR POSITIONS.

>> DARA MASSICOT, ALWAYS GOOD TO SEE YOU.

THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>> NOW, IT'S BEEN CALLED THE SPACE RACE OF THE 21st CENTURY.

BUT THIS TIME IT'S ALL ABOUT ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE.

PRESERVE'S AMERICA'S LEAD OVER CHINA HAS BECOME A TOP PRIORITY OF PRESIDENT TRUMP'S SECOND TERM.

BUT AS THE TWO NATIONS VIE FOR INFLUENCE, THE QUESTION ISN'T JUST WHO GETS THERE FIRST BUT WHAT KIND OF FUTURE THEY CREATE IN THE PROCESS.

FORMER NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER JAKE SULLIVAN JOINS WALTER ISAACSON TO BREAK DOWN EXACTLY HOW AMERICA CAN KEEP COMPETING WHILE MANAGING THE RISKS.

>> THANK YOU, BIANNA.

AND JAKE SULLIVAN, WELCOME BACK TO THE SHOW.

>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME, WALTER.

IT'S GOOD TO SEE YOU.

>> UP AT HARVARD THERE YOU TEACH A COURSE IN THE GEOPOLITICS AND THE AGE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, AND YOU WROTE SOMETHING FOR "FOREIGN AFFAIRS" WITH THAT TITLE.

WITH TAL FELDMAN, WHO WORKED ON AI WHEN YOU WERE IN THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION.

IT HAS EIGHT SCENARIOS OF HOW WE'RE GOING TO COMPETE WITH CHINA IN THE AGE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE.

BUT LET ME START WITH WHAT WOULD BE MAYBE THE MOST LIKELY BUT ALSO THE MOST WORRISOME ONE.

WHICH IS WHAT IF AI REALLY IS GOING TO GET US TO ARTIFICIAL GENERAL INTELLIGENCE AND WHAT IF IT'S HARD TO CATCH UP IF SOMEBODY ELSE BEATS YOU THERE AND CHINA'S GOING HELLBENT FOR IT?

WHAT SHOULD OUR POLICY BE?

>> WELL, THAT'S THE FIRST WORLD WE LAY OUT, THAT IN FACT WE ARE JUST A SHORT TIME AWAY FROM A TRUE SUPERINTELLIGENCE THAT IS A CAPACITY OF VERY POWERFUL AI THAT HAS SOMETHING CALLED RECURSIVE SELF-IMPROVEMENT WHERE THE AI SYSTEM ITSELF IS INVENTING NEW THINGS, DISCOVERING NEW CAPABILITIES, UNLOCKING NEW CAPACITIES IN THE ECONOMIC AND NATIONAL SECURITY DOMAIN THAT THE FIRST COUNTRY THAT GETS THERE IN A HARD TO CATCH UP SCENARIO WOULD HAVE AN ENDURING ADVANTAGE AND THAT THE U.S.

AND CHINA ARE BOTH PELLMEL IN A RACE TO DO IT.

THAT'S SCENARIO ONE.

THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE INCLUDING THE HEADS OF MAJOR AMERICAN AI LABS WHO WOULD SAY THIS IS THE WORLD WE'RE LIVING IN.

IN THAT WORLD YOU DON'T QUITE HAVE WINNER TAKE ALL BUT YOU WOULD HAVE WINNER TAKE A HECK OF A LOT.

BOTH IN TERMS OF THE ABILITY OF A COUNTRY TO GET REAL NATIONAL SECURITY ADVANTAGE IN TERMS OF THEIR MILITARY AND INTELLIGENCE ABILITIES, REAL ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE IN TERMS OF THE ECONOMIC GROWTH AND PRODUCTIVITY THEY WOULD UNLOCK, AND REAL SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGY ADVANTAGE BECAUSE AI INVENTIONS CAN PRODUCE INVENTIONS IN EVERY OTHER FIELD, WHETHER IT'S BIOTECHNOLOGY OR CLEAN ENERGY OR YOU NAME IT.

SO THE STAKES ARE INCREDIBLY HIGH IN THAT WORLD.

AND IT PLACES A PREMIUM ON MAKING THE INVESTMENTS IN COMPUTING POWER AND TALENT AND ELECTRICITY TO POWER DATA CENTERS BUT IT ALSO PLACE S A HIGH PREMIUM ON SAFETY AND A CONVERSATION BETWEEN THE U.S.

AND CHINA TO MAKE SURE THIS TECHNOLOGY DOESN'T GET AWAY FROM US IN WAYS THAT HARM HUMANS IN BOTH OUR COUNTRIES AND IN EVERY OTHER COUNTRY.

>> SO YOU TALK ABOUT A CONVERSATION ON SAFETY THAT SEEMS TO HARKEN BACK ALMOST 80 YEARS TO WHEN NUCLEAR WEAPONS CAME AND WE SAID WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE NUCLEAR WEAPONS ARMS TALKS.

DO YOU THINK WE'LL HAVE TO DO THAT IN THIS WORLD WITH CHINA ON AI?

>> WE ARE ABSOLUTELY GOING TO HAVE TALKS THAT ARE AS SERIOUS, AS TECHNICAL, AS SUSTAINED AS WE DID IN THE COLD WAR EXCEPT FOR THE STAKES ARE EVEN HIGHER BECAUSE THE IMPACT GOES BEYOND JUST ONE CLASS OF WEAPONS AND THE PROBLEM IS EVEN HARDER.

BECAUSE IT'S MUCH EASIER TO COUNT MISSILES AND COUNT WARHEADS THAN IT IS TO DETERMINE AI CAPABILITY.

AND IT IS MUCH EASIER TO VERIFY THROUGH INSPECTIONS AND OVERFLIGHTS AND THE OTHER METHODS WE BUILT UP THAT THE OTHER COUNTRY IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH WHATEVER AGREEMENT THEY REACH.

BUT I'LL TELL YOU, WALTER, IN THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION I HAD A SERIES OF VERY HIGH-LEVEL ENGAGEMENTS WITH MY CHINESE COUNTERPART.

AND TOGETHER WE TEED UP FOR OUR TWO PRESIDENTS A PROPOSAL THAT THE TWO PRESIDENTS, XI JINPING AND JOE BIDEN, ACTUALLY DIRECT TALKS ON AI RISK AND SAFETY MANAGEMENT BY THE U.S.

AND CHINA.

WE HAD A FIRST SESSION IN GENEVA, THE PLACE OF MANY OF THOSE COLD WAR DISCUSSIONS ON NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN THE SUMMER OF 2024.

AND I WOULD ARGUE THAT DONALD TRUMP AND XI JINPING SHOULD REACH A SIMILAR AGREEMENT THIS YEAR AND GET THEIR TEAMS WORKING ON THIS ISSUE.

>> WHAT DID YOU TEE UP AND HOW COULD THAT BE APPLIED DURING THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION?

>> IN THEIR LAST MEETING XI JINPING AND JOE BIDEN MADE A SIMPLE AGREEMENT.

THEY AGREED THAT THE U.S.

AND CHINA AS A MATTER OF POLICY WOULD ENSURE THAT THE DECISION TO USE NUCLEAR WEAPONS WOULD NEVER BE HANDED OVER TO AN AI, THAT IT WOULD REMAIN IN THE HANDS OF HUMANS.

NOW, AT ONE LEVEL THAT SEEMS PRETTY DAMN STRAIGHT FORWARD.

THAT SHOULD DEFINITELY BE THE CASE, SHOULD BE EASY TO AGREE TO.

ON ANOTHER LEVEL THAT TOOK US NEARLY A YEAR TO NEGOTIATE BECAUSE IT'S THE FIRST TIME THAT CHINA HAS ACTUALLY MADE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE UNITED STATES ON AI NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN OUR HISTORY.

AND FURTHERMORE, IT SHOWS YOU THAT THESE KINDS OF AGREEMENTS ARE POSSIBLE.

SO EVEN THOUGH THAT WAS RELATIVELY LOW-HANGING FRUIT MY ARGUMENT IS TAKE THAT AND BUILD ON IT AND WE WILL SEE IN 2026 MULTIPLE SUMMIT MEETINGS BETWEEN DONALD TRUMP AND XI JINPING AND I BELIEVE THAT NEAR THE TOP OF THE AGENDA SHOULD BE FURTHER STEPS TO REDUCE THE OVERALL LEVEL OF AI RISK BY HAVING THE TWO COUNTRIES WHO, YOU KNOW, HAVE THE MOST CAPABILITY WITH THIS TECHNOLOGY MAKING FURTHER AGREEMENTS.

>> AMONG THE EIGHT SCENARIOS YOU PUT IN YOUR "FOREIGN AFFAIRS" PIECE THERE'S ONE THAT'S A LITTLE BIT LESS SCARY FOR US WHICH IS THAT IF SOMEBODY GETS AHEAD IN THE AI RACE IT WOULDN'T BE REALLY THAT HARD FOR THE OTHER COUNTRY TO CATCH UP.

IT'S NOT SORT OF AN EXPONENTIAL THING.

DID THE ADVENT OF DEEP SEEK IN CHINA, WAS THAT A DATA POINT THAT THAT MIGHT BE THE CASE FOR THE WORLD?

>> SO FOR YOUR VIEWERS, YOU KNOW, DEEP SEEK AT THE BEGINNING OF LAST YEAR CAME OUT WITH A MODEL THAT REALLY MOVED CHINA'S CAPABILITIES FORWARD.

AND IT CAUGHT --THE WORLD TO A CONSIDERABLE EXTENT BY SURPRISE BECAUSE PEOPLE THOUGHT CHINA WAS MUCH FURTHER BEHIND.

THE REALITY, WALTER, IS THAT INSIDE THE U.S.

GOVERNMENT WE ACTUALLY HAD BEEN FOLLOWING DEEP SEEK FOR WELL MORE THAN A YEAR BEFORE THAT MODEL CAME OUT.

MY TEAM WAS PRODUCING MEMOS FOR ME ON A REGULAR BASIS SAYING HEY, WATCH THIS REALLY INTERESTING COMPANY IN CHINA.

THEY'RE DOING SOME SERIOUS AND CREDIBLE WORK TO ADVANCE THE CAPABILITIES OF THEIR MODELS.

NOW, THE REALITY IS U.S.

MODELS ARE STILL AHEAD OF CHINESE MODELS.

BUT IF YOU GO TALK TO THE AMERICAN AI LABS, THEY WILL TELL YOU THAT A BIG PROBLEM IS SOMETHING CALLED DISTILLATION, WHICH IS BASICALLY A FANCY WAY OF SAYING THAT ONCE A U.S.

COMPANY HAS PUT A MODEL OUT THERE IN THE WORLD CHINESE COMPANIES CAN TAKE A LOOK AT THAT, RUN SOME TESTS ON IT AND PRETTY RAPIDLY FOLLOW WITH SOMETHING FAIRLY CLOSE IN CAPABILITY.

THAT'S NOT JUST TRUE OF DEEP SEEK.

IT'S TRUE OF OTHER CHINESE LABS AS WELL.

AND IF THAT REMAINS THE PATTERN GOING FORWARD, IF ANY ADVANCE BY ONE COMPANY CAN BE RAPIDLY FOLLOWED BY ANOTHER COMPANY, WHETHER IT'S A U.S.

COMPANY OR CHINESE COMPANY, THEN WE'RE IN MUCH LESS OF A WINNER-TAKE-ALL WORLD.

IT ALSO HAS IMPLICATIONS FOR HOW MUCH YOU INVEST IN THE MASSIVE TRAINING RUNS AT THE FRONT END.

AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT I THINK THE AMERICAN AI COMPANIES ARE GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK VERY CAREFULLY AT BECAUSE THIS IS A TOTALLY CREDIBLE SCENARIO THAT IS MUCH EASIER TO FOLLOW ONCE AN INNOVATION HAPPENS THAN MANY PEOPLE EXPECT.

>> A LOT OF WHAT YOU TALK ABOUT IN THE ARTICLE TENDS TO BE DIGITAL AI, INCLUDING THINKING THINGS.

THERE'S ALSO REAL WORLD AI.

AUTONOMOUS ROBOTS, AUTONOMOUS CARS, AUTONOMOUS DRONES, PHYSICAL OBJECTS.

IS THAT A SEPARATE CATEGORY THAT WE HAVE TO TALK ABOUT?

>> WELL, IT DEPENDS ON WHO YOU ASK.

ACTUALLY, THERE'S A ROBUST DEBATE INSIDE THE AI COMMUNITY RIGHT NOW.

THERE ARE THOSE WHO BELIEVE THE LARGE LANGUAGE MODEL IS THE KIND OF KEY TO UNLOCKING EVERYTHING, MEANING THAT AS WE CONTINUE TO MAKE ADVANCES IN THE CURRENT ARCHITECTURE IT WILL UNLOCK NEW CAPABILITIES IN THE PHYSICAL WORLD.

WITH ROBOTICS.

WITH SELF- DRIVING CARS, WITH INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION.

THERE ARE OTHERS WHO BELIEVE THAT THERE'S A NATURAL LIMIT TO HOW FAR LARGE LANGUAGE MODELS CAN GO AND WHAT WE REALLY NEED TO DO IS FOCUS NOW ON WORLD MODELS, THAT IS, MODELS THAT ARE LESS ABOUT PREDICTING THE NEXT WORD AND MORE ABOUT MAPPING THE WORLD AROUND US.

AND IT IS ONLY THROUGH THAT MECHANISM THAT WE'RE GOING TO PRODUCE THE BREAKTHROUGHS IN PHYSICAL MANIFESTATIONS OF AI.

I OBVIOUSLY AM NOT IN A POSITION TO ADJUDICATE BETWEEN BRILLIANT PEOPLE ON TWO SIDES OF THAT DEBATE.

BUT I THINK THAT FOR THE UNITED STATES AS A MATTER OF STRATEGY WE HAVE TO LAY CHIPS ON BOTH BETS.

WE NEED TO BE CONTINUING TO INVEST IN THE CUTTING EDGE OF LARGE LANGUAGE MODELS, BUT WE ALSO NEED TO BE INVESTING SUBSTANTIALLY IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THESE WORLD MODELS AND OF THE CAPACITY TO BUILD ROBOTS AND AUTONOMOUS SYSTEMS AS SPEED AND SCALE.

AND I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF INTERESTING WORK BEING DONE ACROSS THOSE AREAS THAT GO BEYOND JUST THE OPEN AIs AND ANTHONY ROPPICS AND GOOGLES OF THE WORLD.

>> THE DRIVING FORCE AT LEAST IN THE UNITED STATES RIGHT NOW IS THE PRIVATE SECTOR.

WE HAVE FOUR OR FIVE VERY BIG COMPANIES PURSUING THIS LIKE CRAZY.

AND IN YOUR PIECE YOU SORT OF SAY THAT CAN BE A PROBLEM IF THE INCENTIVES OF THE PRIVATE SECTOR AREN'T ACTUALLY ALIGNS WITH OUR NATIONAL INTERESTS.

EXPLAIN HOW THAT COULD HAPPEN.

>> WELL, WHAT'S REALLY INTERESTING, WALTER, IS IF YOU THINK ABOUT THE TECHNOLOGIES IN THE LAST 100 YEARS WITH TRULY TRANSFORMATIVE NATIONAL SECURITY IMPLICATIONS, NUCLEAR WEAPONS, THE SPACE AGE, THE INTERNET, ALL OF THESE BASICALLY WERE BIRTHED BY GOVERNMENT AND THEN, YOU KNOW, ENDED UP IN SOME KIND OF PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP.

IN THE NUCLEAR WEAPONS CASE IT WAS PURELY GOVERNMENT BUT NUCLEAR POWER THEN WENT TO PRIVATE INDUSTRY.

IN THE CASE OF LARGE LANGUAGE MODELS AND GENERALITYIVE AI THE GOVERNMENT IS ON THE SIDELINES.

THIS IS THE COMPANIES DOING IT.

AND IT'S A RELATIVELY SMALL NUMBER OF REALLY LARGE COMPANIES.

NOW, ON THE ONE HAND THAT'S A HUGE NATIONAL ASSET THAT THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNIQUE AMONG COUNTRIES, HAS THESE BIG PRIVATE COMPANIES DRIVING TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATIONS WITH ALL OF THESE MASSIVE IMPLICATIONS.

IT'S ALSO A RISK.

BECAUSE IF YOU GET TOO MUCH CONCENTRATION IN THE HANDS OF TOO FEW PEOPLE WHO ARE LOOKING FOR BASICALLY RETURNS TO THEIR SHAREHOLDERS AND NOT NECESSARILY ENTIRELY TO THE OVERALL PUBLIC INTEREST, THAT'S A CHALLENGE.

THAT'S WHY THE GOVERNMENT HAS TO COME IN AND MANAGE THAT TENSION WITH A HEALTHY SET OF TOOLS TO ENSURE THAT ULTIMATELY THE VEMT OF THIS TECHNOLOGY WORKS FOR US RATHER THAN AGAINST US.

BUT HERE WE'RE IN SOMEWHAT UNCHARTERED TERRITORY.

BECAUSE UNLIKE IN PAST INNOVATIONS WHERE THE GOVERNMENT WAS IN THE DRIVER'S SEAT HERE WE'RE VERY MUCH IN THE PASSENGER'S SEAT AND IT'S GOING TO REQUIRE A NEW STYLE, A NEW METHOD OF GOVERNMENT PARTNERSHIP WITH THE PRIVATE SECTOR.

WE BEGAN THAT WORK IN THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION.

THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO CONTINUE AS WE GO FORWARD.

>> WHY NOT JUST GET OUT OF THE WAY IF THESE COMPANIES ARE GOING REAL FAST AT IT?

>> WELL, A COUPLE REASONS.

SO FIRST OF ALL, I DISAGREE WITH THE IDEA THAT THERE IS NECESSARILY AN ENTIRELY INVERSE LINK BETWEEN SPEED OF INNOVATION AND BASIC NEGOTIATIONS OF SAFETY.

LET'S JUST TAKE RAILROADS AS ONE EXAMPLE.

WHEN THE RAILROAD INDUSTRY GOT OFF AND RUNNING THAT WAS THE PRIVATE SECTOR DOING ITS THING.

BUT TRAINS WERE GOING SLOW BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE KIND OF SWITCHING AND SIGNALING NECESSARY.

THEY HAD DIFFERENT GAUGES FOR DIFFERENT TRACKS.

AND IT WAS ONLY AFTER THE GOVERNMENT WORKED WITH THE PRIVATE SECTOR TO CREATE A SET OF BASIC RULES OF THE ROAD THAT TRAINS COULD HAVE CONFIDENCE TO DRIVE REALLY FAST.

AND I THINK A SIMILAR DYNAMIC HAS TO TAKE HOLD HERE TOO.

WE SHOULD NOT BE OVERREGULATING OR HOLDING BACK THE PRIVATE SECTOR UNNECESSARILY.

BUT WE SHOULD ALSO BE ENSURING THAT THIS TECHNOLOGY IS NOT SUBJECT TO MISUSE BY BAD ACTORS OR DOES NOT BECOME MISALIGNED IN WAYS WHERE IT'S ULTIMATELY DEEPLY HARMFUL EITHER ON A NATIONAL SECURITY BASIS OR A HEALTH OR ECONOMIC BASIS.

SO IT'S ABOUT GETTING THE BALANCE RIGHT.

AND THAT MEANS THE GOVERNMENT DOES HAVE A ROLE BUT THAT ROLE HAS TO BE ONE OF HUMILITY AND IT HAS TO BE ONE OF DEEP PARTNERSHIP WITH A PRIVATE SECTOR THAT IS A MASSIVE NATIONAL ASSET IN DRIVING THIS TECHNOLOGY FORWARD.

>> DOES CHINA HAVE CERTAIN SYSTEMIC ADVANTAGES, WHETHER IT'S BEING ABLE TO THROW MASSIVE RESOURCES AT ENERGY OR COMPANIES LIKE THAT, OR NOT HAVING A WHOLE LOT OF PRIVACY CONCERNS ABOUT BUILDING HUGE DATA BASES, OR DO WE HAVE A NATURAL ADVANTAGE?

>> CHINA HAS SOME ADVANTAGES FOR SURE.

THEIR CAPACITY TO PRODUCE THE ELECTRICITY TO POWER DATA CENTERS IS UNMATCHED IN THE WORLD AND IT OUTSTRIPS WHAT THE U.S.

CAN DO.

THEY HAVE PLENTY OF TALENT.

THEY HAVE PLENTY OF DATA.

WHAT THEY DO NOT HAVE THAT THE UNITED STATES HAS IS PLENTY OF COMPUTING POWER.

THOSE ADVANCED AI CHIPS THAT GO INTO THE DATA CENTERS THAT TRAIN THE MODELS AND RUN THE MODELS.

HERE THE UNITED STATES AND OUR DEMOCRATIC ALLIES HAVE A MASSIVE ADVANTAGE OVER CHINA.

AND WE PLACED IN THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION CONTROLS ON THE SALE OF THE CHIPS AND THE EQUIPMENT THAT MAKES THOSE CHIPS TO CHINA SO THAT WE WOULD SUSTAIN THAT ADVANTAGE.

AND I WOULD SUBMIT TO YOU, WALTER, THAT THIS IS THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT INGREDIENT TO POWERING THE FUTURE OF THE AI REVOLUTION, COMPUTING POWER.

AND THAT WE NEED TO SUSTAIN OUR ADVANTAGE HERE.

THIS IS WHY I HAD CONCERNS ABOUT THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION ACTUALLY DECIDING TO SHIP SOME OF THESE ADVANCED CHIPS TO CHINA.

THIS REDUCES THE AMERICAN COMPUTE ADVANTAGE.

IT HELPS CHINA SOLVE THE BIGGEST PROBLEM THAT IT HAS.

AND I DON'T THINK THAT THAT IS IN OUR INTERESTS.

AND I WOULD HOPE THAT THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION CONTINUES TO SUPPORT A STRATEGY OF TECHNOLOGY CONTROLS ON THE MOST ADVANCED COMPUTING CHIPS TO CHINA.

>> WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT ARMS CONTROL BEING A PRECEDENT FOR AI TYPES OF TREATIES, WE USED TO 80 YEARS AGO CREATE GREAT INSTITUTIONS WHETHER IT BE NATO, THE WORLD BANK, TO DO THESE THINGS.

IS THERE SOME NEW GRAND INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTION LIKE A NATO OR A U.N.

THAT SHOULD COME ALONG FOR THE WISE MEN OF THIS GENERATION TO CREATE?

>> YOU KNOW, IT'S FREQUENT LY DISCUSSED IN THE CIRCLES OF PEOPLE WHO KIND OF FOLLOW AI AND NATIONAL SECURITY THAT WE SHOULD CREATE SOMETHING LIKE AN INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY EQUIVALENT FOR AI.

I THINK THAT ANALOGY DOESN'T QUITE HOLD IN THE SAME WAY BECAUSE THERE ARE REAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THIS GENERAL PURPOSE TECHNOLOGY THAT TOUCHES EVERYTHING AND NUCLEAR POWER, WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY TRANSFORMATIVE BUT NOT AS GENERAL PURPOSE AS AI.

HOWEVER, I BELIEVE THAT THERE SHOULD ULTIMATELY BE AN INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTION THAT LOOKS AT THE BASIC QUESTIONS OF SAFETY AND ALIGNMENT AND THE RISKS THAT AI POSES AND FINDING WAYS FOR THE WORLD COLLECTIVELY TO COLLABORATE TO MANAGE THOSE RISKS.

WHETHER IT'S IN CYBER AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, THE INTERSECTION BETWEEN AI AND BIOWEAPONS.

WHETHER IT'S TO DO WITH AI SYSTEMS THAT COULD GO ROGUE IN SOME WAY AND ACT CONTRARY TO THE INTEREST OF HUMANITY.

OR WHETHER IT'S JUST SIMPLY HOW TO MANAGE FOR YOU WILL AOF THE OTHER IMPLICATIONS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE INCLUDING ECONOMIC DISRUPTIONS, FINANCIAL RISKS AND WHAT HAVE YOU.

SO YES, THE BOTTOM LINE IS I DO THINK WE NEED A NEW INSTITUTION.

IT PROBABLY HAS TO LOOK AND FEEL DIFFERENT THAN ANYTHING WE SAW DURING THE COLD WAR.

AND IT ALMOST CERTAINLY HAS TO BE NOT JUST AN INSTITUTION OF GOVERNMENTS BUT AN INSTITUTION THAT INVOLVES THE PRIVATE SECTOR AND CIVIL SOCIETY AS WELL BECAUSE OF THE CROSS-CUTTING NATURE OF THIS TECHNOLOGY.

>> YOU KNOW, YOU WRITE IN YOUR PIECE THAT THE U.S.

SHOULD USE AI TO STRENGTHEN DEMOCRATIC VALUES BOTH AT HOME AND AROUND THE WORLD.

HOW COULD WE DO THAT AND ESPECIALLY HOW COULD WE DO THAT WHEN OTHER NATIONS MIGHT THINK WE'RE WEAPONIZING IT?

>> FIRST OF ALL, THIS COMES DOWN TO GUARDING AGAINST SOME OF THE RISKS TO DEMOCRACY FROM ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE.

THE ABILITY TO ENGAGE IN MASS SURVEILLANCE AND REPRESSION.

THE ABILITY TO TAKE THE PERSONAL DATA OF CITIZENS AND USE IT FOR NEFARIOUS PURPOSES BY GOVERNMENTS.

THE ABILITY TO DRIVE PROPAGANDA, MISINFORMATION AND DISINFORMATION.

SO PART OF IT IS ABOUT HAVING A DOMINANT POSITION WITH RESPECT TO THE TECHNOLOGY SO THAT YOU CAN WARD OFF THOSE VERY HARMFUL RISKS.

AND THE PROOF IS IN THE PUDDING AS TO WHETHER THE U.S.

IS PREPARED TO WORK WITH ITS PRIVATE COMPANIES TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

>> BUT IF THE WORLD WAS BUILT ON CHINESE AI, THE RISKS OF THOSE THINGS ARE MUCH HIGHER BECAUSE WE SEE MANY OF THOSE THINGS PLAYING OUT RIGHT NOW ACTUALLY IN CHINA.

THAT'S ONE THING.

THE SECOND THING IS IT GOES TO YOUR LAST QUESTION, WHICH IS THE U.S.

HAS TO BE INVOLVED IN A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT WITH OTHER COUNTRIES AROUND SETTING THE RULES, NORMS AND STANDARDS WHEN IT COMES TO AI.

AND THAT SHOULD BE DONE THROUGH MULTIPLE DIFFERENT VERTICALS.

IT SHOULD BE DONE THROUGH DEMOCRATIC ALLIES AND PARTNERS AND IT SHOULD BE DONE THROUGH THE UNITED NATIONS.

AND I'M PROUD THAT THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION SUPPORTED THE EFFICIENCY GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TO TRY TO LAY DOWN SOME BASIC PRECEPTS ABOUT HOW THIS TECHNOLOGY SHOULD BE USED CONSISTENT WITH THE VALUES THAT WE HOLD DEAR.

>> JAKE SCHK ULLIVAN, THANKS SO MUCH FOR JOINING US AGAIN.

APPRECIATE IT.

>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.

>>> AND FINALLY THE WINTER OLYMPIC GAMES ARE ALREADY UNDER WAY IN ITALY AND ALREADY ONE ATHLETE HAS FLIPPED LITERALLY HIS WAY INTO THE HISTORY BOOKS.

OVER THE WEEKEND AMERICAN FIGURE SKATER ILIA MALININ LANDED THE FIRST OLYMPIC BACKFLIP IN DECADES.

FIRST SEEN AT THE GAMES IN 1976, IT WAS SOON DEEMED TOO DANGEROUS AND BANNED.

THEN IN 1998 FRENCH SKATER SURYA BONALI DEFIED THE RULES WITH A DARING ONE-LEGGED BACKFLIP.

SHE PAID FOR IT IN POINT DEDUCTIONS BUT SECURED HER PLACE AS A PIONEER OF THE SPORT.

AND NOW WITH THE MOVE ONCE AGAIN LEGAL MALSNIN HONORING THAT LEGACY AND HELPING HIS TEAM TO VICTORY.

HE IS A DELIGHT TO WATCH ON THE ICE.

AND THAT'S IT FOR OUR PROGRAM TONIGHT.

IF YOU WANT TO FIND OUT WHAT'S COMING UP ON THE SHOW EACH NIGHT, SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER AT PBS.

ORG/AMANPOUR.

THANK YOU FOR WATCHING "AMANPOUR & COMPANY" ON PBS.

JOIN US AGAIN TOMORROW NIGHT.