N1BOS — broadcast
20260816 010000 UTC
517 transcript segments
Google Speech-to-Text API Automatic Transcription (Chirp)
Data courtesy of The GDELT Project (https://www.gdeltproject.org/), from the Internet Archive TV News Archive.
Machine transcription. Treat it as a searchable index of what was broadcast, not a verbatim quotation record.

[00:00:06] of
[00:00:14] This of of is GPS, the global public square, welcome to all of you in the
[00:00:17] United States and around the world, I'm Farid
[00:00:20] Zakaria. Today on the
[00:00:23] program, I will talk to the CEO of Microsoft,
[00:00:27] Satya Nadela. I want to know how he
[00:00:31] thinks about artificial intelligence, is it
[00:00:34] bubble or is it the industrial revolution times
[00:00:38] 10? will it destroy most jobs and has
[00:00:41] China's technology caught up with the US? all
[00:00:45] that and more.
[00:00:48] also Venezuela's opposition leader Maria Korida
[00:00:52] Machade. she won the
[00:00:56] Nobel Prize for her work promoting democracy and she's now
[00:01:00] me living in exile. b say she would win an
[00:01:03] election back home
[00:01:04] in a landslide, but
[00:01:06] of reports are that the Trump
[00:01:08] of administration has barred her from going
[00:01:10] home. what is going
[00:01:13] on? i will ask
[00:01:15] her.
[00:01:20] but first here's my take: this week britain installed its
[00:01:24] seventh prime minister in barely decade. france has churne
[00:01:28] through almost as many. in
[00:01:30] of just few years. its next president may well be
[00:01:33] of the once outcast Marine Lepen. In Germany, the far
[00:01:37] right AFD, tiny just few years ago, now
[00:01:41] poles in first
[00:01:42] of place. Even East Asian democracies often viewed as
[00:01:46] stable, cautious, even boring, have seen governments in
[00:01:50] Japan, South Korea and Taiwan struggle in the midst of growing
[00:01:54] public anger. And where the popular are in power,
[00:01:58] the situation doesn't seem that different. Donald Trump now hovers
[00:02:02] near the lowest approval ratings of any modern American
[00:02:05] president at this point
[00:02:07] in a presidency. Can modern
[00:02:10] democracies function? Across the democratic
[00:02:14] world, many countries tax, borrow and spend exorbitant
[00:02:17] amounts. Spending now averages more than 40% of
[00:02:21] GDP in the OECD countries, and the debt to GDP
[00:02:25] of ratio in those countries has more than doubled over the last 30
[00:02:29] years. but people don't seem to think they have
[00:02:32] benefited. why has this happened? some of it
[00:02:36] is economic, expensive housing, stagnant incomes and a
[00:02:40] widening
[00:02:41] of inequality problem have fueled public anger. but economics
[00:02:45] is only part
[00:02:45] of the story. america has enjoyed stronger growth than most
[00:02:49] other advanced economies. france
[00:02:52] of under Macron has lowered unemployment, and it has attracted more
[00:02:55] foreigner investment than any country in Europe for seven straight
[00:02:59] years. According to an Ernston Young analysis, South Korea is
[00:03:03] economic success story. Japan was experiencing a
[00:03:06] comeback, yet democratic governments almost
[00:03:10] everywhere are unpopular. The
[00:03:14] larger explanation is that we are living through one of history's great
[00:03:17] technological revolutions, and these transformations always
[00:03:21] produce deep anxiety and fear. The
[00:03:25] last technological transformation on this scale came between
[00:03:29] roughly 18. 18 and 1920 electricity,
[00:03:33] the telephone, railroads, the automobile and
[00:03:36] me movies overturned entire industries and ways of life,
[00:03:40] millions left farms for cities,
[00:03:42] in global trade disrupted local
[00:03:44] in economies, new fortunes appeared overnight while old
[00:03:48] occupations disappeared. In this turmoil,
[00:03:52] frustration and anger found political
[00:03:55] pathways, the left turned to communism, the right
[00:03:59] to fascism. What followed were new mass movements, cultural
[00:04:03] uphevals and world war. Our own
[00:04:06] revolution is digital rather than electrical, beginning with
[00:04:10] computers, then the
[00:04:11] of internet and then smart phones, social media, and now
[00:04:16] of AI. The ladder might prove more
[00:04:18] transformative. As Deep Minds Demus Hasaba said last
[00:04:22] week, we've essentially found a
[00:04:24] me way
[00:04:25] in to make sand think. Silicon trips are made of
[00:04:29] sand. "the ability to mass produce intelligence
[00:04:33] that gets more powerful every
[00:04:35] of month is surely the greatest technological triumph in
[00:04:39] history, but that means it could be the most
[00:04:43] disruptive. the great political scientist Samuel
[00:04:46] Huntington noted, the primary problem of
[00:04:50] a politics is the lag in
[00:04:52] the development of political institutions behind social and
[00:04:56] economic change.
[00:04:58] of large scale change causes. anxiety and anxious societies
[00:05:02] ask more of politics, citizens want leaders to restore
[00:05:06] order, provide security and help them regain a sense of
[00:05:09] control over forces that seam increasingly beyond
[00:05:13] anyone's grasp, but while today's technology
[00:05:17] dramatically increases expectations, it also makes
[00:05:20] democratic governments less capable by
[00:05:23] comparison. we summon a car these days in three
[00:05:27] minutes, package arrives the same day. artificial
[00:05:31] intelligence answers complicated questions in seconds, doing work that
[00:05:35] took people months in mere minutes.
[00:05:38] naturally citizens begin to expect similar efficiency from.
[00:05:43] but democracy is not designed for speed, it's designed for
[00:05:46] legitimacy. it bargains, compromises, consult
[00:05:50] independent courts, protects vulnerable groups and balances
[00:05:54] competing interests. those safegards are precisely what distinguish
[00:05:58] democracy from authoritarianism. yet an age
[00:06:01] shaped by technologies warp speed, these
[00:06:05] increasingly look like paralysis. social
[00:06:09] media widens the gap, every governmental mistake. becomes
[00:06:13] instantly visible, every disappointment becomes
[00:06:16] viral controversy, every frustrated citizen can
[00:06:20] mobilize thousands of others before governments have even begun to
[00:06:24] respond. this helps explain the strange
[00:06:28] trajectory of modern populism. politicians such as Donald
[00:06:31] Trump, Jayer Bolsonaro, Havier Melley and others rose
[00:06:35] to prominence, promising to bulldose through institutional
[00:06:39] gridlock, yet once in office most... have encountered
[00:06:43] the same reality as the leaders they displaced. Today's
[00:06:46] insurgents quickly become tomorrow's disappointing
[00:06:50] incumbants. People don't seem to have lost
[00:06:53] confidence in democracy. They have not turned their backs on
[00:06:57] elections, constitutions and independent courts,
[00:07:01] but they are deeply unhappy with democratic
[00:07:03] performance. Democracies must once against
[00:07:07] prove that they can build housing and infrastructure, modernize
[00:07:11] public services, manage technological change, reduce
[00:07:15] inequality, and do so with urgency and
[00:07:17] effectiveness. History offers some grounds for
[00:07:20] optimism. free societies often look weakest in the
[00:07:24] midst of great technological because they move slowly and
[00:07:28] argue constantly, yet over time they have usually
[00:07:31] adapted better than autocracies precisely because they
[00:07:35] can learn, correct mistakes and change course
[00:07:39] without violence or repression, democratic
[00:07:43] leaders should not try to outrase technology, they
[00:07:46] can't, but they should prove through relentless focus
[00:07:50] and competence that democracies can
[00:07:53] deliver, then people will understand that the
[00:07:57] friction of accountability and the weight of
[00:08:00] legitimacy are not bugs in the system, they
[00:08:04] are the features that keep us free. go to
[00:08:08] fried zakaria.com for a link to my washington post column this week
[00:08:11] and let's get:
[00:08:12] Started:
[00:08:23] artificial intelligence is fueling the American economy right
[00:08:26] now. The appetite for anything AI related seems never ending
[00:08:30] as tech companies rush to build data centers by chips and
[00:08:34] fuel technology development. But so much of this spending
[00:08:38] is one massive bet and many of Wall Street are worried about.
[00:08:42] whether they will see returns on these investments. Here's
[00:08:46] part one of my exclusive interview with Satya Nadela, the CEO of
[00:08:50] Microsoft. Satya Nadela, welcome to the
[00:08:53] show. Thank you so much Farid for having me. Are we
[00:08:57] an AI bubble and has it begun to deflate?
[00:09:01] You have a 30% stake in open AI. They have promised to
[00:09:04] spend hundreds of billions of dollars. They make
[00:09:08] tens of billions of dollars. They'll make 25 billion dollars this year.
[00:09:12] revenue, it just feels like the the math doesn't add up and
[00:09:16] there is going to be moment of truth, am I wrong?
[00:09:20] i i think the moment of truth really more is the
[00:09:24] following: the way look it is this is new input, this is
[00:09:28] new general purpose technology that is going to drive productivity
[00:09:32] and that productivity has to translate into very broad speed
[00:09:35] economic growth that is economy wide in terms of GDP
[00:09:39] growth, and if we don't see that, then we are going to
[00:09:43] have a problem, so unless we see the that broad economic
[00:09:47] growth, we are not going to you have this movie and well,
[00:09:51] but I am all about how do you ensure, not any about
[00:09:54] any one firm, right, quite frankly, it's about every firm in the
[00:09:58] economy right, whether it's a small business, whether it's a large
[00:10:01] multinational or a public sector institution, can
[00:10:05] they see real benefits of this technology, we are in the early innings
[00:10:09] of it, but there's real proof points of that so... The big news
[00:10:13] this week is that a Chinese firm Moonshot AI released
[00:10:17] a model Kimi that is open source
[00:10:21] open weight which means you can kind of see the inners of it which American.
[00:10:25] firms by binage do not allow, people think it's
[00:10:29] very, very good, almost as good as the top American
[00:10:32] models, um, is it not likely that the
[00:10:36] most the world is going to adopt these
[00:10:39] open-weight Chinese models, because they
[00:10:42] are much cheaper, they can do mostly what you need to
[00:10:45] do, you know, most companies are not
[00:10:48] using uh AI to solve Firmats theorem,
[00:10:52] they're using it to rationalize the... inventory
[00:10:55] systems or things like that, so is this, does
[00:10:59] this mean China has an
[00:11:01] edge? I when I think about
[00:11:05] let's say American competitiveness in the digital sector
[00:11:09] or in the intac, it's always come from not
[00:11:12] any one thing, but it's come from this approach I think the
[00:11:16] US has always taken, which is the equal system approach all over the
[00:11:20] world, it's been export led, it's been about trust in our
[00:11:24] technology. Right, so for example, even take the Chinese models, guess what, where
[00:11:28] these models run? They run a lot the
[00:11:32] hyper scalers that are American all over the world, in fact that's
[00:11:36] good, because we then, these are open weight models that means we get to
[00:11:39] monitor them, we get to test them, we get to post strain them, so when
[00:11:43] tinker machines or thinking machines releases new model, is that an
[00:11:47] American model, is it a Chinese model, there may have been a base model that was
[00:11:51] Chinese, but they've done post training, they've released it, so I think that...
[00:11:55] "one the things that's lost in this is the
[00:11:58] understanding even of how the US became competitive in the
[00:12:02] first place, they didn't become competitive because of one invention, they
[00:12:06] became, we became competitive because we took our technology, we built
[00:12:09] a rich ecosystem where others could participate in other
[00:12:13] countries and trust our stewardship of this
[00:12:16] ecosystem, and as long as that remains we
[00:12:20] will absolutely be competitive and we will win, and Chinese will have
[00:12:23] role in it, whether it's in the open-weight models or other
[00:12:27] technologies, but it's not about that zero sum, it's about really
[00:12:31] thinking ecosystems. next on
[00:12:34] GPS, many people are worried about how AI
[00:12:38] uses their data, it may come as a
[00:12:41] surprise, but so is Satya Nadela. We'll discuss
[00:12:45] when we come back.
[00:12:49] Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella made headlines earlier this month when he
[00:12:52] warned that companies using Air. pay for
[00:12:56] intelligence twice, once with their actual payments to the
[00:13:00] AI firms and again with something even more precious,
[00:13:04] their data and their unique knowledge. In other words, asking AI
[00:13:08] questions doesn't just result in answers for us, it tells
[00:13:11] AI what we're thinking. This creates what Nadella has spend, the
[00:13:15] reverse information paradox, where AI models and
[00:13:19] their providers are the ones gaining more knowledge and
[00:13:23] overwhelmingly reaping the... benefits: more now of
[00:13:27] my conversation with satya nadela. so this is something
[00:13:31] you've been quite vocal about the idea yo put it in lemon's terms that
[00:13:35] every time you use an AI model you're giving them your data,
[00:13:39] you're giving them your thought your thought process and they're essentially
[00:13:42] stealing that and making their models better and eventually they
[00:13:46] they have all that information you don't a version of this happened to the
[00:13:50] media companies in the newspapers and
[00:13:53] magazines when Google and internet came
[00:13:56] about, so there's two arguments against this,
[00:14:00] one, what you're describing is of course very beneficial for Microsoft,
[00:14:04] because your business model relies on commoditizing that space,
[00:14:08] and then putting value where Microsoft has lots of
[00:14:11] products, is it feasible, is there a way in
[00:14:15] which you can take advantage of AI and still
[00:14:18] control your your data and your reasoning, particularly
[00:14:22] for average person, maybe a fancy company. like yours can
[00:14:26] do it, but how does an, how does an individual say, look, I do want
[00:14:30] to use AI, but I want
[00:14:31] to in some way be in charge of my
[00:14:33] data? 100%. so in fact, this
[00:14:37] is the the real question, right? because my thesis is simple, which is if
[00:14:41] the firm has to exist, let's take, let's leave consumer markets
[00:14:44] outside, because to some degree there's got to be some value exchange
[00:14:48] in the consumer space where you're getting something for free, maybe for your data, that's
[00:14:52] sort of how the advertising business model has worked. so let's leave that aside,
[00:14:56] but at the firm level, this is the first time where the decision should be,
[00:15:00] okay, I a firm that creates knowledge, and I
[00:15:04] need that knowledge to stay inside the firm. I not only have human capital,
[00:15:08] but now I'll have increasing levels of token capital. The
[00:15:11] only way to preserve that is what I describe as your
[00:15:15] control over ensuring that the reverse information paradox doesn't
[00:15:19] happen right, which is every time you use the model, all the
[00:15:23] metadata around it. is sort of retained by you so that you
[00:15:27] could use all of that to train perhaps your own weights or
[00:15:30] your own model and to me that's what i think is going to be
[00:15:34] absolutely you know you if you go back the
[00:15:37] patterns, copyrights, trademarks, all were created to protect
[00:15:41] the seller, this is the first time where we will need to have, i would say
[00:15:45] even the rights that protect the buyer, but even
[00:15:49] short of that, in the immediate term, there is an technical approach
[00:15:53] that's kind of what i wrote in my post that you could take uh to protect
[00:15:57] yourself right, where not only are you able to use the frontier
[00:16:00] models, but for example by keeping the harness separate from the model,
[00:16:04] the context and memory separate from the... model, you
[00:16:08] absolutely can use multiple models for what they're great
[00:16:12] at, at the same time any one model can go away and you can still
[00:16:16] continue to be in sort of control of your own destiny, and
[00:16:19] so to me there is an absolutely an approach
[00:16:22] and that's what
[00:16:22] a sensible approach, and it's
[00:16:24] of course not what Microsoft does, but it's not
[00:16:28] about a firm specific thing, because any firm that doesn't have
[00:16:32] this control, I will claim will not remain a firm because you've
[00:16:35] essentially outsourced your thinking. Let ask you about the future of work.
[00:16:39] Microsoft employs about 200 thousand people, but the
[00:16:43] number of AI programs and programmers, what people call
[00:16:46] agents, it's probably two million or 20 million
[00:16:49] soon. Um, is is it likely that
[00:16:53] 10 years from now, Microsoft will either have the same number and
[00:16:57] not have grown or maybe even have fewer. Given the
[00:17:01] amount of work and the kind of quality of work,
[00:17:04] Anthropic says almost all its code is now. written at
[00:17:08] the first level by by computers, by
[00:17:11] AI, what happens to human beings? yeah,
[00:17:15] it's a great question, you know, if you think about this is the the real
[00:17:19] challenge in all these transformations right,
[00:17:21] the lump of labor fallacy and our lack of imagination get in the way right, which
[00:17:25] is if you sort of somebody came to us frid in the early 80s
[00:17:29] and said, hey,
[00:17:30] you know what, the billion people are going to get up in the morning and start
[00:17:34] typing, we would have said, why does the world need the million?
[00:17:38] except we invented in the last whatever 40 years this
[00:17:42] entire economy of knowledge work and
[00:17:46] all of us went to work it in different roles and so that's the type
[00:17:50] of transformation even inside of Microsoft right, what does it mean
[00:17:54] to be software engineer is changing because at some
[00:17:58] level these coding agents have made all of us right, creating a
[00:18:01] document
[00:18:02] or software program to some degree are now the same,
[00:18:06] does that mean some? how the specialized deep systems
[00:18:10] engineer who we still needed in order to be able to build the
[00:18:13] distributed systems in azasure goes away, no chance, but
[00:18:17] will anyone be able to create an app that required
[00:18:21] in the past some IT, absolutely, and so as that
[00:18:25] change diffuses, i think the core spine
[00:18:29] the organization, how we are organized, what functions we
[00:18:33] have, the work artifacts, the work flows will change
[00:18:37] way will change, and that
[00:18:40] process is going to have some significant displacement, it's all not going to be
[00:18:44] hunky dory, but when we come out on the other
[00:18:47] end, I absolutely believe there will be new jobs that we will
[00:18:51] value as humans, in fact you can see even today, right, what are the reasons all
[00:18:55] of us react to someone who gives you just pure AI output
[00:18:59] and you say, well
[00:19:00] I don't want that, I want
[00:19:02] to know that there was a human behind it who actually looked at
[00:19:05] it, and our ability. to discern what that human did
[00:19:09] with the AI output is going to be the new quality we will in fact
[00:19:13] value, and so I think as we get through this trans
[00:19:16] transformation, we will understand how humans
[00:19:19] continue to evolve and value each other's
[00:19:22] contribution to advancing our societies.
[00:19:26] People say that human creativity is the one thing that AI
[00:19:30] models cannot match, what if that's not true?
[00:19:34] I'll ask Satya Nadela that next.
[00:19:38] and now more of my exclusive interview with Satya Nadella, the
[00:19:42] CEO of Microsoft. I'm struck by something about AI.
[00:19:46] People often talk about creativity as one the things that human beings will
[00:19:50] be able to do that AI can't, but I'm strucked by because the nature of
[00:19:54] AI, it's a kind of predicting what with the the next
[00:19:57] likely word token, it's actually quite
[00:20:01] creative because it's kind of like a sense hallucination is the is
[00:20:05] is feature, not a bug, it's it's... thinking up things
[00:20:09] right, and so you love poetry, I love poetry.
[00:20:12] AI is astonishingly good at poetry, what does that tell you
[00:20:16] about what's left for human creativity?
[00:20:20] yeah, the fascinating thing is, it's that
[00:20:22] ability empower each of us to be more
[00:20:26] creative. I'll just give you even simple example this morning, right? you
[00:20:30] with the something like get up now, right? the ability, even for
[00:20:34] me, like I was a programmer, over the... years as
[00:20:38] I've evolved in the organization, it's not like I'm
[00:20:41] daily programming, but now I am, like this morning I come in and I wanted an
[00:20:45] app which went into my inbox, traged my inbox, created a project
[00:20:49] tracker. application just for myself, it was
[00:20:53] able to do that, to me to be able to have
[00:20:57] that power that somehow i can express
[00:21:00] a high level intent right, the like the intent
[00:21:04] itself is creativity, but then the rest of it was all
[00:21:08] executed and automated, i think is going
[00:21:11] to create, i would say new form of art, new form of
[00:21:14] expression, new form of ability to, i sort of sometimes
[00:21:18] describe the new work. has macro delegation and
[00:21:22] micro steering right, every one of us will become better
[00:21:26] at management through intense and at the same
[00:21:30] time having the ability to steer it exactly to the place where we
[00:21:33] want it. so a bunch of Microsoft employees, former
[00:21:37] employees have started a company and they say that that
[00:21:41] company is going to be run at the CEO level
[00:21:45] by AI, by an AI agent, so effectively they
[00:21:48] will they will... execute the orders that the AI
[00:21:52] CEO tells them, do you think that will work and
[00:21:56] why and why or why not? mean
[00:21:59] to having an agent that works for a
[00:22:03] CEO is like essentially
[00:22:06] delegated AI that takes your
[00:22:09] identity and your credentials, so to some
[00:22:12] degree I think we're already at an age where I think about
[00:22:16] the fundamental unit of work is a...
[00:22:20] human plus their agents, and at the end the
[00:22:24] day human control is what I think all of us will value
[00:22:27] personally, as institutions and
[00:22:30] as society, so that is the key thing, so even when for example, I
[00:22:34] thought what the Pope did at the Enceclical was fantastic right, because he talked
[00:22:37] about any technology that takes away human
[00:22:41] dignity and agency is going to be
[00:22:44] rejected by definition, right? I don't think we will accept it as a
[00:22:48] society, but anything that... empowers us to
[00:22:52] do more, to achieve more, to be more ambitious about what
[00:22:56] we can do, whether it's a CEO or a frontline worker, we
[00:23:00] will accept it, and so at least that's certainly the direction of travel that I'm for, and
[00:23:03] so do you think that it's fairly clear that the human
[00:23:07] being will be in control, you say he should, he or she should
[00:23:11] be in control, but do we have the kill switch, can we pull the
[00:23:14] plug, or do you worry as Elon Musk used to, that the
[00:23:18] machines will eventually... rule us,
[00:23:22] I,
[00:23:22] I think I have much more faith
[00:23:26] in our political economy and its
[00:23:29] institutions, that the backlash, right, I mean,
[00:23:33] you written a book about this, revolutions are
[00:23:37] great as long as the backlash is
[00:23:40] managed, and that's sort of being the lesson of
[00:23:43] history, and so I always say, that's why I want an English
[00:23:47] revolution, not a French one, and that will only... happen if we really
[00:23:51] really manage through this process where we are in control and
[00:23:55] that I think is the foundational issue that we will be
[00:23:59] defining our error. Satya Nandela, pleasure, thank you for coming
[00:24:02] on. Thank you so much fored, it's a pleasure. Next on
[00:24:06] GPS, in January, after American forces captured
[00:24:10] Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro, many expected
[00:24:14] President Trump to install Maduro's main opposition,
[00:24:17] Maria Corina Machado. is the country's new
[00:24:21] leader, but she remains in exile.
[00:24:25] why? she joins after the
[00:24:27] break. earlier this week,
[00:24:30] federal judge stipulated that former Venezuelan president
[00:24:34] Nicolas Maduro and his wife would face trial in June
[00:24:37] 2027 on drug trafficking charges.
[00:24:41] when US forces struck Karacus and seized Maduro in
[00:24:45] January of this year, many had hoped that the opposition
[00:24:48] leader Maria Cor Machado would lead the country
[00:24:52] through democratic transition. Instead, Maduro's vice
[00:24:56] president. Rodriguez was installed as interim president
[00:25:00] and has been in power ever since. Maria Kurina
[00:25:03] Machado is a Nobel peace prize winner and she has been in
[00:25:07] exile since December 2025. She joins me
[00:25:11] now. Maria Korina, welcome and first let
[00:25:14] ask you what are you hearing about the situation on the ground in
[00:25:18] Venezuela with regard? to the earthquake, how bad is it, has
[00:25:22] it settled down? on the contrary, sorry, every day that goes
[00:25:26] by, the situation is more and more critic, this has been
[00:25:29] certainly the largest tragedy in Venezuela in recent history,
[00:25:33] we're talking about thousands of dead, still we don't have the right
[00:25:37] number, the clear number, the NGOs
[00:25:41] and civil society estimate over 40,000 people
[00:25:45] still missing, hundreds of buildings have
[00:25:49] collapses and structured damage is estimated by the UN
[00:25:52] in over 20 billion dollars, so this has been a huge
[00:25:56] tragedy, but that has also
[00:25:59] shown crucial realities on. one
[00:26:02] side, the solidarity, resilience,
[00:26:06] courage and capacity to organize the Venezuelan
[00:26:09] people, but on the other hand we've seen the absolute
[00:26:13] absence the state, with no zero
[00:26:17] capacities, they did not react, and what they
[00:26:21] did it was to obstruct the the the
[00:26:25] efforts that were being done by citizens, private citizens
[00:26:28] and international foreign foreign rescue mission.
[00:26:32] so this has, you know, we're still seeing
[00:26:36] people, hundreds of people, that it's all already
[00:26:40] amount, digging with their own hands, with no
[00:26:43] equipment whatsoever, looking for the their
[00:26:47] loved ones, so this has brought first
[00:26:51] fear, then indignation, and now I
[00:26:55] would say it's rage that it's growing in the Venezuelan
[00:26:59] population and the sense of urgency that
[00:27:02] grows every day, so you wanted to
[00:27:06] go back to Venezuela and visit your country,
[00:27:10] partly because the earthquake, partly because you feel it's important to
[00:27:13] start a process of democratic transition, the Trump
[00:27:17] administration from all reports essentially barred you from
[00:27:21] going, why? well, I've been in contact
[00:27:25] with with president Trump, secretary ruvio and many US officials
[00:27:28] during these last months and exchanging views in terms. of how
[00:27:32] to move ahead into the three phase plan that the the the
[00:27:36] US government has put in place in Venezuela and
[00:27:40] and the third phase it's very important to to
[00:27:44] remember is a transition process that
[00:27:47] requires legitimate election, we are
[00:27:51] seeing now the same regime that was in place when all
[00:27:54] these criminal activities were denounced and
[00:27:58] and and the the lack of trust
[00:28:01] towards "the regime and institutions that are in in ruwings
[00:28:05] in Venezuela is is is huge, so the only way we can move
[00:28:09] ahead into bringing relieve and
[00:28:13] hope to the Venezuelan people and also getting all the
[00:28:17] investment Venezuela requires now for the after the
[00:28:20] emergency, which is estimated in over 50 billion
[00:28:24] dollars, but but also to take advantage the
[00:28:28] huge resources Venezuela has, but that requires
[00:28:31] trust." that requires institutions, that
[00:28:34] requires legitimacy, the huge transformations
[00:28:38] that ought to be put in place in Venezuela have to have
[00:28:42] the support the Venezuelan people, and and the regime,
[00:28:46] the Rodriguez regime is in its lowest point
[00:28:50] of of support ever, and and it was, as I say,
[00:28:54] exacerbated after
[00:28:55] the the the earthquake, so yes, my desired from
[00:28:59] day one is to go back to Venezuela and when the... "the tragedy
[00:29:03] took place, i realize it was my
[00:29:06] duty to be with our people, being together,
[00:29:10] morning together, praying together, and that's the reason why I'm
[00:29:14] going to go back soon to my country. you will go back
[00:29:17] soon, I will,
[00:29:21] in the next month, well, I, I, we are planning the
[00:29:25] logistics that that are required for,
[00:29:29] you know, not only for rich in Venezuela, but for..." in
[00:29:32] Venezuela for for operating, for
[00:29:36] organizing the the democratic forces, for
[00:29:39] channeling all these anxiety and urgency that
[00:29:43] I mentioned before a a
[00:29:47] peaceful and democratic channel,
[00:29:51] that's precisely my goal and why I believe I need
[00:29:55] to be back, but President Trump has you spoken of
[00:29:59] you often in kind of dismissive ways and suggesting... that it's
[00:30:03] not right, it's not time for you to go, it's not right for you even go,
[00:30:07] the situation is great, do you regret having given him your
[00:30:11] Nobel peace prize? no, I don't, and I think that we
[00:30:14] wouldn't be here with this huge opportunity of
[00:30:18] having Venezuela,
[00:30:20] you know, turning into democratic nation, if it wasn't
[00:30:24] for the decision President Trump took on January
[00:30:27] 3rd, and the Secretary of State has been very
[00:30:31] clear in terms. of what it's needed in terms
[00:30:35] to to bring Venezuela and turn Venezuela into the great ally the United
[00:30:38] States, not only from security perspective, we need to dismantle
[00:30:42] these groups, get rid of Russia and Iranian, Cuba
[00:30:46] and the gorilla that is taking over has taken over Venezuelan
[00:30:50] territory, but turn Venezuela into the largest
[00:30:53] energy partner, a long-term
[00:30:56] alliance, and and look, I've been in contact with...