judy: good evening. i'm judy woodruff. on the "newshour" tonight, the fbi at mar-a-lago -- agents search the south florida home of former president trump in what appears to be part of an investigation into whether he took classified documents from the white house. then, one on one -- we discuss the democrats' major climate and health care legislation -- and whether it will deliver on its promises -- with senate majority leader chuck schumer. and, outreach in africa -- secretary of state antony blinken visits multiple african nations in an effort to counteract chinese and russian influence. >> my worriy is that this strategy will just reproduce

those same old dynamics rather than bring about genuine partnership between the u.s. and various african nations. judy: all that and more on tonight's "pbs newshour." ♪ >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by. >> for 25 years consumer cellular has been offering no contract or list plans designed to help people do more what they like, our u.s.-based customer service team can help find the plan that it's you, to learn more visit consumer cellular.tv >> and with the ongoing support of these individuals and institutions and friends of the newshour including kathy and paul and camilla and george smith. >> fostering informed and

engagecommunity is, more at kf.org. ♪ >> this program was made possible for the corporation for public broadcasting and contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. judy: questions are swirling after the fbi searched former president donald trump's palm beach, florida, home yesterday. reports suggest the search was a part of investigations into

whether trump took classified records from the white house to his mar-a-lago estate. trump was not in florida at the time but he announced the news of the search himself last night - decrying it as weaponizing the justice system against him and a political attack. this marks what could be a dramatic escalation of one of several investigations related to the former president. carrie johnson covers the justice department for npr and is following this all closely. and she joins us now. welcome back to the newshour. what do we think they were after? >> we do not have a copy of the search warrant or underlying affidavit. we do think former president trump and/or his lawyers might have some of those materials they might -- they have not released them publicly. what we have learned from their trump attorneys and the family members, is that this appears to have been a court executed

search related to the presidential records act and the possible violations of laws related tolassified material. we think this began back in february when the national archives reported to the justice department that something like 15 boxes of information had wrongfully wound up at mar-a-lago instead the archives and set up. this entire process including a grand jury investigation, and what is been an unprecedented searched by the fbi of a former president of the night states. >> -- the united states. >> they discussed these 15 boxes, now we are told, it has been reported by former president trump's lawyer that it took another 12 boxes yesterday. do we have any clue as to what was here? what kind of records are they looking for? >> in typical searches the fbi

would leave the owner of the property with an inventory or written receipt explaining the kinds of things being taken. in this case we do believe that happened. former president trump and his attorney have not released that information. at this point is not clear whether those 10 or 12 boxes of new material taken out of mar-a-lago yesterday contained top secret information, general paperwork, or other items that would be of less sensitive national secure debases. we just do not know. the issue seems to be that most of those. . materials belong to the national archives it will take the. fbi some period of time to go through those materials in a painstaking past -- passion. >> at the very least it does appear there is a disagreement at some level between the former president and the national archives, or some other brch of the federal government saying

you have something we think he should have turned over to us. >> we do not know what is in the materials, what we do know is this is an enormously monumental exhalation -- escalation of the legal process against the president. two of my sources seem to suggest it may have take place in part because the former president trump and his attorneys were not forthcoming with the just averment or the fbi and may have been giving them the runaround. putting the doj and fbi and the position of getting a magistrate judge to approve this court executed search, is not something justice department does every day. certainly not with respect to a former official at this level of the government. we had to find out more, the justice department and fbi are not commenting at all. we need to find out more about what is in those materials, it may take former president trump releasing information to find out. >> there are many calls now for the justice department put that information out there so we can

see what it was that led them to believe there was something of value, of importance that the former president was keeping in his possession. is there any notion that justice will put the information out? >> a number of republicans on capitol hill are demanding briefings by the fbi and top justice department officials. it is highly unfit -- unusual for the justice department and fbi to talk and an ongoing investigation. there are rules and laws that prohibit them from disclosing this information. i do not expect will have a full disclosure of what the justice bargain fbi found in the near-term. that said, some of these court cereals will become -- materials will become public and we will know a lot more than about why they took this step, and what they found if it is in violation of the law.

it is not clear that former present trump is the target here if there is a specific target or if anyone would be charged with terminal wrongdoing. it may be -- criminal wrongdoing. they may just want the documents back, there is not a lot of visibility. >> if it was a matter of wanting them back, why would they conduct is highly unusual, unprecedented search of his residence? and spent several hours on the premises. >> we do know the national archives has said in the initial materials sent back to the archives, not the stuff from yesterday, but the materials had top-secret information and there is some basis for the the justice averment to convince a magistrate there is probable cause a crime had taken place that may involve national security information -- violation and violation of the president record acts that dates back to the post nixon area -- your.

>> thank you carrie. judy: and in a separate legal dispute regarding the former president, a federal appeals court toy agreed with a lower court ruling that the treasury department should hand over mr. trump's tax records to a us house committee. if appealed, the case could be taken up by the u.s. supreme court. >> i'm stephanie sy with newshour west, we'll return to the full program after the latest headlines. former secretary of state mike pompeo met with the january 6th congressional committee. he could shed light on discussions about invoking the 25th amendment -- to remove mr. trump from office -- after the attack on the us capitol. also today: doug mastriano -- the republican nominee for governor of pennsylvania who was outside the capitol on january 6th -- appeared virtually before the

committee, but left after challenging its validity. u.s. representative scott perry, of pennsylvania, said f.b.i. agents carrying a search warrant seized his cell phone this morning. according to testimony from january 6th committee witnesses, perry was in frequent communication with the white house in the days leading up to the attack on the u.s. capitol and worked to overturn the results of the election. the fbi has not commented on or confirmed the seizure. the former president and his former vice president -- mike pence -- are waging another proxy battle tonight. it's in wisconsin, where tim michels -- endorsed by mr. trump -- faces pence-backed rebecca klay-fisch in the republican gubernatorial contest. meanwhile, vermont democrats -- bec abella has won the democratic primary for the u.s. house. if elected she would be the state's first female representative to washington.

the government of taiwan warned today that ongoing chinese war games are a rehearsal to take over the island -- and all of the western pacific. china began major military maneuvers after nancy pelosi -- the speaker of the us house of representatives -- visited taiwan. the taiwanese foreign minister spoke today in taipei. >> china has used the drills in its military playbook to prepare for the invasion of taiwan. it is conducting large-scale military exercises and missile launches, as well as cyber attacks, disinformation campaign, and economic coercion. >> taiwan's military also carried out its own wargames today. soldiers were seen firing artillery to simulate defense against invasion. israeli troops killed 3 palestinian militants and wounded dozens today in a shootout in the occupied west bank. it happened during an arrest operation in nablus. israeli officials said soldiers opened fire after palestinians attacked them with rocks and explosives.

back in this country: police in albuquerque, new mexico, say they've arrested and charged the primary suspect in the killings of two muslim men. investigators took 51-year-old muhammad syed into custody after tracking down a car linked to one of the killings. they're investigating whether he's also responsible for the deaths of two other men. all of the victims were from pakistan or afghanistan. a grand jury in mississippi has decided against indicting a white woman in the lynching of emmett till. the teenager was killed after carolyn donham accused him of lewd comments and actions in 1955. in 2017, a book quoted donham as saying she had lied. but today a prosecutor said the grand jury found insufficient evidence to indict. donham is now in her 80's. president biden signed the so-called "chips" act today -- aimed at boosting us semi-conductor output. the president said the "chips" law plus the

climate - health care bill moving in congress represent a turning point. >> i'm confident that decades from now, people will look back at this week with all we passed and all we moved on, that we met the moment at this inflection point in history, a moment when we bet on ourselves, believed in ourselves, and recaptured the story, the spirit and the soul of this nation. >> the "chips" act includes $280 billion dollars in tax breaks and research funding. the "food and drug administration" today authorized a plan to stretch the limited supply of monkeypox vaccine in the us. it calls for injecting one-fifth of the usual dose in each of 2 shots. the fda says research suggests the smaller dosage is about as effective as the regular dose. tennis great serena williams says she will be stepping away from professional play to focus on her family and business. the 40-year-old wrote on instagram-- "there comes a time when we have to decide to move in a different direction. now,

the countdown has begun." williams has won 23 grand slam titles. she still plans to play in the us open this month. and the legendary "motown" , songwriter and producer lamont dozier has died. in the 1960's, he joined with brian and eddie holland, writing more than 25 "top ten" hits for "the supremes", "the four tops", marvin gaye and others. here's a clip of "the supremes", performing one of those hits -- "where did our love go?". ♪ where did our love go? and all of your promises. i will love forevermore. i have this burning, burning, yearning feeling inside of me ♪ >> lamont dozier was 81 years old. still to come on the "newshour", republican arkansas governor asa hutchinson and former democratic senator doug jones discuss the fbi search of mar-a-lago.

the secretary of state takes a multi-country tour of africa to counteract chinese and russian influence. author mohsin hamid explores the construct of race in his new novel, "the last white man" and much more. ♪ >> this is the pbs newshour from w eta studios in washingtoand in the west on the water cronkite school of journalism at arizona state never city. judy: as we reported, president biden signed the bipartisan chips act into law today. it's one of the legislative victories democrats are touting this week, just days before the president's favored health care, tax and climate change bill - known as the "inflation reduction act" - heads to the house, where it's likely to pass, after passing along strictly party lines in the senate. senate majority leader chuck schumer, a democrat from new york, played a key role in getting the bill through that chamber and i spoke with him earlier today.

>> leader schumer, thank you very much for joining us. before i ask you about the inflation reduction act i do want to ask you about this unprecedented raid by the fbi on former president trump's home in palm beach. were you or any other senior congressional leaders briefed on this? if not, should you have been? >> we were not briefed, i do not know enough detail to make a determination there. i will not comment on this until more information comes out. all i know is what all of us have read in the news media. >> let me ask you to questions, one about former president trump's reaction. he says this is a sign of corrupon the biden administration. that the justice system has been weaponized in this country. has it been weaponized? >> i am not commenting until we get more information, judy. >> one more question, we have

the house republican leader kevin mccarthy telling the attorney general merrick garland once the republicans take over the house they will be investigating him. we have republican national committee chair saying to americans, send us money so we can elect more republicans this fall. will this be a problem for democrats and the midterms? >> i think commenting on this is prematurity for me or anyone else. >> we will turn to the inflation reduction act, senator schumer. ethic many people are looking at this and see a lot of numbers. they want to understand what is it mean for ordinary americans? what would you say? >> it is probably the most difficult in sweeping legislation for ordinary americans and decades. it will mean a lot of different things, people's costs will be reduced. we have been waiting for years to allow medicare to negotiate with drug companies to lower costs. that will happen in people's

costs will be much much lower. insulin for people on medicare will only be $35 a month compared to the six, seven, $800 it is now. many more people will build to get health insurance to the aca and their health will not -- cost will not go up. one other thing, known will pay more than $2000 a year for prescription drugs. if you have one of these very needed but expects and -- expensive medication cost $500 of those dose you will be in a better shape. on the climate front is the most dramatic change in climate fighting global warming we have ever had. it will mean ler cost or people, the average electric will will go down thousand dollars by 2030, they will be paying less on appliance -- appliances there more efficient. we will close tax poles on the very alter ego of gotten away with this were a very, very --

loopholes on the ver wealthy who have gotten away with this for a very long time. this will mean a lot of things for a lot of people. the fact, finally that global warning, will get a handle on it and means people being more protected from the floods, hurricanes, tires and everything else that has been happening because of global warming -- fires and everything else that has been going on because a global warning -- warming. >> those caps on drugs do not go into effect until 2025, 2.5 years from now the gernment negotiating with the pharmaceutical companies do not go in effect until 2025. >> the $35 cap on insulin goes into effect 2023 as well as a $2000 limit someone will pay on drugs, will have a lot of effects to be daily and in the longer even greater effects still come was the pharmaceutical industry knows

they will have to negotiate they may have to adjust accordingly ahead of time as well. >> i want to ask you about one of the tax provisions, leader schumer, no arizona senator kyrsten sinema insisted that this provision that would've meant higher taxes on hedge fund and private equity managers be taken out, how does the democratic party say we are the party of working-class middle-class americans when there continues to be this loophole for billionaires that are in private equity or the hedge fund business? >> she insisted it be taken out. the choice it was take it out and not do all the other things or keep and let the bill die. we substituted something that might be just as strong if not better, we are putting a 1% tax on stock buybacks. the stock buybacks help the corporate billionaires in the hedge fund holders and things like that. they do no benefit for people. they just make the stock price go up by having fewer shares.

that brought in $70 billion agnst the very wealthy. the carried interest loop hole, i was for getting rid of it, was only $14 billion. >> the republicans who are saying the irs with 87,000 more agents to be targeting mill income more -- americans? >> they are lying, this is typical of republicans they defend the very rich and say they defended middle-class. the trump tax cuts, they said are for the middle-class for the vast majority went to the very rich. this is what the republic is one do and we reversed it, that will be welcomed by 90% of americans. >> the overall picture that this is $750 billion dollar bill, democrats for months were pushing for a 3.5 trillion and then a $1.75 trillion package. this went on for months.

why not settle for something like this sooner? it would've not just a time, it would've meant the benefits go into effect sooner. >> no one was ready do it sooner. we want to get good as package as we could. senator mansion rejected the $1.85 billion package with president biden. i sit down and we negotiated and it took us a while to get there. everybody, the most progressive people from bernie sanders to joe manchin voted for this, everyone thought this was better than nothing. mansion or cinema would not have voted for anything beyond this. the choice was this were nothing. this is very significant, the most significant reduction of carbon into the atmosphere by legions more than we have ever done, finally dealing with prescription drugs, finally dealing with the loopholes the wealthy get away with.

this is very significant legislation. it is easy to say you should have done more or differently. this is a really good package we are proud of. the american people by pulling data, 70 to 80% supported. >> has her been a lesson in all this for you and other democrats in dealing with senator manchin and senator cinema when you're looking at other priorities? >> i will tie the overall lesson that i have -- tell you the overall lesson i have. my dad passed away november, he would've been 99 on flag day, some of us who lost parents we're close to are never far away. he taught me a lesson, if you are doing the right thing and you persist, and hits words -- his words god will reward you. we kept persisting with senator engine and send, we got -- senator manchin and senator

cinema, we got something and it is dam good, do not give up you will succeed. that has been my motto my entire life, and let's not forget we did a lot of other things this month. the chips act, will keep the american economy number one and employ millions of people. the pact act, the biggest thing for veterans health at 12 years, when he breathed in these toxins it will be taking care of. we did the treaty where we let finland and sweden into nato, this is all six weeks, it is a lot more than any congress has done in a long time. >> will that make a difference this fall? respected analyst are saying the republicans are likely to take control of the house and may very well take over control of the senate. nathan gonzalez, one of those

respected analysts saying the republicans are likely to pick up 1 to 3 seats in the senate. >> some of the other analysts, 538 said we would pick up seats in the senate. i think he will for two reasons, first, the republican party has moved so far to the right, people are seeing it after the court decisions and knobs on abortion and guns in the environment, they have seen in the january 6 hearings and they have seen it with the radical rhetoric and thoughts that come from the new maga republican party. 20% of republicans do not like that mega republican party. they say when can democrats get something done? we have answered that question, yes in the last few weeks, i think we will pick up seats. >> how many? >> i will not guess that,ou got enough out of me. >> senate majority leader, chuck

schumer, thank you very much. >> thank you, judy. take care. ♪ >> back now to the fbi search of the home of former president trump in palm beach, florida. former u.s. senator from alabama, doug jones. he served as the u.s. attorney for the northern district of alabama under president reagan. >> you've said this fbi search of former president trump's mar-a-lago estate has -- is alarming. why? >> it has never happened before. whenever you have such a high public official, we know that the approval was given at a high level at the department of justice. that is the standard of practice. just by the fact it does require the high level of approval means it is a very serious thing.

the fact that you have this, search warrant that is executed. i say is alarming and the sense that we need to know, the public needs to know, the institutions in the united states need to understand why this happened. we do not have the affidavit for the search warrant that has been released, it should be released. if it has to be redacted it should be redacted. but, the public has an interest in knowing what is happened here and the facthat former president trump criticized the operation and made, uh, noise about it indicates the need to be some kind of response and that is important at this point. >> it is our understanding that it is department of justice policy not to make these documents around a search like this public. what you are calling for would be a violation of that policy.

is that we are asking for? >> no, it has been a while since i was a federal prosecutor i was a nice state attorney i understand the guidelines they have. whenever you put something under seal, and a search warrant should be under seal, and it is, they can ask that the search warrant to be released. the affidavit to be released because it is already public information. the idea of having that sealed is to protect the homeowner, or whoever might be impacted by the creation of the information. here it already out in public. while it is a standard practice there are exceptions when it is already public information. they can ask for it to be unsealed and i think that is important for the -- to be done. short of that they need to make a comment, the department just as needs to understand the

public's interest in this and legitimate interest. there are two institutions at stake here, the president to eat -- the presidency of the as states and the other institutions the department of justice. i served in it, i value it, it is critical to our democracy that has credibility, broad support and they operate under our rule of law and the need to explain what is happening here. there is some urgency, i think both democrats and republicans expect some comment from department of justice explaining what is happening. >> the house minority leader has already said what the justice department has done is weaponizing. he used the term they have weaponized the justice system, are you prepared to go that far? >> no. i do not know the facts. i think there would be totally unfair. i think they have instances in the password appears the justice department got political, but i

do not think we should jump to that conclusion. i do not think we should jump to a different conclusion. let's get the facts out there and hear from the justice department exactly what happened and what interest is at stake. we believe in the broad application of the will law. >> sorry to interrupt, governor, what has been reported, as you know agents showed up at mar-a-lago this spring and had a discussion with the former president about -- papers the national archives said should have been given to them rather than taken to the president's own home. if it turns out the former president took documents that should have been turned over to the government, what should be done about it? >> we should make the efforts to retrieve those. perhaps that is what this is about. generally is not done through a search warrant. there are other ways to retrieve documents through legal processes. i think what is important, the

public is not can get too exted if these documents are routine documents in the white house that the president took out in violation of the presidential documents act. what we would be concerd about is if these are classified documents, documents that really be offensive to our national security. this is a serious matter, to do a search of a former president's residence and has to be justified with equally serious conduct that is at risk to require this action. that is the fact that we do not have an. >> we are seeing today that a number of people that are close to the president, they think that this move by the justice department will expedite his decision to run for president again. do you think you should? >> no, i do not think you should.

i am also a political realist. this is the kind of action by the department of justice without explanation will only give fuel to those who just say he is being persecuted, picked on, and they will come to his defense and a very well could motivate him to do that. fairness is what we have to have in the justice system. i want the department of justice to explain what is happening here, give the american public, hopefully a sense that this i being conducted to support the rule out -- of law and barely --fairly. >> in may you said you're mulling over the idea of running for present yourself, it is august, have you reached a decision? >> that will be in the thinking about stage until next january, we have to get through this election and we will have to wait and see how that develops. whatever i say, i do not think president trump should run

again, obviously people who are concerned about the country have to give it thought as i am. >> governor asa hutchinson of arkansas, thank you very much. judy: now from the other side of the aisle, former u.s. senator from alabama, doug jones. he served as the u.s. attorney for the northern district of alabama under president clinton. >> senator jones, very good to see you again. i think you just heard from governor hutchinson that he feels very strongly that it is now up to the justice department, up to the fbi to explain why they conducted this search of former president trump's home. >> i think everybody would love to see that. and i would like to see that. i think everybody would. one thing i would disagree with governor hutchinson on is the fact that this is the affidavit is not public. the ecution of the search warrant, not the evidence that

was gathered to give to put in front of a judge. that is what is under seal. that is the most important piece of the search warrant. that is under seal, the cops -- the compilation of evidence put together to show an independence judge that it probable cause existed that a crime was committed and idence of that crime was concealed on the property. i would love to hear the x nation. house -- explanation. i also thing the public would not like to see any investigation jeopardize and the justice army will have to make a serious decision as to whether or not making public the affidavit would compromise the investigation going forward. i trust them to make the right call. >> do you think that is a decision they've already made already think they're weighing that right now? >> i think they are inclined to keep it under seal. that is the default is in of the department of justice.

circumstances can change. different things can happen that cause them to change their mind. president trump's lawyers may go into court and seek the unsealing of the affidavit. president trump lawyers should have a copy of the warrant itself an inventory of what is seized, if there is a desire to make the public they can do that themselves. we will see how this goes, i think there will be a constant evaluation in the department of justice as they go forward. >> it was my understanding that that warrant was shown to former president trump's lawyers when they showed up yesterday at mar-a-lago when the search was taking place. what about the point that this is such a serious matter to go into the home and spent several hours going through the things that belong to the -- that are there where the former president lives. to governor hutchinson's point,

the credibility of the justice of hermann is on the line. pete -- department is on the line. people from both parties want to know what is going on. >> i do not think there is any question that the attorney general of the united states understand that better than anyone. all of those that are with him in his staff understand that. they have to make those decisions. i do think that this is a different case. obviously i think there is much more that should and needs to become public. if it will not in any way jeopardize the investigation. again, i think people want to see an independent justice department that will make decisions consistent with the rule of law. that is what they have been doing. you have not seen a bunch of leaks coming out the justice department. they have been doing their work, i have been telling people to be patient. they will continue to do their work.

at the appropriate time, this will be made public, there will be more information made public. whether it is the charges or the unsealing of the affidavit. i trust the justice department to move forward. this is a consequential investigation it will have to be done the right way, not just done in a way the public, who has all of their news at their figure tips and one thing news yesterday demands. that the do it the right way. >> you are right the general impression up until now has been that this is a justice to permit that is independent, has played its cards very close to the vest, we have learned very little. you now have republicans in particular looking at this and saying, here you go, the justice department, the justice system, in the words of house minority leader kevin mccarthy have been weaponized to go after president trump. how do they disabuse critics of

that being the case? >> they will do that eventually with facts that will come out with this case if it is the case. i believe the facts will merit exactly what happened. what is interesting, is the same republicans, who for the last few months ding the january 6 committee investigation have just ignored all of the incredible compelling evidence that has come out. instead has said let's look at inflation, talk about gas prices, now all of when the heat really gets turned up, inflation does not seem to be. a big issue anymore. . all of the sudden they want to weaponized what the justice department and following the will of law is. this is so important for folks to remember. this is not just the justice department. the justice department could not have executed this search warrant without the approval of the united states judge. probably a district judge, not a

magistrate. a third branch of government has brought the checks and balances of the competition provides for. this is not a third world country or a banana republic where the president or ruling party can go in and conduct a rate. they have to present evidence of probable cause for a united states district judge, the third range of government. they talk about weaponizing all they want, there was a judge, at the end of the day a judge w set judgment of what was being presented and said there was enough evidence here that i will authorize the search of this residence. >> former u.s. senator doug jones of alabama, thank you. >> thank you, judy. ♪ judy: the united states' top diplomat visited the democratic republic of the congo today where he met with that nation's president and foreign minister.

secretary of state antony blinken's trip is part of a five-day tour across sub-saharan africa to unveil the administration's new strategy for the region. as nick schifrin reports, it's a culmination of a diplomatic and humanitarian push - at a time when russia is trying to enhance its own influence in africa. >> 3 weeks in africa, 3 cabinet secretaries. in kenya suffering from drought, usaid administrator samantha power. >> we are providing 1.6 billion dollars in financial support to our partners >> in ghana, us ambassador to the un linda-thomas greenfield. >> africans have the right to decide their foreign policy positions free of pressure and manipulation. >> and in south africa, secretary of state antony blinken. >> sub-saharan africa is a major

geopolitical force. >> but it's not just americans. russian foreign minister sergey lavrov recently launched his own charm offensive across 4 african countries, ending in egypt. russia provides much of the continent's food, and is africa's largest arms supplier. earlier this year at the u-n, nearly half of african countries didn't condemn russia's invasion of ukraine. the new us strategy promotes democracy and presents african countries as partners. >> one that focuses on what we will do with african nations and peoples, not for african nations and peoples. >> and to discuss us and russian as well as chinese efforts to gain stronger sway in africa, we're joined by hollywood hare, the founding director of confluence advisory, a think tank in sudan, and cameron hudson, a senior associate at the center for strategic and international studies, and the former african affairs director on the national security council staff for the george w bush administration. welcome to the newshour. tuba colored hair. let me start with you. let's lay out the us strategy that secretary of state

blinken laid out. first of all, promoting openness, an implicit counter to chinese influence advocates for democracy, which he said counters russian influence, fights covid and to lead a clean energy transition. what's your response to that strategy? >> i think on paper it sounds like it's what the doctor ordered. but i think that the us strategy seems sort of un implementab, given that there doesn't seem to be much funding around it. what we've seen from the us so far, even with this recent surge of high level officials coming to the continent, is still very much the same tone i think of, you know, charity first and partnership second. my worry is that this strategy will just reproduce those same old dynamics rather than bring about genuine partnership between the u.s. and various african nations. >> ken hudson. secretary blinken specifically uses the words

partnership and tries to make a point that the us will be seeing africa as an important player on every single major aspect facing the world today. that's at least what he says. >> well right, but the problem , is, of course, that saying it doesn't make it so. and i think that we have to look at where decisions are being made and whether or not african voices are being included in those decision rooms, whether it's the chamber of the u.n. security council or the executive boardroom of the world bank. or, frankly, behind closed doors at a g-7 summit where just this last june, g7 leaders decided on the devastating and crippling sanctions campaign against russia, which has severely impacted africans ability to purchase and import grain and fertilizer from russia. so we're seeing already in this administration africans not being included where those decisions are being made. so, of course, i like the idea that we are going to give greater voice to the 54 countries of africa, 1.4 billion people. but right

now, we're not seeing the biden administration live up to the promise inmates just yesterday. >> well, let's look at russia's influence. how have you seen russia focus its influence, especially on the african union and also in particular, african leaders? >> wl, i think this is where russia's strategy on africa seems to vary slightly from the from the u.s.' russia is not interested in engaging on any domestic policies in this country if they don't directly impact russia's interests. so, for example, russia's influence in across the sahel, in countries like sudan and central african republic and mali and, you know, going westwards into burkina faso. it's linked to their ability to extract gold and other commodities, which will help it fuel its war against ukraine. so it's you know, russia is not invested in the inner workings of those countries in, you know, anything beyond how it will impact those extractives.

it's sort of cherry picking the countries it feels are going to be important. it's not looking for a broader level of interests related to, for example, rule of law or even changing some of the trading elements that africa has with other partners. it is actually aiming for a lot less. and by that token, it can actually achieve a lot more. >> aiming for a lot less cameron hudson, but also aiming for military or at least a paramilitary relationship. how has russia used the wagner group? this is a paramilitary group largely controlled by the kremlin to expand its influence in many of those countries that include here just mentioned. >> right. well, what we see about russia's involvement here is really a kind of inside, outside approach. so, of course, it's approaching through visits like foreign minister lavrov, but then it uses the wagner group in kind of unofficial capacities, working with beleaguered leaders on the continent, warlord leaders, militia leaders looking for a

way in. oftentimes, these these sort of side deals that they cut are self-financed because wagner earns rights to mineral extraction in the country. and so what what russia's been able to do with wagner is really prop up leaders in their orbit and to keep western interests, western values at bay for just a little bit longer. [12.8s] >> k'f course, just the us and russia. china has spent billions and billions of dollars, especially on african infrastructure. how successful have chinese efforts to increase its influence in africa been ?africa been? >> china thinks in terms of thousand year strategies. it does not think in terms of 4 to 5 year administrations or at a maximum 10 years. so they can afford to be a lot more patient than we've seen the u.s. and even to some extent, russia being, particularly after the invasion of ukraine.

for china, it's such a broad range of investments and interests across the continent, but they've always been quite pragmatic in terms of who they support and who they don't. and this really sets china and to some extent russia, apart from the u.s. in terms of they don't necessarily have favorites that they stick by through thick and they are much more able to navigate the changes within the continent. and more importantly, they know when to step back, particularly china, at times of fraught tensions. >> and cameron hudson,. and finally, let's take us back to anthony blinken's speech. he has made a specific point repeatedly that the us is not forcing african countries to choose between the us and china or the us and russia, but rather providing a choice. is that what the us is doing? >> well, i think they're providing a choice so long as the choice is the united states. what we saw in secretary blinken's speech wasn't just the providing of a choice, it was the making of an argument as to why choosing a relationship with washington was going to be beneficial to the people, to the leadership, and to the continent

as a whole. i think that what's interesting is that we have seen in recent months and years the chinese and the russians adopting the same sort of language of partnership, of treating africans as equals. russia and china both kind of painting the united states and the european countries as what it calls this golden billion, this idea that the developed north and industrialized north of wealthy countries is somehow controlling 90% of the world's resources and assets and so really pitting, i think, africa against washington and the west as the sort of have and have not and continuing that that dynamic even with the the release of this strategy today. >> cameron hudson, khoolod khair, thank you very much t you both. >> thank you. ♪ judy: a work of imagination

asks us to see race in a new way from a novelist once again taking on magical realism. jeffrey brown sits down with pakistani writer mohsin hamid, for our arts and culture series, canvas. >> "one morning anders, a white man, woke up to find he had turned a deep and undeniable brown." >> the first line of mohsin hamid's new novel - a play on franz kafka's famous first line of "the metamorphosis": a man wakes up as something different. now, a direct focus on 'race'. >> the novel really began with that idea, of a character waking up a different color. >> that was the image that hit you? hamid: yeah, it was. there was a notion that i had of wanting to write about race and identity, and it had been sitting in the back of my mind for many years. but i needed, i guess, a novelistic way into the idea. >> he would write a kind of fable, with the provocative title, "the last white man", in which people in an unnamed place

begin to wake up transformed. >> one thing that the arts and writing gets to do is to remind us that we're sort of making up things as we go along, that reality isn't as real as we might imagine it to be. and that something like race, which you might think of as an actual objective real thing, is an imagined phenomenon. and because it's imagined, it can be re-imagined. >> "the book is about the loss of something" >> the 51 year old hamid, whom i met recently in new york, has lived between countries and cultures, what he refers to as a 'hybridized' life: born into a punjabi family in lahore, pakistan, he spent part of his childhood in california, where his father studied for a phd at stanford. he later returned to the u.s. to attend princeton and harvard law school and then worked in new york and london, before turning full-time to writing, back in lahore.

the new novel, he says, dates back to 9/11, and how he saw his own privileged place change, losing what he now describes as a kind of "partial whiteness" that defined him in the world, even as a brown man. >> it was really only after 9/11 that i began to encounter in a more concerted way, this notion that, you know, i was someone suspicious, i was somebody threatening, you know, that i would be stopped at the airport or stopped at immigration or people would behave strangely, you know, if i walked onto a subway car or a bus with a backpack. after 9/11 when i was forced to reckon with a different standing, i was also forced to reckon with the fact that i hadn't properly reckoned with it until now. you know, why didn't i come to this realization without it being forced upon me? jb: you were enjoying many of the benefits of global citizenship and the kind of elite positions. hamid: exactly. so i think that really got me thinking how easy it is to sort of be complicit in

something. and then to be forced to grapple with it when you're unable to easily access those benefits. >> in different ways, his novels and other writings have grappled with this post 9/11 world. >> "you picked a side, i didn't have to" it was picked for me. >> "the reluctant fundamentalist", turned into a film directed by mira nair, portrays a young pakistani on his way to achieving the american dream, becoming radicalized. the characters in "exit west" were migrants who, with a bit of magical realism, passed through invisible portals into new worlds. >> so 9/11 changed you as a person. it clearly changed you as a writer, as well. >> i began to see similarities in different places. and so it wasn't just that in america, for example, this notion of muslims being seen as a threat. there was also in pakistan the idea that, you know, western

ideas were potentially a threat or having a particular secular outlook was seen as a threat. (and as i traveled around the world and lived in different places, i came to see that this kind of fetishizaiton of purity, of the 'real' people, whether it was happening in modi's india or erdogan's turkey or putin's russia or in pakistan or in america, was happening all over the place. that we were increasingly sorting ourselves into groups and that we are increasingly prone to thinking these groups are real and that they are meaningful. >> you started this new novel, a white man wakes up turning brown. other novels taking on issues of migration and terrorism in the past. do you write fiction with a purpose? >> i like to spend time in my imagination. but also, the world bothers me. and it isn't the way i would wish it to be. and so, the same way that my son will walk around the house pretending to be a

dinosaurnd he's a mighty and powerful, you know, t rex instead of a ten year old boy or i try to imagine the world , differently. and that can be a world where migration is easier. it can be a world where ideas of race are challenged. (it can be -- but all of these things, in a way, for me, are about making the world more hospitable to my way of being, i guess. >> i don't want to give away what happens in this fable of yours, but you are trying to see something different, perhaps even better. you're completely comfortable ckling the big stuff in life, in fiction. yeah. i think fiction is very important right now. we need t find ways to talk about things that allow everybody in, that isn't dependent on, you know, are you from pakistan or america? is your skin lighter or darker? are you muslim or christian background? we have to find ways that everybody can engage in a conversation or thinking about

-- and throughout human story, storytelling has been one of the primary ways we've done that. and so i feel very much part of that tradition. it's not something new. i think it's what we have storytelling for, in large part. jb: alright, the new novel is "the last white man." mohsin hamid, thank you very much. hamid: tha you. judy: and that's the newshour for tonight. i'm judy woodruff. for all of us at the pbs newshour, thank you, please stay safe and we'll see you soon. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy.] >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by -- >> keeper, mentor, they tailor advice to help you live your life. life, well-planned. >> carnegie corporation of new york supporting and -- innovations in education, democratic engagement and the international peace and security.

the target foundation, committed to advancing racial equity and creating the change required to ship systems accelerate equitable economic opportunity. the ongoing support of these institutions. this program was made possible for the pope -- for the corporate ration of public broadcasting and the contributions pbs stations from viewers like you. thank you. ♪ this is the pbs newshour from w eta studios in washington and in the west from the walter cronkite school of journalism from arizona state university. ♪

alejana: tonight on "the great american recipe"... we're going to continue to get to know you better by celebrating the people who shaped you into the cooks you are today. robin: over the years, i have watched this family make this dish. it's different every time. [chuckles] this has so much meaning to me and my family. foo: i took this challenge to heart. it's for my mom. i always say that this isn't what we do. it's who we are. alejandra: we all agreed the most successful dish was... alejandra: what makes a great recipe? are they the dishes that are passed down to us through generations of home cooking? bambi: i love to make my mom's honey turkey wings. alejandra: are they the ones that tell the story of who we are and where we're from? silvia: i make mantecada. it's like a mexican muffin.