Return to Transcripts main page

Don Lemon Tonight

U.S. General Killed in Afghanistan; Russia's Next Move?; Cease- Fire in Gaza; Hamas: Terrorists or Political Players?; Russians Amass More Troops on Ukraine Border; Ann Coulter Talks Israel

Aired August 05, 2014 - 22:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening, everyone. This is CNN TONIGHT. I'm Alisyn Camerota in New York.

All eyes on the Middle East tonight, but not Israel this time. The tragedy is in Afghanistan, where a deadly ambush claims a top American general, the first killed in overseas combat since Vietnam. How will the White House respond?

Meanwhile, tens of thousands of troops massing on the border. Appears that a dangerous situation is about to spin out of control. We're talking about Eastern Europe. Is Vladimir Putin on the verge of another land grab in Ukraine?

JAKE TAPPER, CNN ANCHOR: I'm Jake Tapper in Jerusalem.

It's just before sunrise in Gaza, Israel and Hamas eyeball to eyeball as day two of this fragile cease-fire begins. The big question, what comes next, and what is the price of peace? Should the United States consider recognizing Hamas as something other than a terrorist organization?

CAMEROTA: Plus, the congressman who says Democrats are waging a war on white people. Ann Coulter will be here, and you can bet she has some thoughts on that one.

But let's begin with the latest on the Middle East and my colleague Jake Tapper.

Jake, tell us what is happening at this hour.

TAPPER: Alisyn, it's just before sunrise here in Jerusalem. We are almost one-third of the way through the 72-hour cease-fire with so far no violations of it yet.

Israel has sent a delegation to Cairo, where this deal was of course hashed out under the leadership of the Egyptian government. All the Palestinian factions, including Hamas, which both Israel and the U.S. consider to be a terrorist group, all have voiced support for sticking by this respite in the violence, and the hope is that the cease-fire can morph into something bigger and more sustained soon.

One other note, Alisyn. A new poll in the Israeli newspaper "Haaretz" suggests that most voters in Israel consider this conflict to be something of a tie, with Israel only having achieved partial success in dealing a big blow to Hamas, this despite the claims of triumph by Prime Minister Netanyahu and his cabinet.

The other big story, of course, comes out of Afghanistan, where an ambush believed to be an Afghan soldier killed a U.S. Army major general and wounded up to 15 coalition troops.

And CNN's Jim Sciutto has more on that story.

Jim, what happened?

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Well, Jake, this took place at Afghanistan's premier university in effect for senior military officers, their equivalent of West Point.

It's been a real focus for coalition forces there, including U.S. forces, in terms of training the next generation of Afghan leaders. General Greene was visiting there along with a German general, senior Afghan commanders, when an Afghan soldier, one who had been with his unit for some time, one who had been through a serious vetting process that has been put into place of Afghan soldiers to prevent exactly this kind of attack, he opened fire on that senior delegation.

He killed General Greene. He wounded 15 others, including eight American soldiers, as well as a German general. An investigation is going to be under way now to see how that vetting process failed. But it also raises questions because, as you know, of course, U.S. troops, coalition troops pulling out of Afghanistan in a number of months.

And they're going to be focused on -- the onus for security focused on Afghan forces. Here is what Admiral John Kirby, the Pentagon spokesman, said when I asked whether it undermines confidence in Afghan forces going forward.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: We're months away from Afghan -- from the U.S. handing over security responsibility for Afghanistan -- to Afghan forces like these. Does this undermine your confidence in their ability to take over that role?

REAR ADM. JOHN KIRBY, PENTAGON PRESS SECRETARY: The Afghan national security forces continue to perform at a very strong level of competence and confidence and warfare capability. They have had a good year securing not one, but two national elections.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: To be fair, the number of the so-called green on blue attacks, that's Afghan soldiers attacking coalition troops, has dropped significantly since 2012, when it peaked. There hadn't been one for a number of months. Only two killed this year so far in these attacks.

But as Admiral Kirby said, the steps they have taken, including vetting Afghan soldiers, have mitigated the risk. They have not eliminated this risk. Afghanistan still very much a battlefield, and we saw proof of that today, Jake.

TAPPER: Thanks, Jim -- back to you, Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: All right, Jake.

We want to talk more about General Greene.

Joining us now is Colonel Duane Myers. He lives next door to Major General Greene's family.

Colonel Myers, thanks for being with us.

COL. DUANE MYERS, U.S. ARMY: I'm glad to be here.

CAMEROTA: Colonel, can you tell us how you got the news that General Greene had been killed?

MYERS: Well, we heard on the TV this morning that a general had been killed.

And it fit the description of a major general in logistics. But we then saw a black car pull up outside their door and talk to a woman who drove up next to them and confirmed that it was he.

CAMEROTA: I can only imagine that feeling of having a black car pull up in front of your neighbor's house and knowing that they were about to deliver that news.

Even I, Colonel, today felt a pang when I heard General Greene's name, because I had occasion to interview him almost a year ago last summer. I interviewed him. He was in Afghanistan and I talked to him about an element of the -- his mission there. You see on the screen there my interview with him.

And even I felt the loss. I was just a reporter thousands of miles away from him. So tell me what it was like to live next door to him and what his family is like and what General Greene was like.

MYERS: Well, you know what a nice boy he was. And the community a is fairly tight community and it's in the cul-de-sac in (INAUDIBLE) about a year now and (INAUDIBLE)

CAMEROTA: I think we're having trouble with colonel Duane Myers' cell phone there.

But what he was saying is they lived on a cul-de-sac together and it was a really tight-knit community and that they all spent Christmases together. And it's a real loss for that family and for that neighborhood. And we thank Colonel Myers for joining us.

I want to go back to Jake Tapper now.

Jake, I know you have spent a lot of time in Afghanistan. You have even written a book about the fight there called "The Outpost." What do you make of how this could have happened?

TAPPER: Well, there are so many complicated reasons as to why these green on blue incidents happen.

Part of it, of course, is infiltration by the Taliban with their allies in Pakistan pulling strings. Part of it is just how complicated war can be. It's a very obviously difficult situation. And people's opinions of the United States and the coalition forces change based on things that happen in their own lives.

The army, as Jim mentioned, this is something they have taken very seriously. There was a peak of 61 deaths. It was 15 percent of all U.S. casualties in Afghanistan in 2012 -- 15 percent of them were from green on blue events. Now that's been reduced significantly. But it can't be eliminated entirely, Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: Yes, of course. I understand. And, I mean, there must be some soul-searching in the Army today of how to do things differently?

TAPPER: Yes. I mean, look, they do a lot of vetting, obviously, and this is, as Jim mentioned, the West Point of Afghanistan. This is where officers were being trained. Obviously, they're going to redouble their efforts when it comes to vetting people.

And they may have more, take more seriously -- there was something they did in 2012. They started a process called guardian angels. When U.S. soldiers were Afghan soldiers, there would be a U.S. soldier whose job it was to just watch the Afghan soldiers. They may bring that back in full force, I would think. But it's very, very complicated.

Now let's turn subjects to the price of peace in this part of the world, the Middle East.

Joining me now, we have a team of heavy hitters, Aaron David Miller, who advised six secretaries of state and helped formulate American policy in the Middle East. His latest book is "The End of Greatness." We also have Daniel Kurtzer, former U.S. ambassador to Israel and Egypt, and, of course, former General Wesley Clark, retired General Wesley Clark, former NATO supreme allied commander.

Gentlemen, thank you so much for being with us tonight.

Ambassador Kurtzer, I want to start with you.

Israel has had some tough things to say to U.S. official, most notably perhaps when Prime Minister Netanyahu reportedly told the U.S. ambassador to Israel, Dan Shapiro, that he should -- quote -- "never, ever second-guess" him again when it came to dealing with Hamas.

Have you heard that kind of talk when you were ambassador here or when you were ambassador in Egypt?

DANIEL KURTZER, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO EGYPT: Well, we have experienced tough talk in the past.

I dealt with Ariel Sharon as prime minister. He was quite tough on occasion. And so it's not unusual when the United States and Israel get into these spats. What is unusual is the fact that we have had these recurring fights for the entire period of the Obama and Netanyahu administrations. And the tenor of the discussion has really gotten nasty.

So it's the length of time that these two sides are fighting with each other that makes this unusual.

TAPPER: Do you think that it undermines the influence that the United States has when there are such tensions between Netanyahu and President Obama?

KURTZER: Oh, it surely does.

You know, countries in the region have always looked upon the United States-Israel relationship as a solid bedrock. And when they see this kind of consistent fighting and the words coming out of Jerusalem directed at American officials, it certainly undermines American credibility, and it hurts our ability to help Israel.

And therefore it's not quite understandable why the Israelis are venting their frustrations in public. They have problems, let's talk about it. But I don't understand the public diplomacy going on here.

TAPPER: Aaron David Miller, let me bring you in.

We still do hear a lot of public talk from officials on both sides about the strength of Israel's ties with the U.S. Just last week, Congress passed more hundreds of millions to fund the Iron Dome here.

You have advised so many secretaries of state on this conflict. Do you think we're going to have to wait a couple of years almost for new administrations in the U.S. and here in Israel in order to make a fresh start and move forward with the alliance stronger?

AARON DAVID MILLER, WOODROW WILSON INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR SCHOLARS: You know, unlike Lehman Brothers, I think the U.S.-Israeli relationship really is too big to fail.

But I do agree with Dan that there is a lot of dysfunction at the top. There is a lot of mistrust. There is a lot of suspicion. In life, where you stand has a lot to do with where you sit. And Benjamin Netanyahu and Barack Obama are sitting in two very different places with two differing set of conflicting pressures.

I think, when Obama looks at Netanyahu, he sees a guy who doesn't respect American interests, who is primarily concerned about his own political survival. And when Netanyahu looks at Obama, he sees a guy who is insensitive, from his point of view, to Israeli security needs, and almost bloodless.

So you really do need, I think -- as Dan knows, we have seen tough times before. George H.W. Bush and Yitzhak Shamir, that was a real rough period. Dan and I both lived through that period. But the reality then was that Shamir and Baker and Bush found a way to cooperate with one another.

And until Netanyahu and Obama find a common enterprise -- I don't know what it will be. Iran? That doesn't look so great. The Arab-Israeli peace process. I think Dan is right. I think it's going to be very difficult for the less than thousand days that remains in the Obama presidency to work out a really functional relationship between these two.

TAPPER: General Clark, the United States, as I mentioned, just OKed another $225 million for the Iron Dome missile defense system here and agreed to restock Israel's weapons during the operation. How critical to the United States is the military relationship? Obviously, it's vital to Israel.

GEN. WESLEY CLARK, FORMER NATO SUPREME ALLIED COMMANDER: Well, we look at Israel as a very, very important and vital ally in the region. It's in America's vital interest that Israel be safe and secure. So we're going to support them.

They're an outpost of democracy in the region. They show what can be done with modern technology. They're entrepreneurial. They're going to be energy-independent when they develop their offshore gas and oil. They have got lots of future and lots of potential.

And if we can get a Middle East peace process and get nations working together, that will be the keystone for economic progress in the region. And so Israel's security and safety is vital to the United States.

TAPPER: It's been over a decade of controversial wars in the Middle East. Do you think, General Clark, that the reality is that U.S. influence in the world is waning?

CLARK: Well, I think what has happened is that other powers have gotten stronger relative to the United States economically. And they're asserting themselves.

But I think the United States is still the great power. It's ours to win or lose in the Middle East. We do have to be careful the instruments of power we choose, because, military power, once it's used, when it's used, if there is no exit strategy, if it's not accompanied by the right diplomacy, if you don't take the leverage from the military power to achieve your overriding diplomatic and political aims, then the military power as an instrument, it is frittered away.

Our problem in the Middle East -- I was one of those who didn't agree with going into Iraq. I didn't think it was necessary. When we did go in, we had a brief window of enormous diplomatic leverage. We didn't use it with Iran. We didn't use it effectively with the other nations in the region.

And it soon became clear that we weren't really prepared for the occupation of Iraq which ensued. And so from that point and from then on, it's been very difficult for us to manage the military power that we had there in a way that is most constructive and most effective for the outcomes we seek.

TAPPER: All right. I have to leave it there. Ambassador Kurtzer, Wesley Clark and Aaron David Miller, thank you so much. We appreciate your time.

And, General Clark, you will be back a little later in the show.

When we come back, a former president's surprising call for action on Hamas, Alan Dershowitz will weigh in on that.

Also, with the West's attention on the Middle East, is Vladimir Putin about to make a move in Eastern Europe? And practically speaking, is there anything the White House can do to stop him? We will ask our team of experts about Ukraine coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAMEROTA: Former President Jimmy Carter has added his voice to how to solve the Middle East crisis. He says it's time for the U.S. to recognize Hamas as a legitimate political group, rather than its current designation as a terror group.

Alan Dershowitz has some strong thoughts on that. His latest book is "Taking The Stand: My Life in the Law."

Alan, great to see you.

ALAN DERSHOWITZ, ATTORNEY: Thank you.

CAMEROTA: OK. Former President Carter's position is that the best way to end the fighting in Israel is to sort of legitimatize Hamas.

Let me read to you what he wrote in this piece. He says: "The United States and the E.U. should recognize that Hamas is not just a military, but also a political force. Hamas cannot be wished away, nor will it cooperate in its own demise. Only by recognizing its legitimacy as a political actor, one that represents a substantial portion of the Palestinian people, can the West begin to provide the right incentives for Hamas to lay down its weapons."

What do you think?

DERSHOWITZ: Well, we already recognize Hamas. We recognize it as a foreign terrorist organization.

And the law provides that providing any material support to a foreign terrorist organization is illegal and against the law. And --

CAMEROTA: Yes, but he wants it recognized as a political group.

DERSHOWITZ: I understand that.

But it is both political and military. What is its politics? Its politics -- let me read from its charter. It says: "Hamas has been looking forward to implementing Allah's promise, fight the Jews until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees which will cry, oh, Muslim, there is a Jew hiding behind me. Come out and kill him."

CAMEROTA: Yes. That's a sticking point. That charter is a problem.

DERSHOWITZ: Well, it's not only the charter, but its leader today talked about the blood libel, and said Jews use the blood of Christians to make matzah. They blame the Jews on all the problems in the world.

And they have devised this horrible strategy of using children and babies as human shields in order to fire at Israeli civilians, force them to the tragic choice of either not firing back or trying their best to avoid civilians, but knowing that some civilians will be killed, and then showing the babies on television to turn the world's attention against Israel.

CAMEROTA: And yet the constant bombing of Hamas targets in Gaza doesn't seem to have eradicated them. They haven't gone anywhere. Since 2006, when they were voted into office, they haven't necessarily been weakened.

(CROSSTALK)

DERSHOWITZ: No, the mafia hasn't disappeared either. We negotiate with the mafia.

We don't recognize terrorist organizations and give them legitimacy. The media is at fault here too. They sometimes present Israel, a democratic nation, and Hamas as morally equivalent. Israel plays by the rules. Israel tries its best to avoid civilian casualties.

The difference is that Hamas uses its civilians to protect its fighters, whereas Israel uses its fighters to protect civilians.

CAMEROTA: Yes, I have heard this argument before.

DERSHOWITZ: Right.

CAMEROTA: But, as a member of the media, I feel that I have to defend us and say that, don't we have to show 1,700 people, Palestinians, killed, 75 percent of them civilians? Don't we need to report on that?

DERSHOWITZ: Well, what we you have to show is the empty areas in Gaza. Gaza is not the densest part of the world. It has many empty areas. Hamas could easily pick those areas from which to fire their rockets, build their tunnels.

If they did that, there would be no civilian casualties. Israel would attack the military. The reason so many Israeli soldiers have been killed and so many Palestinians civilians have been killed is that's the goal of Hamas, to get Israel to kill as many Palestinians as possible so that the media will cover it.

CAMEROTA: So, in your mind, until they change that charter that you just read from, there can be no legitimizing Hamas?

DERSHOWITZ: It's more than the charter. Until they change their strategy and until they stop engaging in the double war crime of targeting Israeli civilians from behind Palestinian civilians, they have to be treated as a terrorist organization.

Their tunnels have to be stopped. Their rockets have to be stopped. Negotiation? Yes. Recognition? They have to earn it.

CAMEROTA: OK. We're going to debate this. If you will stick around, Alan Dershowitz, when we come back, we will bring in man who disagrees with Professor Dershowitz when it comes to Israel and Hamas.

Reza Aslan says Hamas may be winning the public relations war, and maybe it is time to recognize them. He is going to join us next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAMEROTA: Welcome back, everyone.

The U.S. officially classifies Hamas as a terrorist organization, as do Israel, the E.U. and Egypt, among others. But is the world's view of Hamas changing?

Alan Dershowitz is back with us, and we're joined by Reza Aslan. He's a professor at U.C. Riverside and the author of "Zealot."

But let's go first to my colleague Jake Tapper in Jerusalem -- Jake.

TAPPER: Thanks, Alisyn.

Reza, I want to ask you. Israeli officials have repeatedly told me that the onus is on Hamas to prove that it can hold to a cease-fire and stop the attacks. And if the organization wants to be taken seriously on the world stage, I think the question is, don't they need to act accordingly?

REZA ASLAN, AUTHOR, "HOW TO WIN A COSMIC WAR: GOD, GLOBALIZATION, AND THE END OF THE WAR ON TERROR": Yes, Jake.

I'm sorry, but if I may, if I could just respond to Professor Dershowitz and what he has on numerous occasions referred as Hamas' dead baby strategy, or what Benjamin Netanyahu refers to as the problem of telegenically dead Palestinians, the problem with this rhetoric isn't so much that it's been repeatedly debunked by Amnesty International, by Human Rights Watch, by the United Nations, by a slew of journalists on the ground in Gaza.

The problem with this rhetoric is that it seeks to deliberately dehumanize Palestinians by stripping them of their most basic human impulse, the protection of their children, all in the name of some kind of ideological loyalty to the state of Israel.

And it has to stop if we're going move forward. It's time to stop blaming the victim. The only person responsible for the death of a civilian in a war is the person who pulled the trigger.

(CROSSTALK)

CAMEROTA: Hold on, Reza. Let Alan get in there.

Alan.

DERSHOWITZ: Let me prove that that's not true.

If there is a bank robbery and the bank robber takes a hostage and the bank robber starts shooting from behind the hostage and aiming at civilians, and the policemen then tries to shoot the bank robber and kills the hostage, who is guilty of murder?

Under the law of every single society, it's the bank robber who is holding the hostage, not the person who shot the bullet that killed a hostage.

Now, there is proof today, and you can see it. And I hope CNN runs it. An Indian television station has a video of Hamas fighters planting their rockets in the -- right next to a hotel, running away, using human shields.

CAMEROTA: Yes.

TAPPER: We do actually have that, Alan.

(CROSSTALK)

DERSHOWITZ: So, I don't care what Amnesty International says. It is a fact that Hamas. It is a fact that Hamas uses human shields.

CAMEROTA: ... video we're showing right now. Go ahead.

ASLAN: Unfortunately, it's also a fact that even if Khaled Mashal were standing on top of a hospital with a sign that says, "Israel come and get me," it would still be a violation of international law for Israel to blow up that hospital.

DERSHOWITZ: That is not true. That's false. That's absolutely not true.

(CROSSTALK)

ASLAN: ... Article 25 (ph) of the Geneva Accord...

TAPPER: Let me jump -- let me jump in for one second. Alan and Reza, let me just jump in for one second. I want to show the viewers the video that Alan was talking about, which we have shown. And I do want to get, Reza, your views of it.

NDTV, an Indian TV station, was saying some reporters were staying in a hotel, and they did seem to witness fighters. I don't know if they were with Hamas, but with some Palestinian group putting -- putting a rocket. Let's run that tape.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SREENIVASAN JAIN, NDTV JOURNALIST: Rocket launching site. That this is an area very heavily built up. A lot of residential and hotel buildings all around. Sort of a bush on top of whatever they've embedded under the sand. That's the rocket being fired yesterday morning. It's in the exact

spot the rocket has been fired. That's the smoke -- we just showed the video of it -- in the immediate aftermath.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Now Hamas has repeatedly denied using civilians as human shields. I asked an adviser to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas today for his reaction to that video. Here is the exchange.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: That area that that video was shot, that was packed with civilians. Hamas turned a neighborhood into a target. As a Palestinian, that must bother you.

MOHAMMAD SHTAYYEH, SENIOR PALESTINIAN NEGOTIATOR, PLO: What bothers me is really the killing of innocent people. Remember one important thing. Gaza is very crowded area. About 1.9 million Palestinians live in only 370 square kilometers. So wherever you go in Gaza, it's very crowded, whether here or there.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DERSHOWITZ: Not true.

TAPPER: Obviously, Gaza is densely populated. But that's not to say that rockets have to be fired from a populated neighborhood. Reza, what's your reaction to that NDTV clip and Mohammed Shtayyeh?

ASLAN: There is no question that Hamas fights in residential areas, that it launches attacks against Israel from residential areas. That's an empirical fact. It's a direct violation of the Geneva accords and international law.

It is also a direct violation of the Geneva accords and international law for Israel to haphazardly target civilian areas when there's a disproportionate number of civilian deaths involved.

So again, this is an issue not of moral equivalence. It's just that, if we were going to compare Israel's acts to Hamas' and to actually excuse Israel's actions because, you know, Hamas is worse, then let's just compare them equally. Let's make sure that international law applies to both. Let's make sure that both are responsible for their actions.

DERSHOWITZ: Let me explain international law. International law says it's absolutely prohibited ever to use, ever, to use human civilian shields. Ever. There are no qualifications.

But Israel has the right -- It's a military target. And any rocket is a military target, to respond, as long as the value of the military target is proportional to the number of anticipated civilian deaths.

Now if Mashal is standing on top of the building, no. But if he's firing at Israeli soldiers or civilians, then they do have the right to fire back.

CAMEROTA: But Alan, I want to move forward, because we're in a ceasefire now.

DERSHOWITZ: Quite right. Right.

CAMEROTA: So let's say that the ceasefire holds. Do you -- let's talk what will happen next.

BECKEL: Right.

CAMEROTA: You think that there is a way that what Hamas wants, the blockade lifted off of Gaza? Can that happen?

DERSHOWITZ: Only if they are demilitarized. You can -- Hamas has a choice. Demilitarize and end the blockade, or remain militarized and retain a blockade to prevent more rockets from coming in and more concrete to build tunnels. That's their choice.

TAPPER: OK, Reza, what do you think?

ASLAN: I absolutely agree. The lifting of the siege OF Gaza has to be conducted in coordination with the demilitarization of Hamas and the acceptance of a unity government.

To the larger point here about President Carter's comments, the United States already recognizes Hamas as a legitimate political entity. It did so when it recognized, along with every other country in the world except for Israel, the unity government between Hamas and Fatah in April.

And frankly, if the Likud government had also accepted that unity government, I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that we would not be where we are right now.

TAPPER: Very quickly, can you just talk about that unity government?

ASLAN: Yes. The unity government did not recognize Hamas. It recognized that some members of Hamas, technical people, would be in.

CAMEROTA: But it's the closest we have gotten.

DERSHOWITZ: Let's let Hamas earn its right to legitimacy. Until it gives up its tactic of hiding behind civilians and targeting civilians, it is an outlaw group; should be treated the way pirate have been treated historically. If it earns its right to legitimacy, then Israel and other countries will give it that right.

CAMEROTA: Gentlemen, we'll leave there. Alan Dershowitz, Reza Aslan. Jake, thanks so much. We'll see you tomorrow afternoon at 4 p.m. Eastern on "the lead." you guys stay safe.

When we come back, while the world is watching the middle east, things are heating up in Ukraine. Vladimir Putin about to make a move?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) CAMEROTA: More trouble in Ukraine tonight. Russia has added 8,000 troops on the border with eastern Ukraine, increasing the force there to some 20,000. What should the White House do about this?

Joining us now is Stephen Cohen. He's the professor emeritus of Russian studies at Princeton University and NYU. And General Wesley Clark, he is back with us. He's the former NATO supreme allied commander.

Gentlemen, thank you so much for being here. General Clark, let me start with you. What is Putin doing?

CLARK: Well, he's building up his capacity to intervene. He hasn't apparently made a decision overtly to intervene. We do know there are Russians on the ground there is Russian equipment inside. And there's Russian artillery and rockets that fire across the border to target the Ukrainian forces.

So he's building up the military capacity. He's got a pretext for intervention now. He's got the separatist mayor of Luhansk citing an eminent humanitarian catastrophe, and he's calling for a U.N. Security Council meeting to discuss a humanitarian situation. He's got many options.

He could overtly invade. He could infiltrate across the border. He could declare himself a unilateral peacekeeping mission. He could call for a ceasefire. He has lots of options here. And he -- he is playing it. He is like someone fumbling with the lock trying to find the right key to open the door.

CAMEROTA: So Professor, how troubling is this, what's happening on the border?

STEPHEN COHEN, PROFESSOR EMERITUS, PRINCETON: Well, it would be troubling if General Clark told only one side of the story. But in any fight, there's two fighters. There's an American adage here is two sides to every story.

It's very clear in Moscow how Putin sees this, what he thinks he is facing. He is being told by people who are advising him that this is no longer a struggle for Ukraine, but a struggle for Russia. These cities that you have reported on in eastern Ukraine that are being attacked by the Ukrainian army, Kiev, are close to Russia. He is being told if you let those cities go, you lose those cities, you will fight tomorrow in Russia.

So General Clark is right in this regard. Putin is now exploring another option. Can the defenders of the city, as they call themselves, with additional Russian weapons defend the cities themselves? If not, he's preparing another option, which would be to intervene directly.

CAMEROTA: General, what do you make of that? Do you think that Putin is going to do what he -- pull a sort of Crimea maneuver here?

CLARK: Well, he certainly would like to do that. But he -- Putin has declared politically that he has created a zone that includes eastern Ukraine. He wants that to be Russia. He envisions forming the basis for a new union. It may not be exactly like the Soviet Union, but it will make Russia a greater power. And he wants eastern Ukraine in that.

How much is eastern Ukraine is open to dispute. But those two cities, they're not Russian cities. And the people who are leading the fighting in there are not Ukrainians who are Ukrainian citizens. They're Russians who have infiltrated in backed by Soviet Spetznatz. So it's a tactic of aggression. And he wants to legitimate, but now he is being frustrated because he never expected the Ukrainians would actually fight. Imagine, he thought that he could just walk in there and they would surrender.

The Ukrainians were told by the west not to resist in Crimea. That's why the Ukrainian defense minister called the Russian generals in Crimea and said, "Look, don't hurt our people. We'll give you everything. Just let us leave." But they didn't like it. They're fighting for their country.

CAMEROTA: General -- OK. Hold on a second. Professor, I see from your expression that you see this differently.

COHEN: I'm glad you call me a professor, because I deal with facts. I want to be as polite as possible. But General Clark is simply uninformed. These are Ukrainian cities, Russian-speaking Ukrainian cities. The populations are either ethnic Russian or Russian- speaking, but they are Ukrainians.

They are getting help from Russia. But overwhelmingly, the fighting force in these cities that's defending the cities, about 15,000 men, overwhelmingly they are Ukrainian citizens.

The notion, this entire crisis comes from Putin's aggression, ignores a fundamental fact there is a civil war under way in Ukraine. And as I said the first time I was on CNN back in February, that if Ukraine's civil war becomes a proxy war with America supporting Kiev and Russia supporting the east, then we will run the risk of an American-Russian war. And that is exactly what happened. To omit one-half of the story is just not to know what to do next.

CAMEROTA: General, I do want you to be able to respond to what professor Cohen is saying, and also, do you think this has become a proxy war between the U.S. and Russia?

CLARK: No, I don't think it's a proxy war between the United States and Russia. But what happens in Ukraine will have an enormous bearing on what happens for NATO and how the United States has to respond in leading NATO. So the outcome is vital to the United States. What we want is a diplomatic solution.

But let's be very clear about this. There was an overthrow of an authoritarian government in Ukraine. There's been a democratically elected president. People in eastern Ukraine are Ukrainian, but to say that this is a civil war is to ignore the instigation, the subversion and the leadership of the Russian influence, which has encouraged, aided, abetted and supported that conflict. So strictly speaking, this is not a civil war. This is a tactic for taking over eastern Ukraine by an outside power.

CAMEROTA: Professor Cohen, I'll give you the last word.

COHEN: Yes, because the longer General Clark speaks, the more non- facts emerge. It's a civil war created by history. Nobody created this in Russia or the United States. And to say it's not a proxy war when the United States Department of Defense has testified to the Senate that United States officials are embedded in the Ukrainian defense ministry is simply to ignore reality. I don't know where General Clark has been these last two or three weeks.

CLARK: Well, I've actually been in Ukraine. Now, I don't know where you have been, professor, but when I was in Ukraine, I met with the American embassy; I met with the Ukrainian government. And there are actually-- we're not giving any military assistance that I can see, other than some flak jackets and supposedly night vision goggles that will someday arrive and some MREs. That's not much compared to what Russia has in that conflict.

COHEN: Well, do we have officials -- do we have officials in the Ukrainian defense ministry?

CLARK: Not to my knowledge.

COHEN: Well, they have testified to this to the Senate.

CLARK: No. What you had was a -- what you had was a fact-finding mission from the United States European command to look at the long- range structure of the Ukrainian armed forces to reduce the size of the armed forces in the five to ten-year planning effort there is nobody giving them any advice or any assistance that I know of. And I was just there. I've been there twice.

COHEN: Well, you look it up. Because it's Senate testimony.

CLARK: Well, I testified in the United States...

COHEN: Not you.

CLARK: It wasn't my testimony.

COHEN: Not yours. Of course. You're not in the government.

CAMEROTA: Gentlemen, it doesn't sound like we're going to be able to resolve this tonight. But of course, we will keep our eyes on what's happening along the border. And we thank you both for your perspectives.

COHEN: Thank you.

CAMEROTA: Thanks so much.

When we come back, are Republicans going head to head on support for Israel? Rand Paul seems to be changing his tune. Next, I'll ask Ann Coulter what she thinks he means.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAMEROTA: The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is dividing people around the world. Our next guest says she wishes Benjamin Netanyahu were our president. Joining us is Ann Coulter. She's the author of "Never Trust a Liberal Over 3, Especially a Republican."

Hi, Ann.

ANN COULTER, AUTHOR: Hello. So good to see you.

CAMEROTA: Good to see you, too.

What do you mean you wish Benjamin Netanyahu were our president? He could solve the border crisis?

COULTER: Well, I keep looking at the news. Like a lot of Americans, we see Israel's border and the Ukraine's border. How about our border? Can we talk a little more about that? And I'm just jealous of what Netanyahu is doing on Israel. How about a nice fence and we'll send some drones down there? I think we could get this wrapped up pretty quickly.

CAMEROTA: But you know we're not at war with Mexico.

COULTER: No. But we have millions coming in. And raping and drunk driving and bringing in diseases and voting. I mean, unless...

CAMEROTA: I mean, you know that children from Honduras are not trying to obliterate the United States...

COULTER: Well, speaking of human shields.

CAMEROTA: ... the way Hamas is.

COULTER: Speaking of human shields, yes they send their children so the whole family can come. This is a country.

CAMEROTA: What do you mean this is a country? You mean they want to come here because it's a better country than what they have in Honduras?

COULTER; Yes. And there are 52 billion, not million, billion people of the world who would like to live in a better country. It's not going to be a better country if all 52 billion come.

CAMEROTA: Let's talk about Rand Paul. What the Congressman has said about our military aid to Israel. So you know, we give $3 billion a year in military aid. And Rand Paul seems to have been sort of all over the map as to whether or not this is a good idea or not. So let's see what he said first today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. RAND PAUL (R), KENTUCKY: I haven't proposed targeting or eliminating any aid to Israel. So when people write that, they're not really writing the truth. What they're writing is a story line.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: OK. So there he says he doesn't want to eliminate any aid to Israel. But this is what he said back in 2011 when he talked to Wolf Blitzer.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: So just to be precise, and all foreign aid, including the foreign aid to Israel, as well, that right?

PAUL: Yes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: Well, what he was saying was he doesn't want to give -- and he wants to eliminate all foreign aid.

COULTER: Right.

CAMEROTA: So which one is it, and which one do you think he should be supporting?

COULTER: I think it's a little like a compass. It used to be whatever would please 15-year-old Ayn Rand readers was his position. Now it's whatever will please basically the mainstream media is his new position.

But I wish he'd just, you know, pick a position and go with it. Even if it's -- in fact, especially if the media hates it, if it's against what most people think. I'd have a lot more respect for someone who takes an unpopular position, defends it and sticks to it. And I might add, that's what his father used to do.

CAMEROTA: Do you think that we should still be sending $3 billion in military aid to Israel?

COULTER: The foreign aid thing, like the earmarks things, is a little bit of a red herring. It's a very, very, very small amount of money. I don't think we use...

CAMEROTA: But $3 billion is a lot annually.

COULTER: For our budget? It's a drop in the bucket. I think we should be using our foreign aid better, i.e. as both a carrot and a stick. And we don't. I mean, as for, for example, right now with 100,000 Latin American kids coming over. We can't pressure Mexico? Mexico can put our Marines in prison, and we can't do anything about it? We send them $20 million in foreign aid.

CAMEROTA: Yes. So what does that mean? That we -- you do like the idea?

COULTER: I don't have a problem with foreign aid. I don't have a problem with earmarks. In both cases it's very -- it's a drop in the bucket for what the federal government spends. The foreign aid itself, it ought to be used as part of our foreign policy.

Again, we're a country. We should be serving the interests of our country. We aren't the U.N. where anyone can move in, and we just send money around the world. It is true. We don't have the money for it. We don't have money -- I mean, for all these things.

CAMEROTA: Well, of course. I mean, that's been the whole Republican point all along. We have to make these choices.

COULTER: No, but foreign aid used as part of our foreign policy. It's a very small amount of money. It's a lot less expensive than going to war. It's a lot less expensive, as the -- as the open borders crowd says, rounding them all up and sending them all home. No, foreign aid before they get here and using it in such a way to have countries prevent 100,000 of their poor coming into our country would be a good way to use foreign aid. But we don't.

CAMEROTA: Got it. Ann Coulter, great to see you.

COULTER: Good to see you.

CAMEROTA: See you soon.

And we'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAMEROTA: Is "CNN TONIGHT Tomorrow," the stories you'll be talking about tomorrow. Here is some disturbing video to show you.

Police are hunting for this gunman that you're to be see, apparently shooting and beating a man in a New York City grocery store on Saturday, all without spilling the drink in his hand. Five other men step over the victim as they leave the store. We will have much more on this story tomorrow.

I'm Alisyn Camerota. That's going to do it for me. Thanks so much for watching. We'll see you back here tomorrow. "AC 360" starts right now.