Return to Transcripts main page


ISIS Fighting Back in Battle for Mosul; Debate Aftermath; Trump Will "Keep American In Suspense" Over Accepting Election Results; Philippines President Announces Military, Economic Split from U.S.; Russia Big Topic During Third Presidential Debate. 11:00a-12:00p ET

Aired October 21, 2016 - 11:00:00   ET



[11:00:20] DONALD TRUMP, REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I will tell you at the time. I'll keep you in suspense.

HILLARY CLINTON, DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well, Chris, let me respond to that, because that's horrifying.


HANNAH VAUGHAN JONES, HOST: An unprecedented situation: Donald Trump refuses to say whether he'll accept the results of next month's U.S.

presidential vote. The third and final debate was another testy affair. We have full highlights and analysis ahead.

Also this hour...


ARWA DAMON, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: This is the front line, and being this close to the fighting, one can't help but to think, but to

wonder about the fate of the civilians who potentially might be trapped inside.


JONES: Embedded with Iraqi forces as they take on ISIS, CNN has been on the front line in the battle for Mosul.

Plus, the Philippines controversial president drops a bombshell on a visit to China. We're live in Beijing for more on that.

Hello and welcome to Connect the World. I'm Hannah Vaughan Jones sitting in for Becky Anderson here in London.

It was a defining moment of the final debate, and perhaps Donald Trump's entire presidential

campaign. The Republican candidate setoff shock waves during his showdown with Hillary Clinton on Wednesday night by refusing to commit to accepting

the election results.

Well, that moment drew gasps in the debate hall and in living rooms across America and almost

overshadowed almost everything else that was said on stage, even though there were actually some substantive policy clashes.

CNN's Manu Raju has more.


MANU RAJU, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Donald Trump refusing to say he will accept the election results.

TRUMP: I will look at it at the time. I'm not looking at anything now. I'll look at it at the time.

CHRIS WALLACE, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: Are you saying you're not prepared now to commit to that?

TRUMP: I will tell you at the time. I'll keep you in suspense. OK?

CLINTON: Well, Chris, let me respond to that, because that's horrifying. You know, every time Donald thinks things are not going in his direction,

he claims whatever it is, is rigged against him.

RAJU: Trump suggesting Hillary Clinton's e-mail use is disqualifying.

TRUMP: She shouldn't be allowed to run. She's guilty of a very, very serious crime.

RAJU: Clinton changing the subject of her Wall Street speeches to Russia and pressuring the GOP nominee to condemn Russia for hacking and stealing

Democratic records. Trump taking the bait.

CLINTON: Will Donald Trump admit and condemn that the Russians are doing this and make it clear that he will not have the help of Putin in this

election, that he rejects Russian espionage against Americans, which he actually encouraged in the past?

TRUMP: I don't know Putin. He said nice things about me. If we got along well, that would be good. If Russia and the United States got along well

and went after ISIS, that would be good.

He has no respect for her. He has no respect for our president. And I'll tell you what: we're in very serious trouble.

From everything I see has no respect for this person.

CLINTON: Well, that's because he'd rather have a puppet as president.

TRUMP: No puppet, no.

WALLACE: You condemn their interference?

TRUMP: Of course I condemn.

RAJU: Throughout the night, Trump repeatedly interrupting and attacking her.

CLINTON: ... be clear.

TRUMP: You're the puppet.


CLINTON: This is a very clear fact that...

TRUMP: Wrong.

CLINTON: ... before the...

TRUMP: Excuse me. My turn.

CLINTON: .. replenish the Social Security trust fund.

TRUMP: Such a nasty woman.

RAJU: Trump did have a strong start, sparring with Clinton on issues that play well with conservatives, like abortion.

TRUMP: Based on what she's saying and based on where she's going and where she's been, you can take the baby and rip the baby out of the womb in the

ninth month, on the final day; and that's not acceptable.

CLINTON: Using that kind of scare rhetoric is just terribly unfortunate. You should meet with some of the women that I've met with. Women I've known

over the course of my life. This is one of the worst possible choices that any woman and her family has to make. And I do not believe the government

should be making it.

RAJU: Trump even going as far as claiming his pro-life Supreme Court picks would automatically overturn Roe v. Wade, something he can't guarantee.

Later, Clinton hitting back on immigration.

CLINTON: When it comes to the wall that Donald talks about building the wall, he went to Mexico. He had a meeting with the Mexican president.

Didn't even raise it; he choked.

TRUMP: First of all, I had a very good meeting with the president of Mexico. Very nice man.

[11:05:03] RAJU: Trump raising eyebrows with this response to the question of deporting millions of undocumented immigrants.

TRUMP: Once the border is secured at a later date, we'll make a determination as to the rest. But we have some bad hombres here, and we're

going to get them out.

RAJU: And once again, rejecting the growing number of accusations from several women of making unwanted advances.

TRUMP: Because those stories are all totally false. I have to say that. And I didn't even apologize to my wife, who's sitting right here, because I

didn't do anything. I didn't know any of these women. I didn't see these women. These women, the woman on the plane, the woman -- I think they want

either fame or her campaign did it. And I think it's her campaign.

CLINTON: Donald thinks belittling women makes him bigger. He goes after their dignity, their self-worth; and I don't think there is a woman

anywhere who doesn't know what that feels like. So, we now know what Donald thinks and what he says and how he acts towards women. That's who Donald



JONES: Manu Raju reporting there.

Let's bring in Juana Summers now for more. She's an editor for CNN Politics. Welcome, Wanda.

And Donald Trump may not have won the debate, but he certainly stole the narrative on this one. Everyone is talking about Trump's refusal to say

whether or not he'll accept the outcome of the election November 8. And what kind of chaos that could then bring to the American system.

JUANA SUMMERS, CNN POLITICS: Absolutely. And what's important to recognize about that is this election is not just about Donald Trump. By

saying that he refuses to potentially accept the results of the election, he's putting Republicans in down ballot races in the House and Senate in a

really difficult position where their supporters, reporters like us are going to go ask them, will you accept the election results, do you believe

that that is rigged. And so I think that puts Republicans in a really difficult position as they are hoping to keep control of both the Senate

and the House and there are a lot of really competitive races out there that could put both chambers in jeopardy.

JONES: I want you to just stand by for us for a second, because I want to play our viewers something that was said by Donald Trump's campaign

manager. He obviously needed a strong performance in this debate. And it's question over the legitimacy over the election result.

This is what Kellyanne Conway told our Chris Cuomo earlier on.


KELLYANNE CONWAY, TRUMP CAMPAIGN MANAGER: He said, let's see what happens.

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR; He said, I want to keep you in suspense.

CONWAY: Let's see how close it is.

CUOMO: The GOP head Reince Priebus, all these different GOP lawmakers came forward and said that was wrong. Laura Ingram said he has to say that

he'll accept it unless there's another Florida.

CONWAY: And I said yesterday. I've said -- I'm his campaign manager, his running mate, his daughter, we've all said the same thing. Absent

widespread fraud or indices of irregularities, but please don't say he said, quote, unless I win I won't...

CUOMO: He didn't say it. He said I won't tell you until then. He didn't say what you said either. He didn't say, oh, look if there's a huge

irregularity or something like that, like Florida, then we have to look at it. He didn't say that. I don't know. I'll look at it when it happens.

I want to keep you in suspense. He didn't say what you said.

CONWAY: So, he was supposed to give 10 or 12 different hypotheticals to prove his point.

CUOMO: No, he was supposed to say I accept the outcome of the election, because we want a peaceful transfer of power. And then if there's some,

god forbid that happens, like in 2000, you deal with it when it comes. You don't undermine the system before you come to that. Isn't that a fair


CONWAY: Chris, I think you're just asking me the same question over one long segment. So, I'm sure that if I turn on CNN all day, that's basically

what I'll see.

But I think the voters learned a lot last night in 90 minutes. I've answered it. His daughter answered it, his runningmates answered it. And

more importantly, he's answered it.


JONES: Juana, Kellyanne Conway there saying that everyone on the campaign is saying the same thing. But crucially, they're saying different things

to what Donald Trump is saying. It's a big difference to what the campaign and himself are saying to what his campaign manager says, to even what his

daughter is saying about whether they will accept the legitimacy of the election result.

SUMMERS: You're absolutely, right. And this situation, the only thing that matters is the candidate. So, it's great that all these people

around him are saying, you know, he will accept this. We will tell him to. Hellyanne Conway said I believe after the debate in the spin room last

night that she would tell him to accept the results of the election if he does, in fact, lose. And that's what happened.

The other thing that's really important to keep in mind in this discussion is, you heard Kellyanne Conway say that she believed Donald Trump would

accent the results of the election absent allegations of widespread fraud or irregularities.

History tells us those things have not happened. When there have been instances of irregularities and voter fraud, they are few and far between.

We're talking in the tens not thousands and certainly not at the nationally level widespread as Donald Trump and some of his surrogates have suggested,

so a situation in which Donald Trump based on his campaign manager's words would be in a situation where he would question allowing the peaceful

transfer of power to continue, something that's a hallmark for American democracy. It is highly unlikely.

JONES: What about how Hillary Clinton did last night? She was obviously going to face questions, as she did, about the email scandal that's she's

been broiled in throughout her campaign. Do you think she managed to combat all of the attacks coming towards her and perhaps even reach out to

those disaffected or undecided voters who are still yet to kind of fall behind Trump at least on this campaign.

[11:10:23] SUMMERS: I do. And I think on two issues she's amplified that really well. Those are on the Second Amendment, gun issues, and on

immigration. In her answers and the way she discussed their positions and the way that they have changed over time, she was really speaking not to

the people who make up her base, to Democrats and independents who have maybe cleaved to her, but to even Republicans across the aisle who maybe

searching for a candidate not to happy with Donald Trump who -- and she tried to reach out to them and say that, yes, she believes to the right to

the second amendment right, but that the tens and thousands of people killed by guns every year, that that does not continue happening in this


So I think that you saw her thread the needle very carefully.

More importantly, though, what we saw from Hillary Clinton was a performance in which she kept Donald Trump playing defense constantly.

Actually I felt in some moments she was playing from the Donald Trump playbook. She got under his skin. She agitated him. And you saw that

especially in the final 30 minutes of the debate when he -- at first he was a little bit more reserved, then he came out

with a few more attacks, you know, then that was in the final minutes when he called her such a nasty woman. And she was answering a conservation.

She really effectively I think won the night, made Donald Trump seem unprepared out of his depth on a number of policy issues whereas she came

across as able to rise above and to expand the base, which is really what both candidates needed to do here. And I think that we can definitively

say that Hhillary Clinton did that significantly more effectively than Donald Trump did.

JONES: Very interesting. Juana Summers, we appreciate it. Thanks very much indeed.

Well, there were plenty of fireworks over foreign policy during the debate as well. Clinton and Trump sparred over several issues including the

battle for Mosul in Iraq.

Trump suggested the offensive on the ISIS stronghold was launched to help his Democratic rival win.


TRUMP: We're now fighting for Mosul that we had. All she had to do was stay there. Now we're going into get it. But you know who the big winner

in Mosul is going to be after we eventually get it -- and the only reason they did it is because she's running for the office of president and they

want to look tough. They want to look good. He violated the red line in the sand. And he made so many mistakes, made all mistakes. That's why we

have the great migration.

But she wanted to look good for the election, so they're going in.


JONES: Well, Clinton called Trump's claim another one of his many conspiracy theories.


CLINTON: What's really important here is to understand all the interplay. Mosul is a Sunni City. Mosul is on the border of Syria. And, yes, we do

need to go after Baghdadi and just like we went after bin Laden while you were doing Celebrity Apprentice and we brought

him to justice. We need to go after the leadership, but we need to get rid of them, get rid of their fighters. There are estimated several thousand

fighters in Mosul. They've been digging underground. They've been prepared to defend. It's going to be tough fighting. But I think we can

take back Mosul and then we can move on into Syria and take back Raqqa.

This is what we have to do. I'm just amazed that he seems to think that the Iraqi government and our allies and everybody else launched the attack

on Mosul to help me in this election, but that's how Donald thinks, you know? He always is looking for some...

TRUMP: Chris, we don't gain anything. Iran is taking over Iraq.


JONES: Well, as you hear there, the discussion over Mosul definitely got heated.

CNN's Clarissa Ward is near Mosul and with analysis for us, and our Matthew Chance is reporting from Moscow on the candidates' references to Putin, and

of course the cyber attack that the U.S. has blamed on Russia.

Matthew, to you first. There was so much toing and froing, wasn't there, over who is Putin's

puppet. Is Russia reveling at all in the prominence that it's playing in this election campaign?

MATTHEW CHANCE, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Not publicly, no. In fact, publicly, it's been critical of the fact that its name has been taken

in vain as it were on so many occasions throughout these various presidential debates. It's called an anti-Russian sentiment, you know, and

it's criticized it.

You know, but I think that secretly, you know, these -- the fact that Russia is playing such a large part in this presidential debate and has

become such a key issue will be received quite positively amongst the higher echelons of the Kremlin. It's been an objective of Russian foreign

policy for several years under Vladimir Putin to place the country at the center of international diplomacy. And it's certainly there now. You

know, it's a reflection of the fact that the Kremlin with its wars in Syria and its intervention in Ukraine a couple years ago is now an extremely

important, extremely influential country, and that's being reflected in this presidential debate the fact that it's being mentioned so often and in

such heated exchanges.

[11:15:08] JONES: Let's bring in Clarissa Ward for us near Mosul for us in Iraq. There was so much mention of Mosul in last night's debate, Clarissa.

Donald Trump saying that the offense there is to help the Clinton campaign, and Hillary Clinton for her parts says that in her administration there

would be no American boots on Iraqi soil, in the near time anyway. How realistic are both of those assertions?

CLARISSA WARD, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, let's start with Trump's claim that this offensive was launched to help Hillary Clinton win

the election. One thing I do think is clear that for President Barack Obama this is a question of shaping his legacy. It is deeply embarrassing

for the U.S. president that this militant group, ISIS, who he wants dismissed as being JV, then went on to sack the second largest city in

Iraq, completely changing the entire dynamic of the region.

So, of course it is important for President Obama. He would like to see some kind of a resolution, or at least the beginning of this offensive

during his tenure.

However, does he or anyone in U.S. politics have the power to make it so? No, I don't think they do. I think we would have seen this offensive start

much, much earlier if, indeed, they did have that kind of power. And certainly then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton actually left her role as

secretary of state in February 2013, way before the sacking of Mosul even happened.

So, I don't think that is realistic, though of course President Obama does have an interest in shaping his legacy by launching this offensive before

he leaves office.

As for Hillary Clinton's claim that she doesn't want to have any U.S. troops on the ground, first of all, there are about 5,000 Americans

currently on the ground here in Iraq, 500 or so special forces inside Syria as well. And she has said repeatedly that she would like to establish a

no-fly zone inside Syria. Analysts who are looking at those options say it would be very difficult to do that without some kind of significant

military escalation.

Can it be done without putting U.S. troops on the ground? I don't know. I'm not a military expert. Well, have to see. But certainly it does

signify a ratcheting up or an escalation of America's military involvement in Syria -- Hannah.

JONES: That's quite alright.

And Matthew Chance, back to you in Moscow. In any event, when it gets to November 9, which candidate, Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton, would the

Kremlin prefer?

CHANCE: Well, I mean, again, officially the Kremlin say they don't have a preference. It's up to the American people, they say, to decide. But if

you watch state television, which is obviously controlled by the Kremlin, you get a very clear picture that there is one

candidate and it's Trump that the officials in the country honestly prefer.

And I think there's a number of reasons for that. I mean, the foremost amongst them is that Donald Trump reflects the kind of world view that the

Kremlin itself has when it comesto international diplomacy. He's criticized NATO, he's criticized the expansion of western institutions.

He's talked about building a better relationship with the Kremlin. This is all music to the ears of those higher echelons inside the Kremlin.

At the same time, Hillary Clinton is seen as somebody very anti-Russian. She seemed to have supported the protests against President Putin when he

was reelected three or four years ago here in Russia. At the same time, Trump is not seen as somebody who is particularly reliable and there

is a sort of voice of dissent, as it were, from that mainstream opinion in Russia that Trump might actually not be good for Russia because he is so

unpredictable whereas the Russians know what kind of person Hillary is and they've dealt with her in the past.

You know, Trump is an unknown quantity. And that's something that's disturbing to many Russian officials when they watch this presidential

debate and this election unfold.

JONES: My thanks to both of you. Matthew Chance is live for us there in Moscow and Clarissa Ward is near Mosul for us in Iraq. Thank you to both.

Now, still to come on Connect the World this evening, bombs have stopped falling on eastern

Aleppo and civilians are being urged to leave, but are people using the route? We will have the latest on the situation in Syria coming up.

Plus, CNN's reporters are working on the frontlines in Iraq. We'll get you the latest on that

battle for for Mosul coming up next.


[11:21:44] JONES: As the battle for Mosul rages around them, black smoke smothering the horizon, gunfire and artillery shaking the air, this is what

escape looks like. Families caked in dust crowding into the back of trucks with whatever they can carry, desperately trying to get out of the way.

Some who've gone back to their villages after ISIS have been purged to have found them booby

trapped by the militants.

Hello, you are watching CNN and this is Connect the World. I'm Hannah Vaughan Jones in London. Welcome back to you. ISIS seemed to be quickly

being crushed around Mosul. Iraq's prime minister says his forces are advancing faster than anyone expected.

CNN's teams took this footage just hours ago. As you can hear, pockets of the militants are still putting up a hard fight. Well, this is a look at

what controls what right now. Kurdish Peshmerga fighters and Iraqi forces have been making gains on several fronts on today, Thursday, that's

according to a CNN analysis of the battlefield. They've now taken back more than 100 square kilometers of


Well, CNN's Arwa Damon joins us now live from Irbil, which is about an hour's drive from Mosul. But she was there when the video that we just

showed you was filmed. And Arwa, the latest we're hearing is that with the fighting right now the Iraqis have taken back a Christian village.

What more can you tell us about that?

ARWA DAMON, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Hannah. That is the town that we were just at. And you saw how intense the fighting got

during certain hours of the day as the counterterrorism divisions special forces brigade pushed forward on three different fronts. They came across

the usual truck bombs and explosives that ISIS had left behind, they did engage the fighters on numerous occasions and really unleashed with

everything that they have within their own possession as they tried to push forward into the town of Bartallah (ph), a Christian enclave, that we had

actually visited around two years ago, just before ISIS took it over, where people had said that they didn't want to flee even if ISIS did come in,

where the priests had just recently renovated the church.

As far as we know, all inhabitants did flee well before ISIS arrived. And as far as we know, according to the Iraqis, there are not many, if any,

residents that remained during the battles. We are hearing from the top Iraqi brigade commander that at this point in time, the majority of

Bartallah (ph) has been liberated. There still do remain small pockets of resistance.

But when we're talking about the broader battlefield, Hannah, it's important to look at the

landscape. You have in the Nineveh plain surround surrounding the city of Mosul itself, relatively speaking, fairly large stretches of terrain that

make things like calling in an air strike or detonating an incoming suicide car bomber or even a truck laden with explosives on the

side of the road fairly easy because the chances of civilians deaths are significantly diminished, the chances of civilian deaths are significantly


We're seeing some of the challenges that the forces are facing when they do move into the villages where people weren't able to flee before the clashes

broke out. And that is going to change drastically once they actually reach the city of Mosul itself where the

armor won't necessarily be able to push forward first, where they won't be able to call in air strikes with such ease out of concern for the civilian


Because remember there are upwards of 1 million civilians still believed to be trapped in the

city of Mosul. And a lot of the Iraqi commanders we're talking to, even though they say that they're not

necessarily encountering the level of resistance from ISIS that they were anticipating, they're not allowing that to let their guard down because

they do believe that ISIS is preparing itself to put a very fierce, the toughest fight to date when it comes to trying to defend the city of Mosul

and trying to prevent it from falling back into the hands of the Iraqis.

[11:26:02] JONES: And Arwa, just briefly, please, is the fact that this progress into Mosul is faster than expected, is that because of the

efficiency of the Iraqi forces or the deficiency of the ISIS defense?

DAMON: Look, the Iraqis have gained quite a bit of battle experience, especially over the course of the last eight months when they began trying

to move across Nineveh Province. And the Kurdish Peshmerga, of course, have been holding their defensive berms around the city itself for about

the last two years. And they are battle hardened as well. They have gained a lot of self-confidence from the fact that they do have the U.S.

and other coalition partners that have been advising, assisting them, that they do have very crucial to note U.S. and coalition air power

and other assets and enablers that have allowed them to push forward, that on the one hand.

On the other hand, we've also seen ISIS slightly changing its tactics. Some eight months ago when the Iraqis were pushing forward, they struggled

to just retake a few small villages. ISIS used to send wave after wave of suicide bombers. They're not really doing that anymore and that's led to

the thought that ISIS is effectively perhaps to a certain degree acknowledging

the fact that it is eventually going to lose the city of Mosul and is preparing itself in other ways.

But that does not necessarily mean that even though they're advancing faster than expected through Nineveh plains towards the city itself that

the battle for the city is going to be simple.

JONES: Arwa, we appreciate it. Arwa Damon is live for us there in Irbil in northern Iraq. Thank you.

Well, the Mosul offensive was a major topic of discussion during Wednesday's U.S. presidential

debate. Fawaz Gerges talks to me about the foreign policy ground covered during the final faceoff between the two candidates. That's coming up in

around 15 minutes' time.

Plus, is the Philippines really cutting ties with the U.S.? New comments from the Philippines president are raising some eyebrows and lots of




[11:31:49] JONES: Syria and Russia have stopped bombing eastern Aleppo, a daily 11-hour pause will last through Saturday. The two countries say this

is to allow rebels and civilians to leave the rebel-held section of the Syrian city through humanitarian corridors.

Well, this map shows you all of the possible passageways that have been set up to allow people to leave. You can see the routes along Castello Road

toward the top of the map, another corridor for rebel fighters crosses the government-held portion of Aleppo to the west allowing fighters to reach

rebel-held territory even further west.

But residents, though, have told us they have seen no clear sign of these so-called safe corridors that have been promised.

Well, for more on the situation in Aleppo, I'm joined by Ivan Watson. He's following developments for us from neighboring Turkey.

Ivan, let's start by talking about this humanitarian -- these corridors that have popped up supposedly and this pause in the air strikes. In

practical terms, what is getting into Aleppo and who is getting out?

WATSON: Well, at this point, what's really important here is that it's this third straight day that the Russian and Syrian government forces have

suspended their punishing bombardment of the rebel-held part of Eastern Aleppo that is encircled and besieged. There were weeks of deadly air

strikes and artillery strikes and that has come to a pause, a much needed pause for the people there.

The Russian military has announced the creation of these so-called humanitarian corridors. We've gotten reports that the Syrian helicopters

have dropped leaflets over this area urging people to leave. We got through to one resident who -- one very shell-shocked resident who

suggested that some of the people there do in fact want to leave, but they're facing some challenges. They don't trust the Syrian government on

the other hand, and on the other hand, not getting support from some of the rebel fighters who control that little enclave to leave either.

So some big questions there.

In the meantime, criticism coming from Europe over the punishing again Russian and deadly Russian and Syrian government bombardment in past weeks

of that part of the city with the French President Francois Hollande coming out and basically saying that this amounts -- claiming that this amounts to

war crimes. We're hearing from an EU council official saying that sanctions are being discussed, not only European Union sanctions against

Syrian government officials, but possibly also against Russian officials as well.

But that is only in the draft stage at this point -- Hannah.

JONES: And, Ivan, just briefly, Turkey carrying out its own airstrikes, its own action in Syria.

Talk us through the targets of these strikes and why it's happening now.

WATSON: Well, this is striking. While the Russian government and the Syrian government forces suspended for several days their bombardment of

eastern Aleppo, the Turkish government announced that it carried out air strikes against Kurdish fighters in other parts of northern Syria, dozens

of air strikes. And the Turkish military claim to have killed hundreds of Kurdish fighters.

Now, we can't independently confirm that. What we're hearing is that perhaps ten or more Kurdish fighters from that PYD faction that's allied

with the Kurdistan Workers Party, the enemy -- an enemy of the Turkish state that they were killed. But this is the most intense series of

Turkish airstrikes against the Kurdish fighters that we've seen in northern Syria thus far, some real criticism coming from the Kurdish side.

And you have to recall that these Kurdish fighters have worked alongside, have been allied with the U.S. military with the U.S. in Syria in the past

and of course Turkey is a NATO ally which is supporting other armed factions in Syria, a sign of the tangled alliances and how you even have

two NATO allies who are supporting different and sometimes rival proxies in this very, very messy, very, very awful war across the border in Syria --


JONES: Ivan, we appreciate it. Ivan Watson live for us there in Istanbul in Turkey.

Now, the Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte says he's separating from the United States. And while in China, he announced a break with the U.S. on

military and economic interests. For more on this, our Matt Rivers is live for us in Beijing.

And, Matt, the president has been increasing his anti-American, shall we call it, rhetoric of late. But these comments seem to take that to another

level altogether.

MATT RIVERS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: They absolutely do. And they come at a very auspicious time. The president of the Philippines, Mr. Duterte, here

in Beijing for his first official state visit in China, and we were expecting the major news of the day to come while Mr. Duterte was meeting

with with counterparty, President Xi Jinping here in China.

But it was actually at a business forum several hours after that meeting with President Xi that he made these comments that really have very, very

large implications.


RIVERS (voice-over): Marching soldiers, military band and red carpet welcome for President Rodrigo Duterte in Beijing by Chinese President Xi

Jinping. Both men oversaw agreements signed in 13 different areas from trade to tourism. But the real news of the day came at a later business

forum where Duterte spoke. Towards the end of his speech, he said this.

RODRIGO DUTERTE, PRESIDENT OF THE PHILIPPINES: Your honors, in this venue, I announce my separation from the United States. Both in military, not

maybe social -- both the military, but economics also.

RIVERS: The implications of a statement like that could be serious. Philippine President Duterte has regularly engaged in anti- U.S. rhetoric

and these are his stronger comments to date. But it's unclear how this will play out in practical terms.

Militarily, the United States and the Philippines are treaty allies with a mutual defense obligation. The U.S. regularly rotates military troops and

equipment through the Philippines and the two countries have also conducted several joint Naval patrols in the South China Sea this year.

A true separation as President Duterte suggested would mean an end to both the treaty and the troop presence. But President Duterte has made

statements before that his staff then has been forced to walk back or clarify.

CNN reached out to Duterte's office for more details on his announced. We received no reply.

In the past, Duterte has expressed anger over the U.S. military presence but said the treaty would remain because his advisers told him it was

necessary. He did, however, cancelled joint military exercises set for next year.

What Duterte meant by separating economically is less clear though U.S./Philippine trade is worth tens of billions of dollars.

In that same speech, the president also indicated what he has said for months now, that he wants to leave the U.S. behind in exchange for new,

stronger allies.

DUTERTE: And maybe I would also go to Russia to talk to Putin and tell him that there are three of us against the world: China, Philippines, and

Russia. It's the only way.


RIVERS: And so all of this really can be seen altogether as a forceful and pointed rebuke of the United States. It's certainly something that

Washington is going to be paying attention to, and frankly will have to respond to at some point to determine whether this is just more rhetoric

from President Duterte or if it has to take his swords at face value and it could really

alter that historic relationship between the United States and the Americans. One more day left for President Duterte here in China. He goes

back to Manila sometime tomorrow afternoon -- Hannah.

[11:40:09] JONES: Disturbing rhetoric nonetheless. Matt Rivers, we appreciate it. Live for us there in Beijing. Thank you.

Live from London, this is Connect the World. Coming up, from Russia to ISIS, the candidates covered a lot of ground during Wednesday's final U.S.

presidential debate. So, how would each of them manage foreign policy if they won the election. The vote now is just 19 days away.


JONES: You're watching CNN and this is Connect the World. I'm Hannah Vaughan Jones sitting in for Becky Anderson. Welcome back to you.

Some of the presidential debate's most explosive moments centered on foreign policy. Take a listen to this exchange over cyberattacks that the

U.S. has blamed on Russia.


TRUMP: She has no idea whether it's Russia, China, or anybody else. She has no idea.

CLINTON: I am not quoting myself. I am quoting...

TRUMP: Hillary, you have no idea.

CLINTON: ...17 -- do you doubt 17 military and civilian...

TRUMP: Our country has no idea.

CLINTON: He'd rather believe Vladimir Putin than the military and civilian intelligence professionals who are sworn to protect us. I find that just

absolutely frightening.

TRUMP: She doesn't like Putin, because Putin has outsmarted her at every step of the way. Excuse me. Putin has outsmarted her in Syria. He's

outsmarted her every step of the way.

CHRIS WALLACE, FOX NEWS: Mr. Trump, I'm not a potted plant here.


JONES: Well, Fawaz Gerges joins me now to talk about how the candidates debated foreign

policy in that last face-off before the election. He is the chair of contemporary Middle East studies at the London School of Economics, and

also the author of ISIS: a History. Thanks very much for coming in.

Let's talk about Russia to start off with, then. In the event of a Clinton administration or indeed of a Trump administration, what would that mean

for U.S.-Russia relations? Who's the puppet and who's pulling the string?

FAWAZ GERGES, LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS: Well, we know Hillary Clinton has a history. We know where she stands. If you ask me how would you

define a Hillary Clinton administration, I would say it's more continuity with Barack Obama than discontinuity and change. That is reliance on

multi-lateral diplomacy, avoidance of any direct military intervention, and also putting together local coalitions to confront America's security


She would pursue the same policies in Iraq and Syria using local forces and using American

special forces and intelligence and air power.

Here are the differences between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton will be more muscular. She would basically -- she would not shy

away from the threat of use force against Russia. She would deter Russia. She has made it very clear. And as you

know, Hannah, Hillary Clinton is well-known for her interventionist impulse, that is she is much more muscular than Barack Obama. And the word

she used in the debate that is safe zones in Syria, it's a code word that Hillary Clinton would be willing to challenge Russian power in Syria by

threatening to prevent Russian and Syrian -- the air force from really flying in certain areas in Syria.

[11:45:17] JONES: And let's talk about Syria, then, and Donald Trump in particular and

his potential relationship with Vladimir Putin and Russia. There is a deadlock around Aleppo at the moment and any diplomacy around how to stop

the fighting there. Is there a potential for Donald Trump under his administration at least to break that deadlock, for there

to be a different approach to how the world community comes together and tries to tackle...

GERGES: I have listen to everything Donald Trump has said about foreign policy. I don't think really -- I mean really hard, and I'm not trying to

be unfair to him, he does not have a foreign policy vision.

JONES: Is it just he's unknown entity?

GERGES: He doesn't know foreign policy. He's a businessman. In fact, he looks at foreign policy through the lens of business. He really -- if you

ask me -- OK, we'll intervene if you pay for it. In fact, his approach to foreign policy he wants to really change the United States into a mercenary

power, even when it comes to NATO.

I mean, he talks about Aleppo, Aleppo has fallen. He's already given up on Aleppo. Going to Mosul, why would you go to Mosul? You're giving Mosul on

a silver platter to Iran.

What really Donald Trump is extremely incoherent. He's all over the map. But let me be fair to him now, he probably would establish close relations

with Putin. He thinks that relation with Russia would help the United States confront ISIS in particular. He praises dictators, whether it's

Saddam Hussein or Bashar al-Assad -- you know, they're smart.

Let me -- my final point in terms of Trump on foreign policy it's all negativity. I mean, he criticizes both traditions, the Republican Party

and the Democratic Party. He just does not offer any constructive ideas. We don't know where he stands.

Let's refer back to Mosul again, because it came up in last night's debate a lot for both candidates. Hillary Clinton, you said that she's more

interventionist than perhaps Barack Obama is, or prehaps than Donald Trump is. But she has said no American boots on the ground in Mosul. They

wouldn't be filling any power vacuum that would be left after this current offensive.

Under her potential administration, how do you see that the layout of the whole of the Middle East at the moment and then the crisis in taking on

ISIS in particular?

GERGES: I mean, I think this is the critical question. Again, when it comes to Mosul, Hillary Clinton -- a Hillary Clinton administration would

not change dramatically from Barack Obama, relying on American special forces, you already now have -- as you know, we have more than 5,000 troops

in Iraq, relying on local forces, but increasing the pace of American indirect military intervention.

Hillary Clinton in the past debate, she used a very important statement, a code word. She says I have learned the lessons of Iraq. As you know, she

voted for intervention in Iraq. That means she will never send American troops to fight at the forefront, but she will use American forces to

support local coalition. The only difference between a Hillary Clinton administration and a Barack Obama administration, she's willing to use more

power. She's willing to use -- threaten the use of power. And my take on Russia, she'll be more willing to challenge Putin in eastern Europe and

Syria and other places as well.

JONES: One other thing that I wanted to ask you about in particular with foreign policy: nuclear proliferation across the world. Barack Obama has

been clear that he wants to reduce nuclear stockpiles around the world. Hillary Clinton would presumably stick along

the same kind of lines of the Obama administration. But Donald Trump has been flip-flopping over whether he would allow or want countries to have a

nuclear stockpile, countries that don't currently have a nuclear stockpile. What would this mean in terms of the balance of power geopolitically?

GERGES: In the past -- you might, in the past 30 or 40 years, American strategy is based on a

foundation that nuclear proliferation is bad, it's dangerous, to limit nuclear proliferation. Here you have Donald Trump saying, so what if Japan

gets nuclear weapon, it's fine, or South Korea.

He is really opening the case --I mean this is a dangerous situation, even on nuclear weapons. I mean, we have reports in which he says, so what if

we use nuclear weapons. I mean, it tells you a great deal about his ignorance about foreign policy. And also he really does not have any

knowledge about the gravity of nuclear weapons, that this is the ultimate weapon. You don't risk it, you don't experiment. And this, again, the

idea of incoherence.

Final point on his foreign policy: one word, isolationism. He really is I mean presents in particular old version of isolationism in American foreign


JONES: And some would argue we haven't learned from history then as far as that policy is concerned. Fawaz, thanks very much for coming in and

joining us on Connect the World.

Live from London, this is Connect the World. Still to come, though, this hour, ratings bonanza. How the final U.S. presidential debate fared on TV.

Plus, it's the face that launched a thousand tweets. We'll show you how the reaction to this photograph helped transform one man's life.



[11:51:57] TRUMP: We're going to secure the border and once the border is secured at a later date, we'll make a determination as to the rest. But we

have some bad hombres here and we're going to get them out.


JONES: Well, that phrase has become an overnight sensational social media for better or worse. Twitter lit up with the hashtag #badhombres. Some

people joked about his use of the word, while others considered it offensive to Latinos.

Let's talk more about the debate with Brian Stelter. And Brian it started off relatively calm, didn't it, but then it got very heated, let's say,

after Putin was brought into it all as well. But from a television perspective, who won?

BRIAN STELTER, CNN MEDIA CORRESPONDENT: The CNN overnight poll found that Clinton prevailed, according to debate watchers, about 53 percent to 39

percent for Trump. That, essentially, is where the electorate is overall. Clinton ahead of Trump in national polls, but Trump holding on to about 40

percent of the U.S. voting population.

Looking at the overnight ratings, looks like this debate was higher rated than the town hall last week, but lower rated than the first debate. So,

it's sort of in between the two of them. And if you believe that Clinton prevailed, as most commentators do, and as the polls do, then that means it

was great news for Clinton, because the more people watching, the better for her campaign.

JONES: A good night as well for the moderator.

STELTER: Yes, Chris Wallace from Fox pretty much unanimously praised by media critics and by the Clinton and Trump campaigns. Rave reviews for

Wallace for challenging both sides and for fact checking Trump and Clinton on a number of occasions.

Trump, in particular, came under scrutiny. You know, there's a reporter for the Toronto Star that's been doing fact checking of Trump every day.

He found 37 false claims by Trump during the debate versus four false claims by Clinton during the debate, a really wide disparity between the

two candidates. By the way, Trump also interrupted Clinton 37 times. Clinton held back and was careful not to interrupt as often. Her staff,

her focus groups, her internal work, has found that if she were to interrupt Trump it would look bad, people would be alienated, people would

criticize her for it. So she tried to if you tried to let trump speak whereas Trump frequently stepped all over her. And I know a lot of viewers

are turned off by that kind of behavior.

JONES: And lots of people now saying this kind of scorched earth policy of Donald Trump, which is 19 days to go, suggest that he's looking past

November 8 now and possibly even onto various other media projects of his own. Trump TV?

STELTER: Certainly Clinton campaign aides were talking up this possibility in the spin room

last night suggesting that that's what Trump is trying to do, trying to fire up his base, and then he can monetize that audience after the


But this is not just a theory among Democrats. There are a number of reports from news outlets like Vanity Fair, that Trump aides have talked

about this idea. The Financial Times trump's son-in-law had an informal conversation with an investment banker about possibly launching a network.

Now, nothing is happening right now, nothing is imminent. I talked with the Trump campaign CEO Steve Bannon about this earlier in the week. He

said Trump believes he really, truly is going to win. So, the focus right now is entirely on election day.

But when I asked Bannon what about these rumors, about this speculation about Trump TV? He didn't deny it at all, in fact his only answer was, Mr.

Trump is an entrepreneur.

I don't know, I think that leaves the door wide open for a media enterprise after election day.

JONES: Does sound like it. Words like nasty women, horrifying, disturbing. I mean, this sort of rhetoric is this kind of unprecedented as

far as U.S. presidential debates are concerned?

STELTER: It is. And it's easy to become numb to all this because we've been hearing it for months now. You know, at the first debate, at the

second debate, now the third debate, and frankly, every day on the campaign trail and on Twitter.

But the coarsening of this campaign, the coarsening of politics is new and is different and is just down right depressing in the United States. To

see Donald Trump toward the end of the debate calling Clinton a nasty woman. It lit up Twitter, it lit up Facebook.

Right now, it's one of the most searched words of the day on the Miriam Webster dictionary website. But all kidding aside, we are talking about a

real lowering of the bar in terms of the rhetoric around presidential campaigns. And I think a lot of folks watching the debate last night are

hoping that bar can be raised back up in 2020.

JONES: Yeah, we all hope for that, of course. Brian Stelter live for us in Washington. Appreciate your analysis of the media angles at least on

this last debate. Thank you.

STELTER: Thanks.

JONES: Now it's often said that you won't find answers at the bottom of a bottle, but you may just at the bottom of a cup. Many who wonder what's

brewing in their future might try to read their tea leaves, but that wouldn't have helped this tea seller in Pakistan guess what was in store

for him.

This Instagram photo captured Arshan Khan (ph) in the capital of Pakistan, that's Islamabad, and he has now quickly become an online sensation, even

reportedly scoring himself a modeling gig. Many focused, you can see them there, on the 18-year-old's piercing blue eyes.

And a lot of people over in Pakistan's arch rival, that's India, also agreed.

One Twitter user remarking the countries are divided on terrorism, they're divided on cricket, but they're brought target by Khan.

Another Twitter user says his looks could perhaps even avert a war.

But some just couldn't let the rivalry go saying that Pakistan's tea man easily betters India's coffee guy.

And that was your parting shots for today's program.

I'm Hannah Vaughn Jones. Thank you so much for your company. That was Connect the World. See you soon.