Return to Transcripts main page

Wolf

Russia Flies Near U.S. Coast 4 Times In 4 Days; Russia Denies Troops Movements Tied To North Korea; China Says Its Force Not On "High Alert"; North Korea Coal Ships Dock In China; Air China Suspends Flights To North Korea; Trump Claimed China Turned Back Coal Ships; North Korea Blames Trump For Increasing Tensions; House Invited Comey, Clapper To Testify In Russia Probe; President Trump's Military Independence Problem. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired April 21, 2017 - 13:00   ET

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

[13:00:00] WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: -- the so-called "Bear bombers" marks the fourth time this week that Russian military planes have come close to the Alaskan coast. The first couple of times the United States scrambled jets to keep an eye on those Russian flights. Let's bring in our Pentagon Correspondent Ryan Browne. He's joining us. Our Senior International Correspondent Fred Pleitgen, he's joining us live from Moscow, and our International Correspondent David McKenzie is joining us from Beijing.

Ryan, what are you hearing, first of all from the Pentagon on these Russian incursions now, four times over four days?

RYAN BROWNE, CNN PENTAGON REPORTER: Well, that's right, Wolf. This is the fourth time and we hadn't seen this kind of activity for quite some time before this. In fact, 2015 was the last time these Russian bombers flew what -- into what's called the "Air Defense Identification Zone". It's kind of -- it's in international air space, but it's kind of this area that the U.S. monitors foreign aircraft as they approach and tries to track them, particularly military aircraft.

Now, in this most recent case, which occurred yesterday, Russian Bear bombers were intercepted by U.S. F-22 jets and some Canadians CF-18s. This was about 700 miles southwest of Anchorage, Alaska. So, quite a far out but again, one U.S. Defense official saying four times in four days, this couldn't be anything but strategic messaging from Moscow. Now, of course, there are other factors at play as well. One is that Russia is constantly trying to keep their pilots up to snuff, training them, making sure that they can fly these long-range missions. But again, I think that four times in four days is particularly noteworthy in this case.

BLITZER: Fred, you're there in Moscow. What are the Russian -- what's the Russian government saying about these Bear bombers moving this close, buzzing in effect the Alaskan coastline?

FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, yes, there's really two sides to that, Wolf. The Kremlin for its part is not saying anything about all of this. They keep referring us to the Russian Defence Ministry. Now, the Russian Defence Ministry has acknowledged that some flights have been taking place over the past couple of days, and he's also acknowledged that some of their planes have been intercepted by U.S. jet fighters. They say that all the flights that are taking place are taking place in international air space, and that all of them happen in accordance with international law.

But, of course, it is something what we are seeing an uptick in such flights, and regarding the question of whether or not there's some sort of strategic messaging involved in all of these, the Russian government says they simply won't comment on that. One of the interesting things about all of this, Wolf, however, is that as these flights are taking place, these increased flights closed to U.S. air space, the Russians are also conducting maneuvers on their side of the pacific, specifically down in the Vladivostok regions with those very same aircraft, the IO-32 spy planes and also the Tu-95 nuclear-capable bombers. Wolf?

BLITZER: Yes. And it also comes amid these reports, Fred, that the Russians are moving some troops closer and closer to the North Korean border. What's going on on that front?

PLEITGEN: Yes, you know, a big question mark there. We've been seeing media reports that the Russians possibly are moving armor, another sort of equipment, including helicopters into the area around the border with North Korea. And there have been some rumors that perhaps this is due to the fact that the Russians might fear that there could be an armed confrontation between the U.S. and North Korea, and that could lead to some sort of wave of North Korean refugees trying to get across the border. It's not a very large border. It's only about 11 kilometers or 7 miles long. But, of course, it's a very important one.

The Russians have some very important assets down there including the port of Vladivostok, which militarily, and as far as trade is concern, is very, very important to them. We pose that question to the Kremlin today actually and the spokesman for the Kremlin said that first of all, such matters are not ones that they want to discuss in public. But he also said -- and we thought that this was quite telling -- that he believed that every country, including Russia, has the right to react if there is a change in the international security environment. So certainly, the Russians do appear to be concerned about what's going on in North Korea right now. Wolf?

BLITZER: Yes, they are not the only ones concerned. The Chinese clearly concerned as well. David McKenzie, you are there in Beijing. Well, China is now denying reports that they put their military forces on high alert because of what's going on in North Korea. But there's another issue, coal ships. President Trump said China was beginning to turn those North Korean ships away, but are they still docking in China as we speak?

DAVID MCKENZIE, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, let's start with that high alert, Wolf. Certainly, the Ministry of Defense putting out a very rare statement here in China, slamming those reports saying it's simply not true that they're in any kind of high alert, and saying that the status of Chinese troops and military assets on the border of North Korea are in fact as per normal. So, they really are pushing back on those reports from U.S. officials that we heard yesterday and today.

[13:04:46] On the coal issue, this is really fascinating, because President Trump in recent days, Wolf, has praised China for putting the screws down on Pyongyang trying to force them to end that nuclear program through trade. And one key issue has been coal imports from North Korea into China. Well, we've looked at the manifest as it were of coal shipments coming in to Northeast China port. At least six vessels have docked in recent days in China that were carrying coal from North Korea. Unclear if those vessels then put that coal on to shore. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs saying that nothing has changed, that the embargo still stands and that they were giving potentially humanitarian assistance to the crew. Wolf?

BLITZER: There's another issue that's intriguing, David. As you know, China's airline, Air China, has now suspended all flights into North Korea. They used to have flights from Beijing and Shanghai to Pyongyang. All of a sudden, Air China suspends all flights. Tell us what the official explanation is and what they're saying behind the scenes.

MCKENZIE: Well, certainly the official explanation, Wolf, is that this is just because there wasn't enough demand, they say, of people flying into Pyongyang from China on the official Chinese carrier. But certainly, a lot of people questioning whether this is just yet another move, a symbolic and a move that could really hurt the diplomats and the wealthy from North Korea coming come in and out of China. Of course, China and North Korea have normal diplomatic relations. By cutting off that flights -- those flights from China into Pyongyang so they have to rely on their own national carrier from North Korea, it certainly sends a signal whether it's to do with ticket sales or we don't know for sure.

BLITZER: Yes, interesting point now. Only Air Koryo, the official North Korean airliner is flying out of Pyongyang. David McKenzie, Fred Pleitgen, Ryan Browne, guys, thanks very much.

Joining us now from Salt Lake City in Utah, Republican Congressman Chris Stewart, he's a key member of the House Intelligence Committee. He's also a retired Air Force pilot. Congressman, thanks for joining us.

CHRIS STEWART, HOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE MEMBER AND A RETIRED AIR FORCE PILOT: Good afternoon, Wolf.

BLITZER: First of all, how concerned are you about these repeated Russian incursions near the coast of Alaska, four times over four days? They hadn't done this in several years. All of a sudden they're doing it. What does it say?

STEWART: Yes, I'm not terribly concerned about it honestly. I mean, when I was flying the B-1, we used to do these types of things. There's no question that Russia is trying to send a message. I don't want to say they're being provocative, but they want to remind us "Hey, we're here. We have these capabilities. We're aware of what's happening in this part of the world. We're making a statement that we want to be involved with that, we'll be a participant of that." But I don't look at it with really much sense of alarm.

BLITZER: All right. So, let's move on to China. I know you're just back from a visit there. You met with leaders in China. President Trump has praised China in recent days for turning away those North Korean coal ships. What we now know, as we just heard from David McKenzie, there are at least six North Korean coal ships that have docked in China. What's your understanding? Is China doing what President Trump wants us to do, in other words, squeeze the North Korean leader Kim Jong-un?

STEWART: Yes, there's no question that China is more engaged than they'd been in the past. And you know, if you'd asked me a year ago, Wolf, do I think that we could stop North Korea from putting a nuclear weapon on top of an ICBM and aiming that towards the United States? A year ago, I just didn't think we are going to be able to stop them. I'm actually much more encouraged now.

BLITZER: Why?

STEWART: We've spent the last weekend in the -- well, having spent some time there, having talked with the premier and other Chinese leaders, and not just China, by the way, but Japan and South Korea. I think a couple of things have happened. Number one is China in the past has had two choices essentially. They could choose stability on the peninsula or they could allow North Korea to continue to develop their nuclear program. In the past, they've always chosen stability.

And I think now that they're beginning to realize that United States is serious when we say we will not allow Kim Jong-un to take nuclear weapons, dozens of them perhaps, put them on ICBMs that are capable of reaching almost every major U.S. city. We just simply won't allow that to happen, and China believes that now. And I think so they're engaging in ways they just haven't in the past. They're engaging in a more aggressive stance towards their ally and we need China to engage on this. We simply can't do this by ourselves.

BLITZER: In the past, you say, earlier administrations, presumably the Obama administration, you believe, maybe the Bush administration, the Bill Clinton administration, their efforts have failed in dealing with North Korea. But you also support negotiating with North Korea. What are you -- what kind of negotiations, what kind of dialogue would you like to see develop between the United States and Kim Jong-un's regime?

[13:09:51] STEWART: Well -- and I agree with what you said. Absolutely, negotiations are the key to this. The last thing anyone wants to see is for this to escalate into any type of war, and obviously, particularly, a nuclear exchange. But South Korea is in a very precarious situation. Their Seoul, as you know, is very close to the DMZ. We have to do this through negotiations and through diplomacy if possible. Now, that is far more effective if the North Koreans actually believed that we will prohibit them in a military manner from proceeding on this. That makes diplomacy much more positive I think. China, again, is one of the key partners there. They have diplomatic relationships with them. Interesting to me, though, Wolf, many of us presume that China has much more influence on North Korea than they really do. They did have a lot of influence with Kim Jong-un's father and his grandfather. But frankly, they're insulted and offended by the way he has treated his Chinese partners over the last couple years. And that makes them, I think, wanting to be more engaged than they have been in the past.

BLITZER: You also saw the report that there are Russian troops moving closer to the North Korean border. The Russians have a border with North Korea. China has much larger of border. What do you make of what Russia is doing?

STEWART: Well, it's kind of like the Russian Bear bombers, which by the way, I've got to say, can we all agree is the ugliest aircraft ever built. I laugh when I see those pictures coming towards America.

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: Do you speak as a U.S. Air Force -- do you speak as an Air Force bomber.

STEWART: Yes. You know, airplanes are built to be sexy, right. That's got to be important, but, you know, coming to your point, you know, they do have a small border, but I think once again, I don't think they're terribly worried about North Korean splitting the Russian border. If there were refugees, they're going to go to China. The last place they're going to go is into Russia. I mean, ethnically and in many other ways, they wouldn't feel welcome there. But once again, I think Russia is just sending a message. They're just saying we're here. We share this border. This is important to us. We're going to -- we're going to enforce our border and protect our sovereignty. And I think it's really nothing more than that, just a reminder of their interests there.

BLITZER: You're a member of the House Intelligence Committee which has had its problems lately in these various Russia-related investigations into interfering in the U.S. presidential election. We are now told the FBI Director James Comey, the National Security Agency Director Admiral Mike Rogers, among others they've been invited to testify this time behind closed doors before your committee, part of this Russian -- Russia investigation. We've also been told now the former CIA Director John Brennan, the former Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, they are ready to testify once again in open session. Their earlier meeting was canceled. So, give us an update on how your intelligence committee investigation is moving. Have you guys gotten your act together now that the Chairman Devin Nunes has recused himself as the leader in effect of this investigation?

STEWART: Yes, you know, one of the things that many of us on the committee being kind of discouraged and a little bit concerned about is this idea that in the past, the intelligence committee has been very bipartisan. We do our work, as I've discussed with you, behind closed doors, not in front of cameras, and I think we do a better work when that's the case. Over the last month or so, many of us have been discouraged that it has become so public and frankly so partisan.

That's why I think this two-week break has been helpful. It gives us the chance to take a breath for us to come home to our districts and you know listen to our folks and think about something else honestly. And now to go back, and hope that we can take a more bipartisan approach. This is a serious work that we're doing. And we need to report to the American people, but I think we're better doing that if we don't have a daily press conference. If we're not seeking out television and trying to make a statement every day, let us do our work and let us come to the conclusion.

I'm glad that we're going to bring back the FBI director and others as well. I mean, remember, more than 100 times we asked the FBI director and Mr. Rogers in the open session and they had to say -- again, almost 100 times we can't answer those questions. So, let's bring them back. Let's get that information. We look forward to having the former CIA director and see what he knows and -- but continue, I hope in a little bit more of a bipartisan fashion than we've seen over the last month or so.

BLITZER: Yes, Admiral Rogers and Director Comey will testify behind closed doors. The former intelligence officials, they'll testify in open session. We're looking forward to hearing from them. Congressman Chris Stewart, thanks as usual for joining us.

STEWART: Good to be with you, sir. Thank you.

BLITZER: Up next, President Trump has a military problem. We're going to explain that. Also ahead, the latest on the effort to repeal and replace Obamacare. President Trump says he wants a vote next week, before the end of his first 100 days in office. Several republicans now say they're close, but how close? Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:18:23] BLITZER: The White House is celebrating a diplomatic coup involving an American-Egyptian aid worker held prisoner in Egypt. The Trump administration played a major role in the release of Aya Hijazi. White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer says the president was directly engaged behind the scenes. Hijazi and her husband were held for three years, accused of child abuse and human trafficking. On Sunday a Chiro court acquitted them. And just a little while ago, she met with the president in the Oval Office at the White House. He welcomed her back to the United States.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We are very happy to have Aya back home, and it's a great honor to have her in the Oval Office with her brother. And, thank you very much.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Hijazi's release was secured through many meetings, including one involving the defense secretary, James Mattis, and the Egyptian president, el Sisi. Glad she's back here in the United States. From miscommunication about the location of the USS Carl Vinson

aircraft carrier strike group, to the use of the so-called mother of all bombs in Afghanistan, some allies are wondering who's in command of the U.S. military and what kind of message the United States is trying to send.

Joining us now, our Pentagon correspondent, Barbara Starr, CNN military and diplomatic analyst, retired Rear Admiral John Kirby, he's a state - former State Department spokesman and Pentagon press secretary during the Obama administration. Also with us, our chief political analyst Gloria Borger.

Barbara, I want you to listen to what the defense secretary, General Mattis, said during a visit today to Israel.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAMES MATTIS, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: You are in a conflict situation. You have got to leave initiative in the hands - delegate initiative to those that you consider competent to do so, to carry out the authorities that you're giving them. In this case, in Afghanistan, they have been engaged in that fight up in that corner against ISIS elements up there for some time. I was kept informed sometimes on a daily basis of how the fight was going, of what the options were.

QUESTION: And you were told beforehand about the MOAB?

MATTIS: I'm not going to get into the specifics, Elaine (ph), because that would - I do not want to articulate clearly what the delegation is. Just rest assured it's to the lowest competent level and they are trained and they have my commander's intent.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[13:20:53] BLITZER: All right, so, Barbara, while the defense secretary said you have to delegate responsibility, wouldn't a bombing of that magnitude be on his radar? This is the first time ever, even though this 20,000 pound bomb was ready to go back in 2003, this is the first time it's ever been used in combat.

BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, you know, Wolf, as a routine basis, commanders out and about around the world have a lot of authority, a lot of discretion to do what they deem is necessary. The bomb, the MOAB, was already in Afghanistan. General Nicholson is the commander there. He had complete authority to use every tool at his disposal. He didn't necessarily have to inform everybody of time, date and place in which he was going to use it.

I think now you see a little more sensitivity to this. You see commanders a little more aware of what they are doing, may have second, third order effects on the world stage, because the day after the strike, General Nicholson came out and made the point that it was only about Afghanistan. Outside events, he said, didn't influence his decision. But a lot of administration people actually picked up the idea, ran that it, that the strike was also sending a message to North Korea about U.S. military power when all the indications are General Nicholson, back in Afghanistan, was doing this on his own.

BLITZER: John, what is the normal protocol for the first ever use of this enormous bomb?

JOHN KIRBY, CNN MILITARY AND DOMESTIC ANALYST: Well, there is no set protocol for that - use of that weapon or any other that the commander has authority to execute. So he did have this weapon in theater. He did have all the authority he need. And I would add that it was exactly the right weapon for this particular target.

That said, in the past, I think it would have been appropriate to float that up the chain of command just to make sure that everybody was aware, because it hadn't been used in Afghanistan. And there are sometimes geostrategic or even geopolitical implications of the use of that kind of a weapon that you would have wanted to make sure Washington was aware of.

Now, I - I've been told that he did float that up to the Pentagon level and that they were aware. I don't know how soon or how long, but that he did that. So - and I think Barbara's right. I think you're starting to see a new administration now with a different sense of how to delegate authority to military commanders. And everybody's kind of getting used to that.

Our four star generals and admirals, they don't get to be four stars unless they are very good at their job and they're beginning to also realize that when they make these decisions, there are larger implication they've got to be aware of.

GLORIA BORGER, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: Do you think in the Obama administration, though, this would have been run up the chain of command a little higher because it seems to me from my reporting during the Obama years, that this was a president who, while he delegated, was clearly weary of delegating too much to his generals. I mean you talk about that a lot.

KIRBY: No, I do. I do. I think if this happened under President Obama, there probably would have been a more robust discussion about the wisdom of using this weapon and the implications, the consequences about it. I do think that probably would have happened.

BLITZER: Yes, because the commander - the U.S. commander in Afghanistan would report to the central commander -

KIRBY: Right.

BLITZER: The U.S. - the head of the U.S. military central command. The central commander would at least inform the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, who would then inform the defense secretary, the national security adviser at the White House and the president of the United States.

BORGER: Right. Right.

KIRBY: Well, again -

BLITZER: But that didn't necessarily happen this time.

KIRBY: I think some informing up the chain of command happened. I don't know how far it went, if it went all the way to the White House or not. But you can't - you also have to forgive, I think, the Pentagon somewhat for the fact that they - that they have these authorities and want to use them, especially when the president - the commander in chief says, I'm going to delegate authority.

BLITZER: Yes.

KIRBY: He's made it clear that he's going to delegate down.

BLITZER: He's - this president certainly is giving more authority to the military commanders than President Obama ever gave.

BORGER: But -

KIRBY: So -

BLITZER: Let me go back to Barbara because there's another issue involving communications, Barbara, I want to get to.

South Korea now expressing frustration about the president's so called armada comments involving the USS Carl Vinson, the aircraft carrier that was supposedly moving towards the Korean Peninsula, but was actually moving towards Australia, in the opposite direction. Some newspapers there are calling, saying it was a bluff. Others are labeling it a lie. How much tension does all of this cause between the Pentagon and the White House when there is a miscommunication like this?

[13:25:11] STARR: Well, I mean right now I think there's been several days of a lot of angst about the whole thing because, again, what you have is what should have been a routine movement of military force perfectly within the authority of the Pacific Command to do it, suddenly blow up into a world crisis essentially for the Pentagon and for the White House because of this miscommunication. You have a president calling this an armada. That - that's a word that's very odd to use. I want you to ask John Kirby the last time the U.S. Navy thought of itself as an armada and I want to hear his answer.

KIRBY: 1588, Spanish.

STARR: Yes. Yes. I mean that just doesn't happen. So words are important, especially when you have some of these confusing signals. And I think it really is just underscoring a sense that if you want to avoid confusion, you tighten up the communication. If you want to have unpredictability, which is what the president has said, that can lead to a military crisis and I think not too far behind the scenes here at the Pentagon there are many very senior commanders who still want to make sure President Trump is very informed every day about what is going on with the U.S. military so he cannot say, to put it delicately, that he's been taken by surprise.

Wolf. BLITZER: That's why it's so important, Gloria, for the president to attend these daily intelligence briefings that he gets from his national security team.

BORGER: Right because - because his - and his credibility is at stake here.

BLITZER: Yes.

BORGER: And so is the credibility of the White House.

BLITZER: All right, guys, thanks very much, Barbara, Gloria and John.

Coming up, President Trump trying to resuscitate a health care repeal bill before his 100th day in office, but will he have the votes on Capitol Hill? What has changed to garner more support? We'll discuss that and more when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)