Return to Transcripts main page


Israel Claims Iran is Lying About Its Nuclear Program; Trump Slams Disgraceful leak of Mueller Questions; South Korea Says Kim Vows to Close Nuclear Test Site in May; White House Claims Iran "Has" Nuclear Weapons Program; A Look Inside St George's Chapel. Aired 11a-12n ET

Aired May 1, 2018 - 11:00   ET


[11:00:00] (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER: Tonight, I'm here to tell you one thing. Iran lied big time.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: And what we've learned has really shown that I've been 100 percent right.

EMMANUEL MACRON, FRENCH PRESIDENT: That's why France will not leave JCPOA because we signed it.

TRUMP: It was a terrible deal. Should have never ever been made.

HASSAN ROUHANI, IRANIAN PRESIDENT (voice-over): Well, if it is a very bad deal, then why did you sign it?

TRUMP: On or before the 12th we'll make a decision.


JONES: Hello, welcome to CONNECT THE WORLD. I'm Hannah Vaughn Jones live in London for you filling in for Becky Anderson today.

At any moment in the next 11 days, the American President could walk away from the Iran nuclear deal. Time to right ahead of that, speaking in

English, Israel Prime Minister delivering a dramatic theatrical presentation full of props, charts, schematics, photographs. All used to

accuse Iran of quote, brazenly lying about building nuclear weapons. Take a listen.


NETANYAHU: After signing the nuclear deal in 2015, Iran intensified its efforts to hide its secret nuclear files. In 2017, Iran moved its nuclear

weapons files to a highly secret location in Tehran.

From the outside this was an innocent looking compound. It looks like a dilapidated warehouse. But from the inside, it contained Iran's secret

atomic archives locked in massive files.


JONES: Right after that, the U.N. agency in charge of inspecting Iran and its weapons insisting the country is not working on nuclear weapons and

hasn't been for at least nine years. So, just hours ago, defending those claims, Mr. Netanyahu coming on CNN speaking to our Chris Cuomo who set

about challenging the Israeli Prime Minister.


CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR, NEW DAY: So first, let's talk about how this came about, and we'll talk about why you think it matters. This is described as

an unusually theatrical display for you. And you gave this speech in English. Why give this speech in English and do it in such a big way?

NETANYAHU: Well, because I wanted the world to hear it. All of it. There are only a few million Hebrew speakers and a few billion English speakers.

So, I think that's why I did it. Look, I would have done it in other places as well. You know that I spoke before the American Congress and I

thought there was an important message. President Macron of France spoke to the American Congress the other day. This is a very important subject

which relates to a quest for peace and security in the middle east and the world. I thought it was important that the broadest audience possible

would hear the dramatic findings that we found about Iran's secret nuclear weapons program.

CUOMO: The suggestion is that you wanted to make sure that President Trump heard it and her to directly from you. The question is, well what did you

change with this information? As you pointed out you spoke to different allies. Putin says the deal stands as it is. The U.K. says they are not

naive on what is going on in Iran. Germany says there is landmark and robust monitoring. On the U.S. side, you had Secretary Mattis say that

this deal was done in 2015 anticipating that Iran would try to cheat still. Michael Hayden, whom you know, the former head of the CIA and NSA says he

didn't learn anything new. Even the U.S. statement from the White House changed from "has" to "had". That Israel has an active nuclear program to

"had". It seems to be that the message is we knew this already.

NETANYAHU: Well, I think no one had better intelligence on Iran than Israel. And when we got this trove of 100,000 documents. We learned so

many things that we didn't know. We are still learning them. You know, we needed to translate it from Farsi. All these documents, all these

simulations, all this data, all this testing, everything, all these sites. We've learned an enormous amount about Iran's secret nuclear program.

Now the deal that everybody's talking about was premised on the fact that Iran had no such material. But Iran bothered and took enormous pains after

the nuclear deal, and before, especially after to hide this information. It's like an arsenal of knowledge.

[11:05:00] It's not just in the minds of people whom they have. It's the actual calculation that they've done, the blueprints, the measurements.

They kept it hidden because they don't want the world to know what I showed yesterday. That they have this capability, a pretty advanced capability,

to manufacture nuclear weapons. Because I think if this was known in 2015, the nuclear deal as was done would not be done. And in fact, the key

condition for its implementation was that Iran come clean and it gave them a clean bill of health that they have no secret nuclear weapons. So,

that's not true.

CUOMO: Mr. Prime Minister, how do you reconcile --

NETANYAHU: They kept it. They kept it and they're ready to use it.

CUOMO: So, Mr. Prime Minister, how do you reconcile that notion with what just came out from the International Atomic Energy Agency, the IAEA, -- of

course you know, but for the audience -- that's the monitoring agency in place to secure the different precepts of the 2015 deal. They say they

have no prove that Iran has done anything new. They date it as 2009. That yes, you are right, this is what Iran was up to. This maybe even what it

wants to be up to, but that there is no new proof.

NETANYAHU: Well, first of all, there is an enormous amount of new information that we did not know that shows how advanced they were in their

bombmaking work. So, that's the first thing. Second, if people knew this, then how could they close the file and say they never about anything like

this? This was the condition for entering the deal. Third, I think it's crucial to understand that the nuclear deal right now that we're discussing

is premised on the assumption that Iran will somehow become a peaceful country. It's not. It's become an empire that is devouring one country

after the another. And that they are doing that before they had nuclear weapons.

This deal will give them unlimited enrichment of uranium -- unlimited in a few years. President Trump said yesterday, seven years unlimited

enrichment over uranium. Second, it doesn't address their ballistic missiles in which they could carry the bombs. And third, as I have shown,

they have the wherewithal the stored-up preserve knowledge to make a bomb very quickly if they wanted to do it. We could -- if you put all these

three things together, enriched uranium, bomb, missiles. Together that's a prescription for catastrophe.

CUOMO: Right, but it works both ways, right?

NETANYAHU: And I think it was important for me to put that forward.

CUOMO: But it works both ways, right, Mr. Prime Minister, because --

NETANYAHU: Well, if you have a bad deal --

CUOMO: Well, the secretary of defense right now, Mattis, said we put this deal together assuming they would try to cheat. So, it wasn't done

assuming that they would change as a state actor, Iran. Nobody went into it with their eyes closed to that, you know, that reality. But it's better

than nothing, right? If there were no deal in place right now, you would have no idea what was going on --

NETANYAHU: No, I disagree -- I disagree with that.

CUOMO: -- and how would that make Israel safer? If by all accounts Iran has slowed or stopped what it was doing prior to the deal --

NETANYAHU: I disagree with that.

CUOMO: How would you be safer without a deal?

NETANYAHU: There are many premises that are incorrect in your -- in your statement.

CUOMO: Please.

NETANYAHU: The first is, we'd be better off -- we're better off because we have this deal. No, you're not, because this deal -- the fact that you

have a dangerous deal, the fact that Iran is keeping or not violating a dangerous deal doesn't make it less dangerous. It's completely flawed.

It's based on lies. It's based on the fact that they have the nuclear weapon program and knowledge that they stored up. They didn't come clean

with it. And it's also based on the fact that Iran will somehow be a docile neighbor. That's not what's happening. The opposite has happened.

I said from the start, look, if you want peace, if you want security, you should have opposed that deal as structured. I said that. I said that

Iran is not going to be more pacific, more moderate once you sign the deal. And it's exactly what is happening. Iran has done the very opposite. It's

taken in the money, the billions, and it's using it to conquer Yemen, to fire rockets on Saudi Arabia, to colonize Syria militarily, to arm

Hezbollah with the most dangerous missiles on earth, to call for Israel's inhalation, to spread its totalitarian wins throughout the Middle East, and

to oppress its people inside Iran to boot.

So, the whole premise that this deal somehow guarantees a safer, more moderate Iran is wrong. This deal paves Iran's path to a nuclear arsenal.

If you got rid of it, the first thing that would happen is you would crash Iran's money machine in which its pursuing its dreams of a conquest and

empire. They're funding it with billions -- tens of billions of dollars their aggression throughout the region. And this deal facilitates it. If

you take away the deal, they're going to be in a huge economic problem.

Second thing, I think you have to insist that you actually dismantle the components that allow Iran to produce an arsenal of nuclear weapons. If

you don't and you do nothing, then I predict that what you do is head right into a wall.

[11:10:00] You would head into a terrible conflict and perhaps a terrible war in which Iran would be armed with nuclear weapons. That's bad. If you

want peace, oppose this deal.

CUOMO: Well, it sounds like you're suggesting that that's the only course anyway. The way you outline the threat and the intentions of Iran, it

seems as though you are indicating that you are on the precipice of war with this nation because that's the only way that you'd be able to

guarantee that you smash all of their capabilities and stop all of their evil outreach in the surrounding region, as you describe. Is that what you

mean? Are you prepared to go to war against Iran?

NETANYAHU: Well, nobody's seeking that kind of development. Iran is the one that's changing the rules in the region. Iran is the one that is

practicing aggression against every country in the Middle East. Iran is firing rockets into the capitals of neighboring countries. And Iran is

preparing 150,000 rockets to be fired at Israel with the explicit goal of annihilating us.

Iran is also moving its army, that's its declared purpose, right next to the Golan Heights, right next to Israel. So, Iran is obviously on the

campaign of aggression.

You know, I've learned something from history and I think you have, too. You know, when you have an aggressive, tyrannical regime with a murderous

ideology, you know, stop it at the beginning. Don't let that tranny grow and expand. Don't let that aggression conquer more and more territories.

CUOMO: Right.

NETANYAHU: So, yes, you have to take a stand. We take a stand. I think that's the way to prevent war. If history has taught us anything is that

opposing such tyrannies and their aggression early on actually prevents catastrophe. And if you don't, you invite catastrophe.

CUOMO: So, obviously how you do that is going to be an open question and it has very lethal implications. That's something that we'll have to see

how it develops. The idea of disclosure, Iran won't tell the truth. We had to go in there, you know, is Israel's position, and steal this

information so we can know the truth. Disclosure as an issue should work every way. The United States should say what it has. You know where I'm

going with this. A yes/no question for you. Does Israel have nuclear capabilities and nuclear weapons? Yes or no?

NETANYAHU: We always said we won't be the first to introduce it. So, we haven't introduced it.

CUOMO: but that's not an answer to the question. Do you have them or do you not?

NETANYAHU: It is as good an answer you will get. But I'll tell you one thing, Chris, and I think it's important. You know, Iran signed the NPT.

Iran signed all sorts of commitments. Iran said that they don't have this nuclear weapons program. And Iran calls daily for the annihilation of my

country. We don't do that.

CUOMO: absolutely. We understand the existential threat from Iran and others. We understand that Iran is known for lying on this issue. That's

one of the big motivating factors for the deal in 2015 as it was explained to us. But what I'm saying is if disclosure matters so much, what message

does it send when you won't confirm something that is widely believed by the entire international community? How does that inspire the spirit of


NETANYAHU: I said that it is not the spirit of disclosure, it's the commitment. Specific written commitment by Iran as part of the deal to

disclose what it has. Iran took that specific commitment.

CUOMO: I understand. And you know what their take on it is. Is that you won't even confirm you have nuclear weapons when the world already believes

that you do. Why? Why keep that quiet?

NETANYAHU: Well, you can make all your assumptions. One thing is clear. Israel is not threatening annihilation of any country. And you know, it's

interesting. That the nuclear arms race that I predicted would unfold once this deal was signed. Because everybody knew that they were just kicking

the can forward for a few years. And as time passes, Iran would get a nuclear arsenal. So, now you hear other countries in the region saying we

want nuclear weapons too. Or rather, we want unlimited enrichment, nuclear enrichment of uranium the way Iran did. And if Iran has it why shouldn't

we have it?

So, in fact what this thing is doing -- nobody said that about Israel. You may think about Israel what you want for decades, nobody cared. But as

soon as they understood that this regime in Tehran -- this murderous terrorist regime that wants to conquer all the Middle East and is sending

is terrorist tentacles throughout the world -- the minute they understood that it has a clear path to nuclear arsenal, everybody now in the Middle

East is trying get their hands on nuclear weapons. Not a good idea. If you want peace the crucial thing is don't let Iran get a clear path to the

bomb. That's with that deal does. And I think if you want to assure the peace and security of the Middle East in the world you can't let that



JONES: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu there packing a lot of news in for us. And next, we'll be breaking down everything that we heard

in the interview with Chris Cuomo. We are going to be speaking to two of CNN's most experienced reporters from Jerusalem to London. We're

connecting your world's next.


JONES: Welcome back. Now before the break, CNN's in-depth interview with Israel's Prime Minister. Pressing him about claims of Israel uncovering a

secret trove of Iranian nuclear weapons documents. Well, to break all of that down for us, CNN's Oren Liebermann is in Jerusalem where the Israeli

Prime Minister was speaking earlier. Also, Nic Robertson here with me in the studio. Nic, of course, has been following nuclear negotiations with

Iran for some 10 years now. Let's get out to Oren first though where this interview with CNN's Chris Cuomo first went down. Oren, some of the

skeptics in the international community, let's say, are questioning the timing of Benjamin Netanyahu's presentation about this new trove of

documents. I'm wondering though what the domestic audience is making of Benjamin Netanyahu's theatrics and how his words have stood up to domestic


OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, there is also some skepticism here because of the fashion in which it was done. If you're going to make

a point that you want world leaders to take seriously, generally it's not with a carefully choreographed theatric dramatic presentation as it was

done last night. You go to them privately to try to plead your case and to try to make your arguments. So, this was very much intended to put on a


That being said, Prime Minister Netanyahu certainly has his fans here who will go with him. Who are absolutely convinced that this is the secret

nuclear archive that proves exactly what Netanyahu wants it to prove. That Iran was always and will continue to seek a nuclear weapon. As you point

out, just as abroad there are skeptics here who don't see anything new in what was revealed. And that will be Netanyahu's biggest challenge. Not so

much for the domestic audience. It's not a domestic audience, it's not Israelis that will decide what happens here or what happens with the deal.

But Netanyahu's mission now is to convince world leaders, the signatories to the deal, that he has new evidence that Iran was in violation of the

deal or at least spirit of the deal.

JONES: And he got defensive, didn't he, when Chris challenged him on Israel's own nuclear arsenal. I guess the question here is, are we dealing

with a matter of double standards when it comes to who has what nuclear wise?

[11:20:00] LIEBERMANN: I would argue it is probably one of the worst kept secrets in the Middle East that Israel has nuclear weapons. And yet, it

has never been acknowledged by any Israeli government. Some have come close and hinted at it, but no Israeli leader has ever come out and said

yes, Israel has nuclear weapons. So, the question remains if Israel expects Iran to reveal more about its nuclear intentions, its ambitions and

its programs, why won't Israel do the same? And Netanyahu made his answer very clear there. He said look, Israel is not calling for the destruction

of anyone else. And his wording on the question that Chris Cuomo asked there, was very careful what he said, Israel will not be the first to

introduce nuclear weapons. Which is almost a different way of saying Israel is not the first to use nuclear weapons.

But to say that latter statement is to imply that Israel already has nuclear weapons. It's a policy of ambiguity. Israel has followed it for

decades. And as Netanyahu just made it clear, Israel will continue to follow a policy of ambiguity with its nuclear program.

JONES: Oren, thanks very much. Let's speak to Nic Robertson who is with me in the studio. Nic, in this presentation by Bibi Netanyahu he's

effectively accused the other signatures of this Iran nuclear deal -- including the then President of the United States Barack Obama -- of being

naive when it comes to its contents. How is that going to be received by those other signatories when it comes to actually -- potentially actually

having to renegotiate a new deal?

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: Well, the language didn't seem to work for the British. Who said, we've never been naive

about -- this is from the British government spokesman -- we've never been naive about Iran's nuclear intentions about weapons they might want to

build from them. The French have also sort of echoed this. Both British and French are saying, look, we knew this. We knew about this archive. We

knew what was in there. That it is not a revelation to us and this is the foundation of the reason that week we think that the JCPOA is the best way

to go forward.

We heard Emmanuel Macron in a clip at the beginning of the show saying we signed the JCPO. We're not backing out of it. And that's the language

that we're hearing from the French and the British at this time. Although Macron and the British and the Germans have also indicated that perhaps

there just needs to be some change in the language in the terms of that agreement.

President Putin, on the other hand, who's called Prime Minister Netanyahu last night, said it was important that everyone abides specifically by the

terms of -- everyone abides by the terms of the JCPOA. And this does seem to be a shot across President Trump's bows on this one. The idea that

people are naive about it, that's not washing in the capitals around the world for the countries that signed up to the JCPOA.

JONES: And Donald Trump is keeping us all guessing but hinting at the idea he may indeed pull out of the deal for weeks now. Saying he will make his

decision on May 12, I believe it is. And that decision will be final I guess. This must have been something of a gift to him in a way that his

longtime ally in Israel has come forward and said, yes, we've got all this evidence. It was over seen, and it was dismissed by others, but you were

right all along.

ROBERTSON: Well, and Prime Minister Netanyahu, it clearly references that, saying the time -- the clock is ticking down on when President Trump has to

make the decision. It is interesting that Prime Minister Netanyahu's theatrical primetime, you know, show here of all this evidence that he said

he had, came hours after U.S. Secretary of State -- the new Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, had just met with Netanyahu. On the way back, Pompeo

said that he had seen some of these documents and he could verify the voracity of what Netanyahu was saying. That they were in broad terms.

But when had been in Israel, most importantly, he had said that the United States stands behind Israel. It is concerned about Iran's growing

influence and destabilizing influence in the region and recognizes and supports Israel's right of self-defense. So, I think the language that we

heard there -- this is, you know, it might look like it was coordinated. We don't know that it was coordinated. But it absolutely gives that


JONES: You mentioned language and then we have to bring up this document. A White House statement which has been changed at the last minute. Chris

Cuomo also talked about it in his interview with Benjamin Netanyahu. It's a statement about Israel's nuclear capabilities. And it's effectively

saying that on the one hand they said Israel has a nuclear weapons program and then quickly changed it to "had". Past tense. Could we read anything

into that or was this just an error -- an administrative error?

ROBERTSON: As you know, I think a lot of people read whatever they want into it. It is easy to read into that. That this I what the White House

is thinking all along. This is the impression they want to create. The fact that they took the time to change it clearly indicates they don't want

to be accused of saying something that isn't true. What Prime Minister Netanyahu is saying is that actually Israel does have the wherewithal or

the capacity capability intent. And that's the important word here to do this because it is carefully kept this archive of material of how to build

such a weapon.

[11:25:00] The reality is -- and this is what the IAEA, the international atomic watch dog, the inspectors and body that oversees the JCPOA or the

terms of it at least -- is that, you know, they say that they don't believe that since 2009 Iran has had any plans to develop such a weapon or has been

in the process of developing such a weapon. You know, the White House seems to be correcting itself, so that it cannot be accused of

misrepresentation. The original slip, perhaps, that does belie thinking. But I think to over-think this point is maybe dangerous. There are a lot

of other points out there that are being made.

JONES: And you mentioned that the IAEA, we're going to be speaking later on in the program to a former chief weapons inspector as well to find out

their position exactly on these latest developments. What about Iran though? What does Iran make of all this?

ROBERTSON: You know, on this instance specifically that this is theater by Netanyahu. That is just playing. That they're saying that this is a very

dangerous moment. You know, we heard statements from the leadership in Iran yesterday talking about the need to cut the feet off America. That

you can never trust north America in this type of deal. The rhetoric in Iran has been ratcheting up as they feel under pressure and can see which

way this deal is going. And there is real concern that in the region that Iran could find itself or make the decision rather than to accept what

Trump says on May 12th and maybe stick with the deal. That many signatures of that deal, the Europeans and Russia seem to be ready to say with the

JCPOA. That they could turn their back on it and that of course, you know, could lead in a very dangerous direction in a fragile region. That's the


JONES: Nic, thanks very much. Indeed, also thanks to Oren Liebermann. Who's been live for us in Jerusalem.

All right, lots more ahead for you this hour, including lashing out at leaks. The U.S. President is outraged at the list of questions the special

counsel, Robert Mueller, wants to ask him it's the headlines. That's coming up next.


JONES: You are watching CNN. This is CONNECT THE WORLD. I'm Hannah Vaughn Jones in London. Welcome back.

U.S. President Donald Trump is slamming the publication of questions special counsel, Robert Mueller, wants to ask him if he sits down for and

interview. In a tweet, the President called the leak disgraceful. But the indications are that leak came from inside the President's circle. Mr.

Trump also falsely stated there are no questions on collusion. CNN's Abby Phillip reports.


ABBY PHILLIP, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER (voice-over): Special counsel Robert Mueller's team is interested in asking President Trump at least four

dozen questions as part of their Russia probe. According to notes transcribed by the President's lawyers and obtained by "The New York


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. President, would you still like to testify in special counsel Robert Mueller's search?

TRUMP: Thank you.

PHILLIP: A large portion of the questions appear to center on obstruction of justice. Including the President's high-profile firings of national

security adviser, Michael Flynn and FBI director, James Comey. The questions specifically cite a number of the President's own statements

including these remarks.

TRUMP: Regardless of recommendation, I was going to fire Comey knowing there was no good time to do it. And in fact, when I decided to just do

it, I said to myself, I said, you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story.

PHILLIP: The special counsel also seeking insights into the President's response to Attorney General Jeff Sessions' recusal from the Russia


TRUMP: The attorney general made a terrible mistake when he did this and when he recused himself or he should have certainly let us know that he was

going to recuse himself and we would have put a different attorney general in.

PHILLIP: "The New York Times" reports that another category of questions deals directly with Mueller's inquiry into potential coordination between

the Trump campaign and Russia. Including the now infamous June 2016 Trump Tower meeting with Russians promising dirt on Hillary Clinton.

TRU up MP: It must have been a very important -- must have been a very unimportant meeting because I never even heard of it.

PHILLIP: Mueller's team is seeking information about the President's involvement in crafting the misleading initial statement about the purpose

of the meeting.

SARAH HUCKABEE SANDERS, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: The President weighed in as any father would, based on the limited information that he had.

PHILLIP: The "Time" reports that investigators are also interested in learning about what the President knew about Russian hacking and

communication between longtime adviser, Roger Stone and WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange.

TRUMP: Russia if you're listening, I hope you are able to find the 30,000 e-mails that are missing.

PHILLIP: One question raising intrigue, what knowledge did you have of any outreach by your campaign, including Paul Manafort, to Russia about

potential assistance to the campaign.

No such outreach by the President's former campaign chairman has been reported. Manafort's former deputy, Rick Gates, is cooperating with

Mueller's probe. The special counsel is also pursuing information about President Trump's knowledge of his son-in-law Jared Kushner's attempt to

set up a back channel to Russia during the transition.

SEAN SPICER, FORMER WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: He was a conduit to leaders. And that's until we had a State Department or a functioning place

for people to go.

PHILLIP: The President's businesses also under scrutiny with Mueller seeking information about Mr. Trump's 2013 trip to Moscow and discussions

he had with personal attorney Michael Cohen about Russian real estate developments during the campaign. Cohen is now the subject of a separate

criminal investigation. The FBI seized records from his home, office and hotel room last month.


JONES: CNN's Abby Phillip reporting there for you. And there is a lot more online on this story. If you are struggling to keep up with all the

many strands on this, our award-winning digital project, "The Russia Investigation Tracker" will get you up to speed on the who, what and when

of it all.

On the Korean Peninsula, more small steps after last week's historic summit, of course, between the North and South.

[11:35:02] Seoul is dismantling a set of loud speakers along its border which has been blasting propaganda and music into North Korea for years

now. Both leaders agreed to stop their audio battle as part of the declaration signed on Friday. Meanwhile, South Korean President, Moon Jae-

in is asking the U.N., the United Nations, to endorse that landmark declaration. Well, for more on this, Alexandra Field joins us live from

the South Korean capital, Seoul. Alexandra let's talk about this UN approval to start with. If indeed it does need to get approval through the

Security Council. What's the timeframe for that happening? I guess I am asking, is it going to happen before we see Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un

potentially meeting and if it does gets to the Security Council, could anyone actually descent from it, disagree with it?

ALEXANDRA FIELD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: It is not a moment that has been made yet. Look, this conversation was had. The blue house put out there,

reports saying that they were moving forward with this request. That this conversation had been had with the Secretary-General, but the provision

here is that it does have to go through the Security Council. So, no commitment could be made. But there was also an additional request here

was that the UN would have some participation with watching the shutdown of the nuclear test facility that Kim Jong-un had made clear he would shut

down. That was supposed to happen -- or is supposed to happen sometime in May.

North Korea has said that it would be open to journalists from both South Korea and the U.S. So, it would be one means of verification, South Korea

obviously looking for another means of verification with some cooperation from the U.S. This the outreach to the UN certainly just another step that

South Korea is trying to take, trying to make as they work to create this atmosphere of reconciliation. An atmosphere that they hope will lead to a

positive outcome of that summit that all eyes are on at the end and of the month potentially.

We're told that this summit could now take place in 3 to 4 weeks. And that would be that big sit down between President Trump and Kim Jong-un.

However, we are not there yet. A lot of planning still in the works at this point. Hannah, not just that outreach to the UN, but coordination

still needs to be done between South Korea and the U.S. We know that the two leaders of South Korea and U.S. are also planning to sit down with each

other in advance of that summit to continue to talk about the preparations. A big question is still on the table, where exactly this summit would

happen -- Hannah.

JONES: Yes, there's a lot of diary events, aren't there? Building up in May at the Moment. Especially when it comes to Donald Trump. Of course,

we've just been talking early on in in the program about the Iran nuclear deal. He is expected to make a decision on that one way or the other by

then 12th of May. And then of course, well we have a royal wedding in the U.K. I don't know if that factors into international diplomacy at all. But

you know, the big question of course is, when might this meeting take place? Might he push it back to June now? And when I say him I mean

Donald Trump and where exactly. Have they gotten any closer to a location?

FIELD: Well, all up sides now seem to be talking about the DMZ and that does seem to make this timeline. It's been reported of a possibility of

perhaps three to four weeks. It seemed feasible. Because of course, you've essentially rehearsed this scenario just a few days ago involving

security, involving the press, involving all of the mechanics of what would be a highly orchestrated and carefully choreographed event.

We know that President Trump along with millions of others who's carefully watching this summit. He saw the North Korean and South Korean leaders

stepping over that line of demarcation. A senior U.S. official says he likes seeing that handshake. It's something that he hopes he might be able

to recreate at the DMZ. He wants the cameras there. He wants this moment in history captured in the way it was made for television. It seems he

would also want those cameras there to capture it if he were to stand up and walk away from the table. If negotiations were to go awry.

But the President is at least publicly coming out and saying that he is intrigued by the possibility of the DMZ. Certainly, it's something that

South Korea says would be a symbolic location for the summit. Logistically, of course, it makes sense for North Korea. But there are

skeptics issuing words of caution in D.C. at this very moment, Hannah, saying that it was simply appear too conciliatory of an approach from the

U.S. President to head to the DMZ to meet with the North Korean leader.

JONES: We wait and see, of course. Alexandra Field thank you very much indeed.

Now we want to take you to Paris now where May Day rallies have turned violent. Police say more than 1,000 demonstrators attacked a McDonald's

restaurant and other businesses. We've been seeing a lot of people on the street as well as police. So far, there are no reports of any injuries or

any arrests. Those are the latest pictures from Paris.

Live from London, you are watching CONNECT THE WORLD. Coming up, playing his poker face, President Trump still mum on the Iran nuclear deal as that

deadline approaches. We'll be going live to Washington next.


JONES: You are watching CNN. This is CONNECT THE WORLD. I'm Hannah Vaughn Jones. Welcome back.

More now on our top story. As decision day nears, of course, for the Trump administration and the Iran nuclear deal. As we heard the White House now

says its statement that Iran has a secret nuclear weapons program was a typo. It was changed online to read Iran had such a program. Had in the

past tense. So, are we getting though an idea of where Mr. Trump might be leaning on this deal? Our White House reporter, Stephen Collinson, joins

us now from Washington. So, Stephen do you think this was administrative typo or some kind of insight into where this administration is going on


STEPHEN COLLINSON, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: I think it could be both inadvertently. The National Security Council says that this was just a

clerical error in this statement. I think it should be noted that this White House has had a number of issues with typos in statements. It

doesn't seem that it's process of vetting and verification in terms of what the press office sometimes puts out in terms of dates or spellings. It

hasn't been that impressive. Certainly not compared to previous White Houses. So, it could be a clerical error.

Of course, a lot of people are reading more into this because it's pretty clear that the White House wants the fallout of the Netanyahu presentation

yesterday to cast doubts on the future of the Iran deal and potentially to give the President a reason for pulling out. There's that issue and also,

you know, this White House has often shaded the truth. It has attacked reporters. It has talked about alternative facts. It doesn't get a lot of

benefit of the doubt when it comes to an issue like this because of that.

JONES: Yes, talking about Donald Trump's language around the deal then so far and in particularly the new evidence so say by the Israelis. He said

since that it shows if nothing else he was right all along. Does that suggest to you that this is going straight toward the bin this deal?

COLLINSON: It is very difficult to look at the events of the past week or so following the visit of Emmanuel Macron, the French President and him

coming out and saying that he thinks Trump will pull out of it. Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, said in his first trip abroad over the weekend that

it looks like Trump is going to leave. This episode, what appears to be sort of a message coordination between the Israelis and the Trump


It's very difficult to see that this is not heading as you say toward the U.S. pulling out of the deal in the near future. The President has kind of

raised expectations. He is playing this game of televised nuclear poker not just with Iran, but with the situation with North Korea. Raising

expectations and saying well I've not decided what I'm going to do, but we'll see. But evidence suggestions that certainly the U.S. is going to

pull out of the deal which would be a very profound thing for international relations. But this is President Trump. You know, he is known to change

his mind in a minute and he could turn and do something we don't expect and be very unpredictable. But logic and evidence suggest that he's moving the

way pulling out of the deal.

[11:45:03] JONES: Stephen, thank you very much indeed. Now Iran's foreign minister says Donald Trump is quote, jumping on a rehash of old allegations

already dealt with by IAEA. Inspectors with the International Atomic Energy Agency have certified Iran's compliance with the nuclear deal

multiple times. And today an IAEA spokesman repeated a key finding from 2015. The agency determined there were no credible indications that Iran

was pursuing nuclear weapons after 2009. Well, we're joined now by Olli Heinonen. And a former deputy director general of the IAEA. He is a

senior adviser on science and nonproliferation at the foundation for a defense of democracy. Sir, welcome to the program. Thank you. Project

Ahmed. This project that the Israeli Prime Minister has now portrayed in his presentation to the whole world. Were you aware of it or was this all

new news to you?

OLLI HEINONEN, FORMER DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL IAEA: Certainly, IAEA was aware about it or in 2005, they started to raise some concerns regarding

this program and project Ahmed. And then our concerns were raised further during 2008 when we briefed the IAEA board about some of this information

which you saw yesterday, in the speech of Mr. Netanyahu. So, it has been there for a while and the IAEA has tried to dive deeper into the structure

of the program and where it is heading for.

JONES: The information that Mr. Netanyahu gave us yesterday, though, was some of that detail not available to you as far back as 2005 or 2009? And

had it been available to you, do you think it would have charted a different course as far as the Iran nuclear deal was concerned?

HEINONEN: I think at this document is a matter of concern. This is much more detailed than what we saw in 2005 and during the subsequent years.

But this shows actually a very cohesive approach for creating and design of a nuclear weapon. So, that's why it's a matter of concern. And this

actually I would want to concentrate here on this IAEA report in December 2015 when the IAEA discussed with Iran about the so-called possible

military dive missile. And when we looked at this document we had to still dive much deeper into that and to understand what exactly is there.

It looks to me that Iran was not entirely complying with its obligations to address the IAEA concerns. And as you remember, this was a prerequisite

for the implementation for the JCPOA. So, I think that this is why the P5 and the international community has to take it seriously and IAEA has to

take a very different look at the material.

JONES: But Israel is clearly saying that as far as it's concerned Iran has a nuclear weapons program in place right now and this new evidence that

they have, shows that quite clearly. Are you saying or is the IAEA saying that that is the not case? That even if Iran had been trying to implement

or restart a weapons program, your inspectors would have halted that in the last three years?

HEINONEN: I think at the IAEA has to take another look at the material and look where it leads. There are a couple of concerns I have. First of all,

this is much more extensive than what was known before. It has new locations with definitely IAEA has not visited. That is important. We

need to remember this was only documents. Papers, computers simulations. We have not seen the equipment. And it appears to me that also equipment

was manufactured. So, the IAEA has to see the equipment, visit the sites and discuss the findings with the relevant scientists and technicians.

JONES: Yes, but it does seem to suggest that the Israelis have unearthed some new evidence which would be relevant then to the IAEA and relevant

potentially to any new deal should Donald Trump pull the plug on the current deal in place.

HEINONEN: Certainly, this problem is to be at us first of all. I don't think that the country is a party to the NPT should maintain this kind of

documentation. It's not in the spirit of nonproliferation treaty. So, there are a lot of things which ought to be done now based on these

findings and to find out if there is something else what we have not seen.

Mohamed ElBaradei the former IAEA chief has tweeted to comment on these Israeli findings. And he says specifically in this tweet -- were just

showing our viewers now. Don't destroy the temple.

[11:50:00] Effectively, seeming to imply that if you destroy the current Iranian nuclear deal that's on the table, that's been signed, that all of

the other infrastructure and security and stability of the region would fall away. Would you agree with that analysis? Do you think that this

deal so crucial that if it were to fall apart that the entire region stability would be at risk?

HEINONEN: I think the deal at least needs to be fixed. We cannot leave a country with this kind of information without knowing, what is the real

status. Whether the single use nuclear equipment and materials have been really dismantled. Is there some undeclared nuclear materials still in

Iran? Remember that IAEA inspectors found some uranium particles at Parachi when they went there in 2015. So, there are a number of issues

there. Whether this will be additional agreement to the JCPOA? I'll leave that for the policymakers.

JONES: Olli Heinonen, the former deputy director-general of the IAEA. We very much appreciate you talking to us on CNN. Thank you, sir.

HEINONEN: Thank you for having me.

JONES: Now live from London. You're watching CONNECT THE WORLD and we will be right back with more news after this short break.


JONES: Now that Prince Louis has been born to William and Katharine, Britain's royals are looking towards the next big event. There are just

two weeks and counting until Prince Harry and Meghan Markle get married. CNN's Max Foster takes us inside the chapel where the couple will say their



MAX FOSTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Windsor Castle, home to kings and queens for nearly a thousand years. And within its grounds, St.

George's Chapel where many members of the family have been baptized, married, and yes, buried.

When Meghan Markle is driving into these hallowed grounds packed with special guests, she will mark a new chapter in this most famous of family


(on camera): The car will come into what will be a quite eerily quiet cloister. It will stop here and the first thing that will confront the

bride is some 20 steps leading up to the chapel.

As Meghan Markle enters the church, the guests will turn around and see her at the west door beneath that spectacular stained-glass window. This whole

area will be filled with seats, 600 people in total. And whilst it looks vast and spacious, it's actually quite intimate at this level. Quite a

narrow aisle as we move up from the nave into the choir. And a few more steps. As she enters the choir, wherever she looks she'll see a nod to the

Knights of the Garter. The highest order of chivalry in the land, the oldest in the world.

[11:55:00] High up on the ceiling, a bust of Henry VIII who completed this church 500 years ago. Flags represent all the current Knights of the

Garter, including the best man there, Prince William, his flag and below him the seat where he would normally sit. So, all of these plaques

represent a Knight of the Garter. A gray marble slab sunken into the aisle. Another reminder of Henry VIII. As Meghan Markle will literally

walk over his grave towards her fiance.

Plus, the Royal family will be seated the side. The bride's family on the other side. And she'll eventually settle up there by the step where she'll

meet Harry. And with the words I will, an American celebrity becomes British royalty. Max foster, CNN, Windsor, England.

Max Foster there getting ready for the day as we all are. I'm Hannah Vaughn Jones. Thanks so much for watching. That was CONNECT THE WORLD.

See you soon.