Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

U.S. Strike on Baghdad Kills Top Iranian Commander. Aired 12- 1a ET

Aired January 03, 2020 - 00:00   ET

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

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

[00:00:12]

MICHAEL HOLMES, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Hello and welcome to our viewers in the United States and all around the world. I'm Michael Holmes at the CNN Center in Atlanta.

And some breaking news. The U.S. military confirming it carried out a strike near Baghdad Airport killing Qasem Soleimani, the commander of the Quds force, Iran's elite special operations unit. Now, the U.S. strike also killed a senior member of the Iranian-backed Popular Mobilization Forces. The PMF is the same group whose supporters tried to storm the U.S. embassy in Baghdad earlier this week.

Now, the Pentagon releasing a statement that reads, in part, "At the direction of the president, the U.S. military has taken decisive defensive action to protect U.S. personnel abroad by killing Qasem Soleimani, the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, Quds Force, a U.S.-designated foreign terrorist organization." It goes on, "The strike was aimed at deterring future Iranian attack plans. The United States will continue to take all necessary action to protect our people and our interests wherever they are around the world."

No official statement from the White House as of now. We're not expecting one either. Only a tweet of the American flag from the U.S. president, Donald Trump. He's been on vacation, of course, at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida in the past two weeks.

Now, CNN is covering this breaking story like no one else can. We have correspondents and analysts all around the world. CNN's Arwa Damon is live in Baghdad for us. Alex Marquardt is in Washington, Nic Robertson in London.

First let's go to you in Baghdad on the ground, Arwa Damon.

For those who don't know, give us a sense of the moment. This is a major figure in Iranian politics and military activity in the region. How big of a deal is it?

ARWA DAMON, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: This is monumental, Michael. Qasem Soleimani was the head of the Quds Force. The Quds Force is basically responsible for Iran's external affairs, if you will. It is responsible for Iran's non-conventional military activities.

Qasem Soleimani, inside Iran, was revered. He was beloved by his soldiers. And he also was in Iraq quite often, especially during the fight against ISIS. Guiding, leading what is known as the PMF, the Popular Mobilization Force that you were referring to there earlier.

He's also been instrumental in propping up the Assad regime in Syria.

And of course, Iran's proxies throughout the region are incredibly powerful, as well. Alongside Qasem Soleimani was also the leader of Kataib Hezbollah. That is the group that the U.S. targeted on Sunday that then led to those demonstrations and attempts to breach the U.S. embassy that were happening over the last few days.

This strike alters a lot of the dynamics that were unfolding here. The Iraqi government is now in something of an impossible situation, given the fact that this happened here, and it is a government that has already found itself stuck between Washington and Tehran.

And then there is the other reality of the situation, and that is that we are in uncharted territory, Michael. This is an extraordinary event that took place.

And when you have events of this magnitude happening, especially in a region like the Middle East, there are unforeseen consequences, things that the planners, those that are modeling what's happening, can't necessary calculate for. You look at what happened in the aftermath of the invasion and the takedown of Saddam Hussein that led to the rise of al Qaeda in Iraq and then ISIS. This also is going to have unforeseen consequences.

Iran most likely does have a plan. This is not something that they wouldn't have planned for. But what exactly that is, exactly where it's going to unfold, how it's going to unfold, we don't know.

But the one thing that we can pretty accurately predict, and that is that this war with Iran, it is a war. There's no way that Iran views it as anything but. And it is going to be a war that is unconventional. It does not have borders, and most likely, does not have any rules.

HOLMES: And Arwa, you know, the U.S. had made its feelings toward Soleimani clear for a very long time. They'd had him in the crosshairs before and not pulled the trigger.

[00:05:07]

And to that point, speak to the timing of this. I mean, why would the United States strike this man now, knowing that there would be consequences? What is your take on that, Arwa?

DAMON: You know, that's the question that is being asked by just about everybody, because yes, things had been simmering with the United States. We had seen, you know, the activity that was happening in the Persian Gulf. The Iranians had downed a U.S. drone, and the Americana response had been, relatively speaking, of course, one of restraint.

But then you had this uptake in attacks by these Iranian proxies in Iraq against U.S. military interests, U.S. military installations, that attack that happened near Kirkuk on Friday, a week ago, exactly, that killed a U.S. contractor, wounded a number of other U.S. personnel, that then led to the counter strikes by the U.S. that happened on Sunday.

So we had been having an escalation, but this takes it to an entire new level. And this kind of action that takes it to this level is one that one would assume comes along with a plan, but we don't know what the Americans' plan is afterwards, because this is not even remotely similar to, say, the targeting of Osama bin Laden or Abu Bakr al- Baghdadi or any of the other, frankly, key figures that we have been seeing taken out either by the U.S. or by others, whether it's figures that are affiliated with ISIS or figures that are affiliated with other groups that the U.S. brands a terrorist organization.

This cannot be overestimated, the impact of what it is. And again, like we keep saying, this is unchartered territory. We don't know exactly where this is going to go next, but along with everything that we have been talking about, what is also of great concern is who is going to pay the price for this? Which population is going to end up ultimately paying the price for this?

HOLMES: You make a very good point. Iran has tentacles in many varied places. Where they strike is going to be pretty much up to them, when they figure that out.

Let's go to Washington now. CNN's Alex Marquardt is there. Speak to the Pentagon's response, and there hasn't been one, really, from the White House.

ALEX MARQUARDT, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Michael. At the top there, you showed the only White House response that we've seen was that tweet from the president's personal account of an American flag, and then the White House saying that that was going to be the only response from the White House for the night.

So they left it to the Pentagon to put out a statement that, at the order of the president, this strike was carried out in Baghdad to kill Qasem Soleimani. So what they were saying was that this attack was very clearly -- was planned and he was targeted, not just because of what he has done in the past, which as we've noted, included killings of hundreds of American troops, maiming of thousands more. The Pentagon's statement says that he was also behind the coordination of attacks against U.S. military bases, that he approved those protests and attacks against the U.S. embassy in Baghdad over the past few days.

But what they're trying to make very clear is that this was a preemptive attack to thwart future attacks against American personnel. I want to read just a little bit more of that statement from the Pentagon, in which they say, "General Soleimani was actively developing plans to attack American diplomats and service members in Iraq and throughout the region." There was a bit of foreshadowing that we saw earlier in the day. Of

course, this is the first day back at work for many in the federal government, and Mark Esper, the secretary of dispense [SIC] -- defense, did speak with reporters. And he said, "If we get word of attacks or some type of indication, we will take preemptive action, as well, to protect American forces, to protect American lives. So the game has changed, and we're prepared to do what is necessary to defend our personnel and our interests and our partners in the region."

So the secretary of defense there previewing what now seems to be preventative action to thwart Iranian attacks against American personnel.

But that is the big question, Michael, that you asked Arwa. Why now? America has had opportunities to target and kill Soleimani in the past. For years they've been killing -- he has been killing American personnel. Those attacks in the Gulf, those attacks against the Saudi oil fields, the downing of that U.S. drone.

And remember, Michael, there actually were American plans to retaliate against Iran for the downing of that drone, and as those plans started, as they were underway, President Trump changed his mind and canceled them.

[00:10:00]

The president has had a conflicted -- he's trying to play both sides of it often when it comes to Iran. The other day, while those protests in Baghdad were taking place, he threatened that Iran would pay a big price. That was on Twitter, a very bellicose statement, the likes of which we see often from him on Twitter.

But then when he was asked in person, he said that I want peace. So there was always going to be that question of what would come next from the U.S. side. Arwa laid out the various things that have taken place over the next few days with an American contractor being killed, U.S. airstrikes, the protest against the embassy. But this is a massive escalation that I don't think anyone here in Washington saw coming, Michael.

HOLMES: This was a president who wanted to get out of engagement in the Middle East and may well have just sparked an extended one. One

CNN's international diplomatic editor Nic Robertson joins me now from London.

I mean, the Iranians, Nic, I think you might agree, will be fairly considered in their response. They're not known for knee-jerk in this situation. But they have many proxies in the region who might want to impress the regime. What's your take on what retaliation could look like and where? There are a lot of targets in the region.

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: Yes, I think -- Let's begin with President Trump's decision to take the strike. The reason he didn't take the retaliatory strike against -- against an Iranian military facility when they downed -- when the Iranians downed the U.S. drone. He said at the time he changed his mind ten minutes before the strike, and he said he wasn't going to do it, because there was no loss of U.S. life.

Now in Iraq, with the killing of that contractor by Iranian proxies, that perhaps is what has tipped the balance here in the president's mind, that lives have now been cost and that is -- this is where he put his word in the past.

To the proxies, the proxies already know what to do. This was very clearly told to them by the Iranians last year. They instinctively know this. They don't need a game plan. The -- this was, as escalations and tensions with the United States ratcheted up for the last year, the proxies were left under no extensively noticed, they don't need a game plan. This was, the proxies were left under no illusion that they should a strike against U.S. interests in the region.

So the proxies are perhaps the most unpredictable element here, because we don't know what they will take upon themselves to do. They certainly view Qasem Soleimani as the provider of military largesse, as an inspiration and a battlefield hero, somebody whose death they're going to feel viscerally and want to have a visceral reaction. So there's that dynamic.

And as you say, the Iranian leadership, and as Arwa said, likely had a plan and will -- will act in a perhaps slightly more pragmatic way, although we've seen them act in what has been anything but pragmatic. It seemed in September, they were striking a several -- two Saudi oil facilities, taking down half of the country's oil production, putting a spike in the price of oil.

But I think what we can see them do, and here, the best analysis I think we can get at the moment, is what have they been doing to ratchet up tensions over the past six months or so.

What they've been doing is capturing ships in the Straits of Hormuz, and mining oil tankers in the Straits of Hormuz. I think it will be very likely that they will escalate that, that in effect, the Straits of Hormuz and that sort of area, that geographic piece of sea real estate on the planet, through which one fifth of the world's oil leaves every day, passes through, the Iranians will probably tighten that and try to shut that down. I think we can expect that.

What we've also seen them do in recent months is escalate their nuclear production capacity. They've been increasing the amount of material that they've been enriching, the uranium that they've been enriching, enriching it to a high degree, going above their stockpiles, using uranium enrichment techniques that they are banned from using.

So I think we're going to see, as well, the Iranians perhaps respond more covertly in that area, but that's going to draw on the question very quickly, again, that had been center stage through Obama's presidency, President Trump's presidency, certainly Prime Minister Netanyahu in Israel has pushed for this, and that would be strikes on Iran's nuclear production facilities. So the opportunities for escalation here are very serious and very

real, because there will be counter measures that will need to be taken against the actions that the Iranian regime takes.

And what we heard from the Saudis was that if there was another strike on their oil facilities from Iran -- and they believe the last one was -- that this would be a threat against their country. So -- against their national security interests.

So the region at the moment can only be bracing itself for a series of unexpected consequences that it's going to be very hard to game plan through. The U.S., of course, will be on a high military footing. The Fifth Fleet in Bahrain, for example, could also find itself much more on the front line of this fight.

The United Arab Emirates, another U.S. ally in the region, could find itself on the front line, too. And they don't want that. And the Saudis have tried to avoid a full-on war with Iran, but this does open the door now to the unexpected, as Arwa was saying.

HOLMES: U.S. bases in the Gulf region, in Syria and Iraq, and elsewhere, too. There are plenty of targets.

Nic Robertson, thanks so much. Appreciate your analysis there.

OK. We're joined now by CNN international security editor Nick Paton Walsh. He's in London for us, too, to talk more about this.

Nick, I think you'd agree. The death of Soleimani, it's not going to stop Iranian aggression or activity in Iraq. The question is, you know, just how much things are going to ramp up, if you like. This is an escalation. How much of an escalation can you see?

NICK PATON WALSH, CNN INTERNATIONAL SECURITY EDITOR: Probably one of the most significant developments in the Middle East for the last ten years or so. A startling moment, certainly, direction of U.S. policy towards Iran.

Let me give you a bit of breaking news, some context from a U.S. official I've been speaking to, calling this, quote, "a target of opportunity," saying that while this has obviously been authorized from a presidential level for some time, this may not have been a particular incident in which President Trump was specifically gave the order to go tonight. It's unclear, but certainly, the phrase "target of opportunity" suggests this was something that had been authorized for some time.

The official also did point out that this was clearly, as you heard from Mark Esper, the secretary of defense there, something preemptive, suggesting maybe that maximum pressure at this stage may have not been getting the desired effects.

Maximum pressure is what the U.S. has been determining as being the policy against Iran for the last years or so. Ratcheting up sanctions, applying pressure in every direction they possibly can, pulling out of the nuclear deal in the hope that somehow the Iranian government crumbles in the face of that pressure.

This is a stark change, though.

A bit of context about General Qasem Soleimani himself. While it was clear that he was often the directing hand in moves against the United States' assets, or their allies in the region, too, he was a key figure, certainly, in the fight against ISIS. A lot of that fighting, paradoxically, you might say, given the Trump administration's view of the Iranian government, a lot of that fighting done by Iranian-backed militia in Iraq, and occasionally in Syria, too, as well.

Qasem Soleimani also said to be on the battlefields himself, directing some of that fight, too. It was a very uncomfortable alliance, but it's important to remember that Qasem Soleimani did contribute, I think, certainly, strategically on the battlefield in the fight, kicking one of the worst terrorist groups out of the region, as well.

But we're in completely different territory here, and this U.S. official I was speaking to sort of tried to characterize a slight sense of unknown as to exactly what comes next. I'm obviously paraphrasing here, but we're either into a situation where the Iranians have already war-gamed their response, what they wish to do next, how they would respond to something like this, and implement that plan; or may have thought that something like this was unimaginable. Maybe the plan for response was in Qasem Soleimani's head himself. They probably have a successor reasonably ready to go.

But we're into a complicated time in Iran itself here, as well, because as you know, Michael, this is not a homogenous government that speaks with one voice. There are moderates, often epitomized by the current president, Hassan Rouhani, and his foreign minister, Javad Zarif, who is the architect of the peace deal the Trump administration pulled out of.

Hassan Rouhani is sort of coming towards the end of his second term, so he won't be in power forever. And certainly, I think, within Iran, there may be those looking to see who comes after him. There are hardliners pushing for the most vehement response, frankly, some might say, violence to show reaction to the U.S. sanctions presence. And many, I think, analyzing the U.S. presence in the region and their attitude towards Iran, saw a moment like this coming. The frank -- the utter terror of not quite knowing exactly what the other side's red lines were.

Donald Trump perhaps not being entirely clear what it would take for him to instigate a reaction like this. What the Iranians do in response is unclear. The response is bound to be asymmetrical. We're not talking, most likely, about conventional conflict here. But certainly, for American interests and their allies in the region, it's an incredibly dangers week ahead -- Michael.

HOLMES: Indeed. Good to have you there. Nick, thank you. Nick Paton Walsh there in London for us.

And we will take a short. We're going to have much more, though, on our breaking news story, a significant moment. We'll be live in the Iranian capital, Tehran, when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[00:23:03]

HOLMES: Welcome back. We're following the breaking news out of Iraq, where the Pentagon says it has killed the commander of Iran's Quds Force, Qasem Soleimani.

The Pentagon calls it a defensive action meant to prevent future attacks coordinated by the Iranian general. The U.S. blames him and his forces for the deaths of hundreds of American and coalition service members, and the wounding of thousands more during the Iraq War.

Now, the U.S. strike just at Baghdad's airport also killed a senior member of the Iranian-backed Popular Mobilization Forces. That's the same group whose supporters tried to storm the U.S. embassy in Baghdad earlier this week.

Now, Iran's foreign minister quickly condemning the U.S. for the strike, and speaking in very strong language, blaming the U.S. for, quote, "rogue adventurism." Javid Zarif tweeting this, quote, "The U.S. act of international terrorism, targeting and assassinating General Soleimani -- THE most effective force fighting DAESH" -- also called ISIS, of course -- "Al Nusrah, al Qaeda," and others "is extremely dangerous and a foolish escalation. The U.S. bears responsibility for all consequences of its rogue adventurism."

Let's bring in CNN journalist Ramin Motaghim. He is live from Tehran for us in Iran.

Speak more to the Iranian reaction. As expected, fairly strong words there from the foreign minister. Tell us more.

RAMIN MOTAGHIM, CNN JOURNALIST: It depends whom you talk. The middle-class people are already showing their concern that, lest this assassination of Qasem Soleimani leads to the all-out war between Iran and America, and that is the least things that they wish to happen, and it's a main concern for the middle class dwelling in the cities.

But pro-ruling establishment, ruling theocracy are calling for retaliation and revenge.

[00:25:06]

And from now on, from today onward, there are three options open to Iranian society and Iranian ruling establishment. One is starting all-out war, face-to-face with Iran and America, at any cost.

Or escalating the proxy war, and attacking to American bases in Bahrain, in Qatar, in Saudi Arabia, in Iraq, anywhere else in the world.

Or just covert and secret negotiations to be resumed somewhere in the world, between Iranian -- Iranian officials and American. Out of this, I mean, three options. There is nothing else we can expect.

And I can say that Iranian society is very concerned. And they think -- I mean, middle-class things that Iran and America are heading into uncharted waters. And any day, any minute may -- anything can go overblown and goes out of control, because any minor incident can lead to the major incident which is called all-out war.

And bear in mind that Qasem Soleimani is regarded by Iranian, even for the secular nationalists, as a hero, and now there is -- he was, I mean, adored and admired as a sort of martyr. And now they say he just achieved what he has long awaited for, martyrdom.

HOLMES: Ramin Motaghim, thank you so much. Appreciate it, joining us live from Tehran in Iran with the reaction from there.

MOTAGHIM: Thank you.

HOLMES: The U.S. air strikes in Baghdad had an immediate impact on world oil prices, as you might imagine. Crude is always jittery, more so now.

The price actually shooting up 3 percent as news of the airstrike came out. You see Brent crude up 3.2 percent, at 68.38. And also WTI crude is 63.09, up 3.12 percent. We'll keep an eye on it.

Do stay with us here on CNN. We have much more on this breaking, very important news out of Baghdad. It is a momentous time, in fact. A U.S. strike killing Iran's top military commander. We'll be live in Baghdad when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[00:31:39]

HOLMES: All right. Let's update you on our breaking news this hour.

The U.S. military confirming it carried out a strike near Baghdad airport, killing the most revered member of Iran's military. The Pentagon says it was a defensive action and that Qasem Soleimani and his Quds Force were responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American soldiers during the Iraq War.

The U.S. strike also killed a senior member of the Iranian-backed Popular Mobilization Forces.

Let's head to Baghdad and CNN's Arwa Damon. Arwa, what is the likely response there? There were reports of some Iraqis celebrating the death of Soleimani, but he also has support in other areas.

DAMON: He really does, Michael, and this is going to potentially be very polarizing for Iraq just in the same way that Iran, in and of itself, and the way that Iran's tentacles reach both into the Iraqi security apparatus and into the Iraqi political spectrum are also incredibly polarizing.

We have seen some reports of some Iraqis celebrating this. And you also have to remember that this comes after Iraqis, some of them, at least, for months, have been protesting against the government. These aren't the same protesters, by the way, obviously, who were outside the U.S. embassy. These protesters want to revamp Iraq's governance system, and they also want to end Iranian influence. And they were being gunned down. Hundreds of them killed throughout the course of these demonstrations. They have, for quite some time now, been very vocal about how they want to end Iranian and also, incidentally, U.S. influence.

But then you also have the reality that Iran does remain very powerful here. It is the main backer, supporter, funder of those Popular Mobilization Forces. Remember, they're this umbrella organization that is made up of predominantly Shia ex-militia fighters who, incidentally, cut -- most of them, at least, cut their teeth fighting U.S. forces during the U.S. occupation here. And they, at times, did have Qasem Soleimani himself, in fact, fairly often, on the ground with them as they were pushing through and recapturing key cities and towns from ISIS.

So you really have right now a country that is going to, not only be caught up to an even greater, perhaps unimaginable degree, in this proxy battlefield between the U.S. and Iran, but also one that is at a very real risk within itself of becoming even more bloody than it has been.

HOLMES: Yes, absolutely. Arwa, appreciate that and good to have you there on the spot to cover this important breaking news.

And we will have much more ahead of this breaking news out of Baghdad, and the killing of that top Iranian military commander. Retired U.S. Army Lieutenant General Mark Hertling gives me his assessment when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[00:38:27]

HOLMES: Welcome back. The breaking news, the Pentagon saying it has carried out a strike at the direction of President Trump that killed Iran's top military commander, Qasem Soleimani.

Days of tension led up to this strike. Last Friday an American contractor was killed in a rocket attack at a U.S. base near Kirkuk in Iraq.

Then, on Sunday, U.S. air strikes hit five facilities in Syria and Iraq linked to Iranian-backed militia.

And then on Tuesday, pro-Iranian protesters attacked the U.S. embassy in Baghdad, many of them linked to the militia that had been hit by the U.S.

And then on Thursday, the U.S. strikes near Baghdad Airport, killing top Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani and a senior member of the Iranian-backed Popular Mobilization Forces. Retired Lieutenant General Mark Hertling, he's a CNN military analyst,

former commander of U.S. forces in Europe, and commander of multinational forces in north of Iraq during that war, joining us now from Orlando.

You and I were texting earlier, Mark, and you said this to me. You said, quote, "This will take Iraq backwards and cause danger for the U.S. troops throughout the region." Tell me more. What's your take?

LT. GEN. MARK HERTLING (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: You're going to have, certainly, many citizens within Iraq, Shia even, that are going to say this is a very good thing, because they're tired of the interference of some of these pro-Iranian forces.

At the same time, as you know, Michael, having been to Iraq for many years, there are going to be quite a few thousands, hundreds of thousands of young Iraqi men who are part of some of these pro-Iranian groups in places like Sadr City and 9 Nissan in Baghdad who are going to go to the mosque in about another hour and a half, and they're going to be getting quite a bit of vehemence from some of their imams.

As we used to track that when we were in Iran, what was going on in the mosques. This happens on a Thursday night. On Friday morning, you can see some of these things.

You've seen the Iraqi government trying to tamp down some of this pro- Iranian forces. The president, in fact, when the former prime minister put in his resignation, refused two more prime ministers, because they were too sectarian in their views toward Iran and some of the Shia militias.

So this will cause a great deal of turmoil. I don't know if it will be the same as when the Samara Mosque was bombed, and -- over ten year ago. But it could cause a lot of tension within Iraq itself. That's beyond what's going to happen to U.S. forces in the region, not just Iraq but in any places where U.S. forces are stationed and they're next to prorated militia that were under Soleimani.

HOLMES: No shortage of targets. I mean, you've got the ships in the gulf. You've got bases in -- in Iraq and in Syria and elsewhere. In a conflict since, and you know better than anyone, Iran is not Iraq. I mean, it has tentacles spread far and wide. They will not be a front wine from the Iranian point of view. This would be asymmetrical warfare in terms of response. Would that be fair to say?

HERTLING: It's definitely fair to say. And Mike, I think we have to go back a little bit and say who was this guy that was killed today. He was a very charismatic military leader, but he was also a ruthless killer.

But he was actually the -- both the tactical operational and almost strategic lead in bringing this arc of the revolution from Iran, all the way from Tehran to Lebanon, Israel, anyplace Hezbollah was.

So when you see a guy like him doing things with pro-Iranian groups in Iraq, that's just a portion of his portfolio. He was also very involved, talking to Russian soldiers in Syria. He's

been involved in Hezbollah and in many other places throughout the Middle East and, in fact, around the world. He is a favorite son of the leader of Iran.

So you're talking about a guy who is very charismatic within the country, who has a great deal of tactical expertise, but make no doubt about it, he is a killer and a rabid one.

HOLMES: Yes.

HERTLING: He's one of these kind of guys that the world is a better place that he's now been killed, but at the same time, it's going to cause quite a bit of eruption in this part of the world.

HOLMES: There will be no tears for him in the west. I mean, it was the Quds that introduced, you know, explosively formed projectiles, the deadliest roadside bombs in the Iraq War that killed so many American servicemen. Not a lot of tears.

But I'm wondering whether you see strategic thinking in this killing and anticipation of what is likely to come.

HERTLING: Yes, well, all indications are the Pentagon is now saying they had a great deal of intelligence on what he was about to do and some of the things he was planning. That he was involved, in fact, with the protests over the last couple of days at the Baghdad embassy, that he has been involved over the last several months in stirring the foment of action within Iraq and other places against American forces.

And in fact, that is their strategy. That is Iran's strategy to do exactly that to America.

But here's what I think will happen. We haven't prepared ourselves. I don't think for the turmoil that will come from this throughout the Middle East.

From a strategic perspective, again, I'm going to quote my fellow -- my former boss, General Petraeus, and say how does this end? What is the grand strategy? Is this part of the pressure campaign, and in fact, if it is, are we prepared when -- when the pressure is such within that boiling pot that it blows all over the Middle East?

HOLMES: Yes. And also, you know, again, as you know well, Iran has deep ties in Iraq. That isn't going to change with this guy's death, but you know, you've got Iranian-supported politicians in Iraq who are already pushing for U.S. forces to leave altogether. Could that be given some impetus? What would that mean?

HERTLING: You're going to see some of that play out within the next week, I think, Michael. Certainly, there have been, and that's what a lot of people don't understand, that all of these pro-Iranian Iraqi groups are beholden to certain politicians within Iraq, some of whom are within the parliament. And these are some of the people that may be leading Iraq in the future. You've heard names like Qais Khazali, who I'm very familiar with from

my second tour in Iraq. Muqtada al-Sadr. Some of these individuals are closely tied to the Iranian groups. And they are, in fact, part of the Iraqi parliament.

[00:45:12]

You have Barham Salih, again, the president of Iraq, a Kurd, who is trying to keep this, as the Thomas Jefferson of Iraq, under wraps. And he's trying to lead democracy forward. And -- and it's been tenuous, at best, in the past. It's probably going to get a whole lot worse, and there's going to be a lot of debate in the Iraqi parliament tomorrow or next week, actually.

HOLMES: Yes. It's an escalation. The question is how much worse it will get and what form it will take.

Good to see you, my friend. Appreciate that.

HERTLING: Always a pleasure, Michael. Thank you.

HOLMES: We'll take a short break now. When we come back, a look at the legacy of Qasem Soleimani and why it is so important that the U.S. killed him on Iraqi soil.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HOLMES: You're watching CNN's breaking coverage of the U.S. strike that has killed Iran's top military commander, General Qasem Soleimani. He was the leader of the elite special operations unit, the Quds Force, which the U.S. blames for the deaths of hundreds of American forces.

Ambassador Feisal Istrabadi is the director at the Center of the Study of the Middle East at Indiana University. He's also the former deputy permanent representative of Iraq to the United Nations. He joins us now from Washington.

And again, great to have your expertise on what is a major event. I mean, Qasem Soleimani, such a major player in the entire region, the Quds Force such a powerful and feared force, as well. Speak to the significance of this.

FEISAL ISTRABADI, DIRECTOR, CENTER OF THE STUDY OF THE MIDDLE EAST, INDIANA UNIVERSITY: First, I have to say, the reporting by Arwa Damon has just been superb, and I just feel I should say that. And as has her analysis.

This is huge, as she's just said. The first thought that occurs to me as an Iraqi is that -- that this was done on Iraqi soil. And the -- I'm reminded when there were reports that the Iranians were planning to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to Washington in the United States, and the outrage that the United States felt.

Now, Qasem Soleimani has been a particularly malign force throughout the Middle East, particularly in Iraq and other places that have been mentioned, Lebanon and Yemen and other places. He's a particularly malign force, and I -- there will be many in Iraq who will not mourn his passing.

[00:50:13]

But the notion of this being done on Iraqi territory, almost absolutely without the permission of the government of Iraq, it will weaken the government of Iraq significantly. It will give an -- there will be an opportunity for the destabilization of the country. Maybe it will work out well. But this is a huge deal throughout the Middle East. The fact that it was done over the territory of Iraq means that Iraq has, in fact, become what I have feared it would become from the beginning: the battleground between Iran and the United States.

Iran has always had, an Qasem Soleimani in particular, has always had an incentive to keep Iraq just not stable, not quite in total chaos but not stable either. This, I think, will increase the stakes. And my question to the Americans is, what's your plan for keeping Iraqi stable after pulling this off? I fear they don't have one.

HOLMES: It's a very good point. You know, when we think about a man who has been a mastermind of Iranian action in Iraq and Syria, and certainly, behind the deaths of many Americans in Iraq, as well, I mean, this is a strike at the heart of Iran's military command.

Again, we have to ask the question. Iran cannot not respond, or they will look weak. How bad could that response be, in terms of what it then leads to? Unintended consequences, perhaps?

ISTRABADI: Yes, you're absolutely right. Iran cannot not respond, which was the logic of the United States responding earlier in the week to a provocation from an Iranian-backed militia in Iraq.

But I think that Iran has many places that it can respond. Iraq is certainly one of them. It can continue to destabilize. It will have allies in the Iraqi parliament who will be demanding, for instance, at a bare minimum -- they're already demanding the withdrawal of American troops. Their argument, I think, just became stronger by the willingness of the United States to make Iraq part of the battlefield.

But they have other places to respond. Lebanon is a place they can respond. Syria, as you have noted, they're a major player there. They have allies in Gaza and can respond with respect to Israel, as well. They can respond in the Persian Gulf.

Indeed, the reporting has been, as you well know, that they have -- were responsible, either directly or indirectly, for the attacks on Saudi Arabian oil facilities already. So they have a broad scope of responses or potential responses.

The president seems to think that they will, you know, send out tanks and airplanes and meet the United States on a mutually-agreed battlefield, and that this, therefore, will not take long.

But obviously, this will be asymmetric. They will engage in terrorist acts. as they have done in Iraq and and in other places, and where this ends, it's very difficult to start.

You know, military officers know that it's easy to start a war, very difficult to get out of one. This is -- this is genuinely now -- this is no longer a proxy war. We've been talking about what's been happening in Iraq as a proxy war sort of between the United States and -- and allies of Iran in Iraq.

That's no longer the case. This is a direct action between the United States against a senior military commander of Iran. It isn't a proxy war anymore. It's a direct confrontation between the United States and Iran, and I think Iran will, indeed, have to respond in ways that it hasn't up 'til now. It's -- it's new territory that we're in. It's very dangerous.

HOLMES: So what are the dangers, from your perspective, when the U.S. takes action on Iraqi soil. In terms of damaging, what political support the U.S. still has in Iraq, and of course, there are moves by some Iranian-supported politicians to get the U.S. out of Iraq altogether. What are the risks there when they do this?

ISTRABADI: Well, the risk is, of course, that the -- those who are demanding the removal of U.S. forces from Iraq, their hand gets stronger.

Remember that the demonstrators who have been demonstrating in Iraq now for three months. One of things they have said is that they -- this is actually one of the things that they've been demanding, that foreign interference in Iraqi affairs come to an end. They -- they don't want, and specifically, that they do not want to be a battleground between the United States and Iran.

[00:55:10]

This has been one of the things the protesters have been protesting about. This just makes the case for people who are allied with the United States much more difficult to make. It's a complete and total disregard of the sovereignty of the state of Iraq.

And again, don't take any of this as me crying tears for Qasem Soleimani. He has been a particularly malign force in Iraq, in particular. And if they had got him over the Gulf or something, that would be one thing.

But in Iraq, it's a blatant violation of Iraqi sovereignty and plays into the hands of America's enemies in Iraq, saying that the United States should quit Iraq. While it's a blow to Iran in sort of the short and intermediate term, I suppose, it's potentially, in the long term interests of Iran that the United States continues to sort of weaken the case for why Iraq should continue to be allied with the United States.

From that perspective, that's the real reason I'm troubled by all this, or one of the reasons that I'm troubled by all this.

HOLMES: Incredible times, and great analysis, as always. Feisal Istrabadi, thank you so much. ISTRABADI: Thank you. It's a pleasure, as always.

HOLMES: And thank you for watching CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Michael Holmes. I will be back with more of our breaking news in just a couple of minutes.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

END