Return to Transcripts main page

Wolf

Obama Calls for Global Effort to Fight Spreading Extremists; Will Netanyahu's Speech Have Lasting Impact on U.S.-Israeli Relations; Ukraine Asks for U.N. Peacekeepers, Russia Says No; Jeb Bush Criticizes Iraq War But Hires Same Advisors

Aired February 19, 2015 - 13:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Welcome back to our viewers in the United States and around the world. I'm Wolf Blitzer reporting from Washington.

First, it was Iraq and Syria, now ISIS has extended its reach spreading like a cancer in the Middle East, North Africa and even beyond. President Obama called today for a global effort to fight violent extremists like ISIS.

Let's bring in our panel. Our CNN global affairs analyst, Bobby Ghosh, the managing editor of "Quartz"; Bobby Baer, the CNN intelligence and security analyst, former CIA operative; and retired Colonel James Reese, CNN global affairs analyst, former U.S. Delta Force commander.

Bobby, in a recent article, you described ISIS -- and I'm quoting you now -- as, "an unholy combination of al Qaeda, the Khmer Rouge and the Nazis." Sounds like they're the worst of the worst, yet they're growing. Why?

BOBBY GHOSH, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Because they are the worst of the worst. In that map you showed a moment ago, all these groups that existed in these countries, there were already Islamic terrorist groups in these countries. ISIS has not created new ones but it's galvanized these groups, given them inspiration, and these groups are now pledging their allegiance. Some used to pledge their allegiance to al Qaeda. Now they're pledging it to ISIS. They are inspired by ISIS' success. Nothing succeeds like success. In the world of terrorism, ISIS is the most successful terrorist group that has ever existed, especially in modern times. They have killed people in brutal ways, but they take territory and hold territory, which is something al Qaeda never successfully was able to do.

BLITZER: And they have a huge amount of money. They're probably the wealthiest terror group out there.

Bob Baer, they're also taking advantage of power vacuums in places like Libya, Yemen, these failed states. They're clearly developing strongholds there. That potentially is a huge, huge problem.

BOB BAER, CNN INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY ANALYST: Exactly, Wolf. You look at Yemen where you have this Shia government that has taken over the capital, Sanaa. These Islamists, whatever you want to call them, look at them as a positive at times. They look at their existence as under threat. You see al Qaeda in Yemen leaving al Qaeda for the Islamic State. They're taking over bases. They're switching allegiance. These people, Sunni Islam, if you like, look at they're under threat, and they'll fight back any way they can. I hate this word, but Islamo-fascism is starting to fit. It is a fascist problem we're facing. And we need all the same resources to destroy it, whether it's military or political.

BLITZER: So in the short term, Colonel Reese, --we know this is going to be a long-term problem. It's going to go on for years, presumably. But in the short term, to stop the spread, what does the U.S. and its partners need to do?

COL. JAMES REESE, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Wolf, one thing, we were very successful in Iraq in defeating al Qaeda in Iraq, and it took us a couple years to figure this out, was establishing these intelligence operation fusion cells around the country so we could collaborate. And that included everyone, the coalition, the Iraqis and everyone together. What I'd like to see happen now is that same type of model put in with these other Arabic countries surrounding Syria and Iraq to collaborate, to get the Arabic aspect out there. Most of these Arabic armies were not meant to invade or be an invading army or an offensive army to protect the homeland. But we have the ability to help set them up to do that. Like I've been saying for months, I still believe a lot of this has to do with the center of gravity in Syria and Assad. The president talked about it today. He walked through multiple red lines for us. So I believe we need to get the Arab armies involved, including the Turks, and we become that advisory force that helps them do this. We're eventually going to have to put boots on the ground and go root ISIS out of there.

BLITZER: Bobby, why haven't the Turks been more supportive of what the U.S. is trying to do? Turkey, after all, is a major NATO ally.

GHOSH: And a country that's on the border with the problem with Syria and has a substantial sort of radicalized Muslim population within its own borders. That remains a mystery. Turkey, one of the largest militaries in the Muslim world, seems completely disinterested in engaging directly with this problem that is right at their door.

One part of it has to do with the fear if they did get into a war in Syria, that those radical elements within their own society would rise up and create political instability. It's possible that the president does not really trust his military. There's a long history of distrust between the largely secular military in Turkey and the Islamist government. They don't necessarily see eye to eye on their view in the world. It's possible that Erdogan does not trust his military.

BLITZER: All right, guys. I want all of you to stand by. We're going to continue to follow this developing story.

Also coming up, the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his controversial speech before the United States Congress, will it have a lasting impact on U.S.-Israeli relations? A former U.S. ambassador to Israel, Martin Indyk, he's in Tel Aviv. He is standing by to join us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Two leaders, two agendas built around one contentious issue, Iran's nuclear program. Israeli officials now charging the Obama administration is leaving Benjamin Netanyahu's government in the dark when it comes to specific details of the ongoing Iran nuclear talks.

Listen to the White House press secretary, Josh Earnest.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOSH EARNEST, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: There's no question that some of the things that the Israelis have said in characterizing our negotiating position have not been accurate. We're also been very clear about the fact that the United States is not going to be in a position of negotiating this agreement in public, and particularly, when we see that there is a continued practice of cherry picking specific pieces of information and using them out of context to distort the negotiating position of the United States.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Let's bring in a former U.S. ambassador to Israel, Martin Indyk, with the Brookings Institution right now. He recently served as a special adviser on the U.S.-Middle East peace process for President Obama.

Martin, you're joining us from Tel Aviv right now. Is there perception the Israelis are cherry picking details to try to make the president's negotiations on this nuclear issue look weak and out of touch?

MARTIN INDYK, BROOKINGS INSTITUTION & FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO ISRAEL: Well, what I think happened here is the prime minister, in terms of making his case, in particular to the Jewish leaders coming here this week, used the figures on the number of centrifuges, taking that out of the context of what the -- what would happen to the centrifuges in any agreement, to make it look like some major climb down on the part of the United States, appeasement of Iran. I think that really upset the White House because, for years now, the United States and Israel have been working very closely together, not just intelligence sharing, intelligence operations against Iran, but also in terms of detailed briefings before and after every negotiating round. Now that the prime minister has taken aim at the whole deal, declaring that already that it's a very bad deal even before it's done, I think the White House feels that there's a threat to the possibility of actually making a deal, and they're getting very upset about it.

BLITZER: You believe the prime minister's decision to accept House Speaker John Boehner's invitation to address a joint meeting of the United States Congress without advance notification to the White House was a major blender on the part of the prime minister of Israel. Tell us why. INDYK: Look, it's a fundamental principle of the U.S.-Israel

relationship and in Israel's supreme interest to ensure bipartisan support. That has always been the case. And that cardinal principle is being undermined in this way by doing a deal with the Republican speaker of the House, going around the Democratic president of the United States, and that puts Democrats in the Congress in a position where they have to choose between their president and the prime minister of Israel. It turns it into a partisan issue, with the Republicans scoring points against the Democrats now, claiming to be more pro Israel, and it just undermines the very fabric of the relationship, which is critical to Israel's defense and deterrence. It's Israel's second line of defense. I think Israel's enemies, particularly in Iran, are having a field day in this regard.

BLITZER: Is there a way -- only a few weeks before the Israeli elections on March 17th, the speech is supposed to take place on March 3rd -- for the prime minister to find a face-saving way to cancel it?

INDYK: The problem, Wolf, is that he's now in a high tree and the tree seems to be growing. And he climbed that tree with one party, and the only way he can climb down is with both parties. And, you know, it's very hard to see how that can happen in these circumstances. So it doesn't look like he's willing to do it. I wish that he would find a way out. But if he's determined to go ahead, I think he needs to make a speech which is -- doesn't have all these applause lines and doesn't attack the president of the United States. He needs to really lower the temperature here and just address the issue, because Israel has real concerns, legitimate concerns, but not turn it into more of a partisan issue than it's already become.

BLITZER: We'll see how it plays in the Israeli elections. It's become a huge issue in domestic Israeli politics as well.

Martin Indyk, thanks very much for joining us.

Martin's a former U.S. ambassador to Israel.

Coming up, Ukraine, we're taking a closer look at what's going on. Ukraine now asking U.N. peacekeepers to save the crumbling cease-fire. Russia apparently rejecting that call. Does the peace effort stand any chance of surviving? We're going to the region.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: All right. This just coming in to CNN. Officials in Denmark announcing $150 million, 12-step plan over four years to boost police and intelligence services to combat terror at home and abroad. It comes on the heels of the deadly attacks over the weekend. A gunman opened fire at a cafe on Saturday. Few hours later, shot several people near a synagogue. The gunman was later shot and killed by police. The money had been earmarked in response to the deadly Islamic attacks last month in Paris.

The failure of the cease-fire in Ukraine, meanwhile, has stirred up another controversy we're following. Ukraine's president now asking for the United Nations to step in with international peacekeepers. Russia says, no, a move like that that it would negate the peace plan agreed to last week. And with U.N. Security Council veto powers, Russia could certainly make that decision stick.

Let's go to our senior international correspondent, Nick Paton Walsh, in Donetsk in eastern Ukraine.

Nick, talk about what's going on. That rail town that's right at the center of all of this post-cease-fire fighting, is there any access? How bad is it?

NICK PATON WALSH, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, we got into Debaltseve earlier on today. Rare access to that key strategic town that has been surrounded by separatist rebels now for weeks. Remarkable devastation in inside of it. You can hear, Wolf, how it sounds in central Donetsk. That was what sounded like a shell landing quite close to the center here. The violence has been picking up around Donetsk itself. But we saw the damage to Debaltseve, the key down at the heart of all this. Barely a home left unscathed in Ukraine there. The streets littered with damaged Ukrainian armor. And also many civilians coming out for the first time from basements to see what they could, gather food from the humanitarian convoy that had gone through. One woman who lived through World War II, she said frankly what she'd been through there was worse. One family worried they had no homes to go to, frankly.

The shelling behind me is picking up some. It's remarkable how close it seems to be getting towards the city center here. But that's been going on all day, Wolf. Does that sound like a cease-fire to you?

BLITZER: It doesn't sound like a cease-fire at all.

This call by the Ukrainian government for U.N. peacekeepers, international peacekeepers, because of this Russian veto at the U.N. Security Council, I take it that's not going to get off the ground.

PATON WALSH: The problem is the Russian point is that would negate the cease-fire accords. They're not really in effect, behind me, from what we're hearing here. That may be Ukrainian military rounds coming in. It sounds like incoming. But we've seen both sides trading artillery fire since that cease-fire broke out. I think perhaps Petro Poroshenko's call for U.N. peacekeepers is a bit to try to slow the violence down here. The separatists are better equipped because, as Ukraine and NATO said, they are equipped by the Russian military, staffed by them. I think Ukrainians hope is to stop extra territory being taken now they've lost Debaltseve -- Wolf?

BLITZER: All right, Nick Paton Walsh, be careful over there. We'll stay in close touch with you. Good luck.

Still ahead, the former Florida governor, Jeb Bush, now apparently running for the Republican presidential nomination, says mistakes were made in the Iraq war, but he's also hired a lot of the same advisories who helped shape that war, people who worked for his brother, his father. What's going on? We'll discuss. Stand by.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) BLITZER: He's the son of the 41st president of the United States, the brother of the 43rd president of the United States, but if he wants to be the 45th president of the United States, Jeb Bush will have to supposedly differentiate himself. But he may have a hard time since he's using many of the same national security foreign policy advisors as his brother used and his father used.

Let's discuss what's going on. Joining us CNN political commentator, Republican strategist, Ana Navarro. She's very close to the former Florida governor. Plus, our CNN political commentator. Paul Begala, who is not so close to the former Florida governor.

(LAUGHTER)

Is that a mistake, Ana? He delivers a major speech on national security Jeb Bush yesterday in Chicago then they release the list of his national security advisors almost all of whom worked either for George w. Bush or his father. If he wants some new blood, he certainly didn't show it in terms of his advisors.

ANA NAVARRO, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, you know, Wolf, I just think it's the Modus Operandi. It's par for the course in political campaigns. You hire people with experience. The other day, I read that Hillary Clinton has 200 economic advisors. They either worked for her husband or President Obama. So, look, political operatives, advisors, they're like soda cans, they get recycled and they get used over and over again because of the experience and sometimes the experience they bring to the table is knowing what not to do and having learned from mistakes. So I think this is a preliminary list, I think you're going to watch it grow. It's important to know that he hasn't hired any of these folks. It's more of like an advisory council is my understanding. So I don't think there's anything strange in this.

BLITZER: What do you think, Paul, because she makes a fair point? When we see the list of Hillary Clinton's national security foreign policy advisors, I assume many of them either worked for President Obama or worked for President Bill Clinton, the man you worked for.

PAUL BEGALA, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I certainly hope so, but here is the difference. Of course, approximate both of them have a famous relative that was president. They each have legacy problem. They don't. People have I Bill Clinton was a good president so they like the idea of perhaps some Clinton folks coming back. Jeb we know he's smart, Jeb Bush, we do. Now we know he thinks we're done because you can't on the same day same I am my own man and then introduce your team of advisors almost all of whom come from your brother who most people think was a disaster. What's next, Brownie at FEMA? Or his running mate, Dick Cheney. His dog, Barney? It's really pathetic.

(CROSSTALK)

BEGALA: If you're going to be your own man do your own hand.

(CROSSTALK)

NAVARRO: Actually, Paul, let me tell you --

BLITZER: Hold on, Ana. Hold on, Ana.

A lot of them, Michael Hayden, a former CIA director, Michael Chertoff, former Homeland Security secretary, some of the ones are much more controversial.

BEGALA: Yes, they are. Some of the architects of the war. The most famous name being Paul Wolfowitz at the Pentagon one of the architects at the war at Iraq.

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: He was deputy secretary of defense.

BEGALA: Deputy secretary of defense. This is -- it's a terrible mistake for Jeb.

BLITZER: Let's go to Ana.

Ana, go ahead.

NAVARRO: Well, look, I'm sure Paul's friend Bill Clinton is so much different, but having advisors doesn't necessarily mean you take your advice, it means you listen to their opinions, talk to people. I think what we saw yesterday in Jeb Bush's speech is this is a very well informed, well read, worldly man with a wide perspective of the world and a lot of experience having traveled and lived outside of the United States. And I think, you know, he's going to be hearing from a lot of opinions, a lot of people, and making his own decisions. He's got a -- he's very unique and own deliberative process to make decisions.

BLITZER: Very quickly, Paul. I know you don't like some of had his advisors. I called Wolfowitz. But what did you think of his speech on the substance the national security positions he put forward?

BEGALA: I thought he needed nor meat there. If you're going to break with the past -- Bill Clinton broke with the fast past. He broke with Democrats on welfare, on trade, on crime. Jeb didn't do any of that. He says, I'm my own man, and then he just recycles, as Ana says, the same stuff we got from his brother, W. He's Jeb W. Bush. He's going to have to find specific ways to break away.

BLITZER: Ana, he seems seemed a lot more comfortable in the Q&A after the speech than actually delivering the written speech, right?

NAVARRO: You think? Listen, I think Jeb Bush is going to be the Q&A guy on the campaign and I think he's very good on Q&A because he's authentic, he doesn't pun on any question, anything that's pitched to him he answers, he's comfortable. He's funny. He's loose and witty. So if I were advising Jeb, I'd say to him, Buddy, speak less, answer more Q&As.

BLITZER: OK.

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: Maybe he will do some here on CNN with me.

He has an open invitation. We'd love to have him.

Guys, thanks very, very much.

I'll be back 5:00 p.m. eastern on "The Situation Room."

For our international viewers, "Amanpour" is next.

For our viewers in North America, "Newsroom" with Brooke Baldwin starts right now.