Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

Interview With State Department Spokeswoman Jen Psaki; Is Cease-Fire in Works Between Russia and Ukraine?; Defense Secretary Outlines Options for ISIS

Aired September 03, 2014 - 16:00   ET

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

JAKE TAPPER, CNN ANCHOR: President Obama vowed to destroy ISIS, but then, a few minutes later, he said the goal was to make ISIS a manageable problem. So which is it?

I'm Jake Tapper. This is THE LEAD.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The bottom line is this. Our objective is clear.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Is it, though? Is it clear?

In the world lead, can you contain a threat like ISIS or does one have to wipe it off the face of the earth completely? President Obama's seemingly contradictory remarks might make it difficult to know exactly what he thinks, especially after ISIS beheaded a second American.

Also, he called the threat from ISIS -- quote -- "beyond anything we have seen before." Maybe Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel can better explain the U.S. strategy to fight ISIS, if there is one yet, in an exclusive CNN interview.

And the politics lead. While foreign affairs are grabbing the headlines, control of the U.S. Senate hangs in the balance here at home. Our surprising new poll on a race that is on track to be the most expensive Senate race in history.

Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to THE LEAD. I'm Jake Tapper.

We will begin with the world lead. President Obama has not yet formulated or articulated a comprehensive strategy to take on ISIS, the jihadists running rampant in Iraq and in Syria, but he got another chance today in Estonia when he responded to the video ISIS released showing the second beheading of an innocent American by these terrorists in as many weeks.

The president had just landed in Estonia, the first stop on his four- day trip that will include a key NATO conference in Wales, and just as the president did after ISIS executed American James Foley, President Obama sternly condemned ISIS over Steven Sotloff, the American beheaded in the most recent horrific ISIS video, but then, President Obama's critics are saying, then he undercut his own message just a few sentences later.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

OBAMA: The bottom line is this. Our objective is clear. And that is to degrade and destroy ISIL so that it is no longer a threat.

TAPPER (voice-over): President Obama's clear objective toward the terrorists known as ISIS or ISIL was laid out this morning during a joint press conference with the president of Estonia.

QUESTION: Will you have a full strategy now on ISIS?

TAPPER: But to some observes, such as "National Journal" columnist Ron Fournier, that clarity may have been blurred.

OBAMA: We know that if we are joined by the international community, we can continue to shrink sphere of ISIL's influence, its effectiveness, its financing, its military capabilities, to the point where it is a manageable problem.

TAPPER: By moving his bottom line from degrade and destroy to make ISIS a manageable problem in mere minutes, critics say the president once again muddled his message, the terrorist group's barbaric tactics not withstanding.

Just hours after the president talked about his goal to make ISIS a manageable problem, the vice president said this.

JOSEPH BIDEN, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We will follow them to the gates of hell until they are brought to justice, because hell is where they will reside!

TAPPER: And the secretary of state said this:

JOHN KERRY, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: We have taken the fight to this kind of savagery and evil before, and, believe me, we will take it again.

TAPPER: So, do the president's at times seemingly contradictory words reflect his ambivalence about using military force in a part of the world where he's convinced it can only accomplish so much? Is he trying to avoid his predecessor's style?

GEORGE W. BUSH, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: There is an old poster out West as I recall that said wanted, dead or alive.

TAPPER: Whatever the reason, the president's words about ISIS have even alarmed some of his fellow Democrats, as when the president said this about any plan to target ISIS in Syria.

OBAMA: We don't have a strategy yet.

TAPPER: That was quickly followed by this.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We do have a comprehensive strategy for dealing with ISIL.

TAPPER: Perhaps any confusion is because the president is still coming to terms with the threat he dismissed to the "New Yorker" magazine in January, saying -- quote -- "If a J.V. team puts on Lakers uniforms, that doesn't make them Kobe Bryant."

But even with the secretary of defense now suggesting that the threat from ISIS or ISIL may be even worse than the threat from al Qaeda because of its financing and Western members--

CHUCK HAGEL, U.S. DEFENSE SECRETARY: They are tremendously well- funded. Oh, this is beyond anything that we have seen.

TAPPER: -- the White House is still today trying to insist that there was nothing inaccurate about that January J.V. quote.

JOSH EARNEST, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: The president was not singling out ISIL. He was talking about the very different threat that is posed by a range of extremists around the globe.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TAPPER: "The Washington Post" fact-checked that statement from White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest looking at the transcript of the "New Yorker" interview and determining that the conversation was very clearly, specifically about ISIS. And today Earnest was awarded four Pinocchios for a whopper of a falsehood.

Now I want to bring in Jen Psaki, spokeswoman for the State Department.

Jen, good to see you, as always.

JEN PSAKI, STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESWOMAN: Hi, Jake.

TAPPER: Maybe you can help clear this up for me. President Obama said today that the U.S. objective is to -- quote -- "degrade and destroy" ISIS or ISIL and then just 17 minutes later he talked about making ISIS a -- quote -- "manageable problem."

Those seem to be two different scenarios. Does the U.S. want, have its objective the destruction of ISIS or the containment of ISIS?

PSAKI: Well, absolutely, the United States wants to see ISIL destroyed and degraded.

Now, as the president also said today, that's not an overnight effort. It is going to take some time. We do want to take steps with countries in the region, with other countries around the world to reduce the threat, reduce the impact to countries in the region.

But we know this is going to take a while. That's why we're building this international coalition and talking to countries about a range of capabilities they have.

TAPPER: The two executed, murdered Americans, Foley and Sotloff, they were seized at the Turkey-Syria border.

That strongly suggests that ISIS in Syria is behind those terrorist murders. The president last week said that the U.S. does not yet have a strategy on -- for taking on ISIS in Syria, but the murder of these two Americans seems to suggest we should have one soon. When will we hear one articulated?

PSAKI: Well, first, Jake, we're going to hunt down these terrorists who have killed American citizens, who have gone after and threatened our people with every resource that we have.

And certainly the FBI will be the lead in that process. At the same time, the threat that ISIL poses to the region and to Western interests is one that we're already beginning to implement. We have taken more than 120 strikes in Iraq. Of course, part of that is addressing the humanitarian situation, protecting American citizens, but degrading ISIL is something that is a side effect of that as well.

And having this discussion that the president is having at NATO, that the secretary will have after the course of his travel is something that's under way as we speak.

TAPPER: I want to play something that former CIA operative Bob Baer said to me.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BOB BAER, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: The people who collect tactical intelligence on the ground day to day -- and this isn't Washington -- but the people collecting this stuff say, they're here. ISIS is here. They're capable of striking. They don't know what their plans and intentions are. But it's a definite concern.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Jen, are there ISIS operatives, ISIS cells here on American soil?

PSAKI: Well, Jake, look, I think we have been clear that one of our primary concerns is individuals who have Western passports who have aligned themselves with terrorist organizations like ISIL.

Obviously, we have a range of tactics we can take to prevent those individuals from coming into the United States, but certainly what we're looking at and what we're focused on is wherever this threat is, wherever it is growing. And the focus of that is really in countries like Syria and Iraq, where we have seen the most growth over the past several months.

TAPPER: But are they here?

PSAKI: I don't have any additional information, Jake, to provide to you on the comments of that individual.

TAPPER: Thank you so much.

PSAKI: Thanks, Jake.

TAPPER: Jen Psaki at the State Department, we appreciate your time.

Coming up next, President Obama overseas to try to reassure NATO allies that the U.S. has their back. Can he win their confidence now that Russia is measuring Ukraine for new curtains?

And are you still confused about the U.S. strategy about ISIS? Totally understandable. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel will try to clear it up for you in his exclusive sit-down with CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: Welcome back to THE LEAD. I'm Jake Tapper.

More now on our world lead. With the growing let of the terrorist group ISIS and Russia's escalating tensions with Ukraine, this week's NATO summit could not come at a more critical time for President Obama. It is also an opportunity to regain footing on the foreign policy front in the midst of bipartisan backlash over an administration perceived by many to be too cautious for its own good.

CNN White House correspondent Michelle Kosinski is live in Newport, Wales.

Michelle, there's one word that I did not hear President Obama use today when talking about Russia and Ukraine. The word is invasion.

MICHELLE KOSINSKI, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Right. Exactly.

No, we were just talking about that. We have kind of been keeping a collection of the phrases that President Obama and the administration has been using to describe what's been going on in Ukraine. Today, he used the words brazen assault, and in the past we have heard things like direct incursion, but they always stay away from the other I- word, invasion.

There's a number reasons for that, but obviously as they keep emphasizing, they still see a diplomatic solution to this, no boots on the ground, no military solution. They keep repeating that. And today President Obama gave this address to the people of Estonia, and he laid out again -- I mean, some of this is the same stuff we've been hearing for months about the need to defend Ukraine and keep, really, its goal of territorial integrity, but he also laid out the reasons why he feels that what's been going on well is basically all Russia's fault and then listed goals for the summit coming up and ways that could contribute to this collective defense that really this meeting is all about any that includes an expanded military presence, expanded U.S. military presence in Europe and that's interesting that is proposed by President Obama, Jake.

TAPPER: Michelle Kosinski, thank you so much.

With President Obama's arrival in Eastern Europe came news that Russia and Ukraine were working toward a cease-fire. It sounded encouraging. Except for one fairly significant hitch. Russia insists it cannot make any cease-fire deal because Russia is not engaged in the conflict.

Joining me now is Ambassador Richard Haass. He's the president of the Council on Foreign Relations and the former director of policy planning.

Ambassador Haass, good to see you as always.

Help us clear up some of this confusion over the ceasefire we heard about this morning.

First, Ukraine said the deal was done. Then there was clarification that a truce was in the works, and in the meantime, Russia denies it can even make a deal because President Putin insists his forces are not in Ukraine.

What do you make of it all?

RICHARD HAASS, FORMER DIRECTOR, POLICY PLANNING, STATE DEPT.: Well, I think you've got it exactly right and what we're likely to see is something in the gray area as we've seen, what, for months, Jake, between what would be a cease-fire and what would be an all-out conflict. So, you're going to have the continuation of a low-level conflict that's intermittent and it's going to be in geographically desperate places.

TAPPER: Isn't the timing of this cease-fire or whatever you want to call it a little suspicious coming on the heels of the NATO summit and shortly after the president arrived in Eastern Europe?

HAASS: You have to be a healthy believer in coincidences to think otherwise, but whether it happens or not I'd say two things and one, it's unlikely to last and two, it's unlikely to materially affect what's decided or discussed at NATO.

TAPPER: In the midst of all, Putin released and they posted it on the Russian government Web site, his seven-point plan for peace between pro-Russian separatists and Ukrainian forces. As part of that plan, he calls for Ukraine to pull its troops from rebel-controlled towns and for Ukraine to stop air strikes. It seems to me, correct me if I'm wrong, but he's basically saying here is the cease-fire terms, surrender and give eastern Ukraine to new Russia.

HAASS: This is a non-starter. The last I checked, it's Ukraine that is the sovereign entity. So, the idea that they're simply going to pull back and allow the separatists or ethnic Russians or whatever you want to call them to essentially create their own mini-state within a state, this is simply not going to happen.

What we don't know is whether this is sort of an opening bid and Putin knows this is unacceptable and he wants to start a diplomatic process, or he's just toying with people. This sounds to me more of the latter. This is not serious diplomacy. This is not the sort of stuff from which you would compromise.

So, it's hard to see any silver lining in this. TAPPER: Let's talk about the administration's reluctance to use the

word "invasion" to describe this. Nearly a month ago, the U.N. Ambassador Samantha Power said any further intervention by Russia into Ukrainian territory, even under the guise of humanitarian aid would be considered an "invasion," quote, unquote. But weeks later, a convoy of Russian trucks rolled into Ukraine purporting to be humanitarian help and Ukraine called the move an invasion, but the Obama administration did not then and still has not.

Why is there a reluctance to call it an invasion?

HAASS: The reluctance as I would judge it is simply if you start using words like "invasion", it puts tremendous pressure on you to respond directly and militarily, and I think it's important for everyone to keep in mind that while the United States has important interests in Ukraine and what happens, we do not have formal, legal obligations, and Ukraine is obviously not a member of NATO and the administration wants to avoid using language which would pressure it to make more of a local commitment than it wants.

Instead, what the administration is looking to do is to give limited help to Ukraine and instead to use this entire situation to bolster NATO, to try to wean, hopefully the Europeans somewhat from their dependence on Russian energy, to sanction Russia and so forth. The bulk of the response is indirect. The direct nature element to the response is actually quite modest.

TAPPER: Does it not matter at all that Samantha Power said, if you do this, it would be an invasion and then they did it. It's almost as if that never happened.

HAASS: It's almost as if that never happened. Simply because this or that ambassador or the U.N. or some other place said something, shall we say, does not make it policy.

TAPPER: Interesting. Ambassador Richard Haass on the Council on Foreign Relations, thanks so much, as always.

HAASS: Thanks, Jake.

Up next on THE LEAD: the president vowing to fight ISIS, yet stopping short of committing Americans to a drawn-out military campaign. So, just what exactly is the commander-in-chief saying?

Then, they're barbaric, they're unrepentant, and secretary of defense says these jihadists are beyond just terrorists. Hear what else Chuck Hagel told our Jim Sciutto about ISIS in a CNN exclusive. That's coming right up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: Welcome back to THE LEAD. I'm Jake Tapper.

Continuing with our world lead, the ongoing threat of barbaric ISIS terrorists in Iraq and what the U.S. can or will do about it. Just a short time ago, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel told CNN that the mission is clear, but it's possible he may only have raised more question marks in the process.

And CNN chief national security correspondent Jim Sciutto joins me now from Newport, Rhode Island, where he sat down with the secretary of defense.

Jim, great job, there's so much to pore over. But what struck you the most on your one-on-one?

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Well, Jake, I'll tell you, you and I have talked about this in recent weeks, about the administration's response to the threat of ISIS. There have frankly been mixed messages.

Is it, for instance, a threat to the U.S. homeland or just to the region? We've heard both coming out from the administration.

Will the U.S. attack Syria and does the president have options on the table? We've heard conflicting things there, but also a conflicting or, frankly, imprecise definition as to what the strategy is against ISIS in Iraq, in Syria. What is the endgame here?

And on those points, we heard more definitive answers, frankly, from Defense Secretary Hagel. For instance, he made it clear that the mission in his words is to destroy, not contain ISIS. He said in very clear terms that the threat of ISIS is not just to the region, to Iraq, to Syria, but also to Americans, and that's something we haven't heard to this point.

Have a listen to how the secretary put it to me just a short time ago.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHUCK HAGEL, DEFENSE SECRETARY: We're providing the president with those options to degrade and destroy ISIL's capability.

SCIUTTO: That's the endgame? Degrade and destroy, not contain?

HAGEL: No. It's not contain. It's exactly what the president said -- degrade and destroy.

SCIUTTO: Is it an imminent threat to the U.S. homeland or to the region?

HAGEL: Look at what happened 24 hours ago on the latest video of another citizen as to what ISIL did. It is a threat. ISIL is a threat to this country, to our interests.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: One other issue where the secretary did not, frankly, give a final answer is, will the president seek further congressional authorization for military action if he chooses to do so in Syria. Does he believe the current authorizations give him the power he needs?

Secretary of Defense Hagel saying that's an option that the president is still considering, but he did say that the president wants to have Congress involved in the decision-making process. He did not say, Jake, whether or not he needs to go to a vote in Congress before, for instance, he might take military action inside Syria.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Do you vow to the American people today that ISIS will not just be degraded and contained, but destroyed?

HAGEL: Well, vows are something beyond my mortal capacity of doing, but I can tell you this, Jim, I know this about this president, this vice president, I know this about everyone in his administration, I know this about myself -- we will do everything possible that we can do to destroy their capacity to inflict harm on our people and Western values and our interests.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: I think you heard there, Jake, just a very personal response, something along the lines from what we heard from Vice President Biden earlier today when he said, "We're going to chase ISIS to the gates of hell", you know, a visceral, almost, response, saying that as defense secretary, he takes this threat seriously, seeing those beheading videos a call to action for him and others in the administration.

TAPPER: Jim Sciutto, great work. Thank you so much, as always.

Up next on THE LEAD: what we have here is a failure to communicate. Those words from the movie "Cool Hand Luke" might best sum up how some are viewing the president's message on how they will tackle ISIS, comprehensively.

So, why does the administration not seem to have all its members on the same page? Our political panel will weigh in, coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)