Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Officials: U.S. To Send Cluster Munitions To Ukraine; White House Holds News Briefing. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired July 07, 2023 - 14:00   ET

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

[14:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN HOST: The U.S. is expected to announce that it will include cluster munitions in its newest military aid package for Ukraine. Russia calls it "a move of desperation," that uses cluster munitions itself. We are standing by for the White House and Pentagon briefings this hour.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Plus, a CNN exclusive on where the special counsel is now focusing its investigation into election interference. It's that Oval Office meeting where former President Donald Trump heard some wild options about how to hold on to power. CNN's exclusive reporting is coming up.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: And the U.S. job market is cooling off slightly. We will break down the June jobs report and whether it is enough for Fed Chair Jerome Powell to change his plan on interest rate hikes. We are following these major developing stories and many more, all coming in right here to CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

SCIUTTO: In moments, the White House briefing is set to begin. We may hear why President Biden is taking an unprecedented step in Russia's war in Ukraine. Defense officials say the administration will supply Ukraine for the first time with cluster munitions.

This weapon is banned in nearly all Western nations because of the risk to civilians. A cluster munition is made up of a canister that contains anywhere from dozens to hundreds of smaller bombs. The danger is that oftentimes for a small percentage, those bombs do not detonate immediately as you see in this attack that Russia launched in Kharkiv, Ukraine last year. That could pose a danger to civilians for many years to come. Both Russia and Ukraine have used cluster munitions in this conflict.

As we wait for the briefing to begin, let's turn to CNN's Nada Bashir in London. And, Nada, the issue here seems to be that the Western view is Ukraine needs these munitions to help break through those entrenched Russian positions in eastern Ukraine, multiple lines of defense, minefields, trenches, etcetera. How are Ukrainian officials and now Western officials making that case?

NADA BASHIR, CNN REPORTER: Well, look. This is something that has been under consideration by the Biden administration for some time now. It's something that President Zelenskyy has been pushing for and requesting for some time now.

But this anticipated turnaround by the Biden administration, it's really coming in response to the situation on the ground. We know the cause that Ukraine is in the midst of its weeks-long counter- offensive. But that counter-offensive is A., not going as quickly as Ukraine's Western allies had anticipated. But also the gains being made by the Ukrainian Armed Forces simply aren't as substantial as the U.S. and other NATO Allies would have hoped.

And we know that Ukraine is -- Ukraine is burning through its weapons stockpile. And that is a significant concern because that is, of course, simply not sustainable. And that, as you mentioned, is something that Russian officials themselves have picked up on -- have pointed out.

We've heard from Russian -- from the Russian ambassador to Belarus speaking about this. He said the hawks in the West have realized that the much-advertised counter-offensive of the Ukrainian Armed Forces did not go according to plan. So, they are trying at all costs to give at least some impetus to it. In fact, it is a move of desperation.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

BASHIR: Of course, the U.S. administration actually phased out these cluster munitions back in 2016. So, they do have a large stockpile. But as you mentioned, this would be a deeply controversial move.

These weapons have been outlawed by more than a hundred countries, including some of the U.S.'s closest NATO allies. And that is because of the significant long-term risks that these weapons can pose to civilians.

We've seen cluster munitions used to devastating effect by the Russian Armed Forces in the past in Syria. We know that both Ukraine and Russia are currently using these munitions on the battlefield in Ukraine. Ukraine is currently being supplied with cluster munitions by Turkey. However, they do want those U.S. cluster munitions which they can use with those U.S.-made HIMARS that was supplied by the Biden administration.

[14:05:07]

But as you mentioned, as well, these are really risky. There is a significant case, of course, around the civilian risk because many of these simply don't detonate and pose that long-term risk. We've heard from the International Committee of the Red Cross. They've warned that they believe between 10 and 40 percent of these bomblets that are distributed by the canisters do not detonate. So, it is a hugely controversial matter. But of course, this would mark a significant turnaround by the Biden administration if indeed it is approved.

SCIUTTO: Yes. And U.S. defense officials say that the fail rate or the dud rate of the munitions they're supplying, they're aiming to keep around two percent or two and a half percent lower than in other cases. We'll see if it maintains that standard. Nada Bashir, in London, thanks so much. Brianna. KEILAR: Russia calls the Biden administration's decision a move of desperation amid Ukraine's ongoing counter-offensive. Worth noting that Ukraine has been asking for these cluster munitions for some time now. We have CNN's Natasha Bertrand live for us at the Pentagon. So, Natasha, what changed?

NATASHA BERTRAND, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY REPORTER: Yes, Brianna. So, this is really the result of the realities on the ground in Ukraine right now. U.S. officials had not necessarily been considering providing these cluster munitions to Ukraine in a serious way up until a few weeks ago when Ukraine did launch its counter-offensive and U.S. officials began to realize that Ukraine might not have enough ammunition to sustain it through the end of their counter-offensive. Enough to get them through the war in Ukraine.

Now, the reality though, is that this -- the U.S. has these munitions in its stockpile, but they also only have so many of those munitions. And so, it is unclear whether this is simply going to be a temporary measure to hold them over until more ammunition is supplied to them more conventional ammunition so that they don't need to use these cluster munitions, or whether this is a more long-term solution.

But it is a very controversial move. And it took the Biden administration quite a long time to get to this point. Ukraine had been asking for months and months for this ammunition saying that the Russians are using it. Therefore, they should also be able to use it. And arguing that they would not use it in civilian areas.

But they say that it can really have a big impact on their operations on the battlefield. They do believe that because you can hit larger areas and more concentrated targets of Russian troops with these munitions that it could help them break through those Russian defensive lines. And now, U.S. officials do seem to agree.

Pentagon press secretary Patrick Ryder, he said yesterday that he does believe that these could have a significant impact in allowing Ukrainian forces to hit Russian personnel and also engage in anti-tank attacks. And so, this is something the administration has kind of come around to, but it's mostly been by necessity.

The Ukrainians are burning through artillery ammunition. And the U.S. has a very large stockpile of these cluster munitions. So now, they're looking to tap into that stockpile.

Of course, U.S. allies are not necessarily thrilled by it. But U.S. officials also say they've had extensive conversations behind the scenes with some of those allies who have signed on to that ban on cluster munitions. And they say that they have managed to alleviate some of their concerns, Brianna.

KEILAR: So, they've alleviated some of their concerns. You have the NATO Summit coming up here soon, where you have many European allies of Ukraine and the U.S. who have signed on to this ban on these munitions. Do you think that there will be any pushback, any folks whose concerns have not been alleviated? BERTRAND: Well, we're already hearing a little bit of dissent from some U.S. allies. Notably, the UN secretary general, his spokesperson said that he does remain opposed still to the use of cluster munitions because he supports the ban on cluster munitions that was signed back in 2010. And we also heard from Germany, which did not necessarily give a full-throated defense of the United States' decision to send these munitions with the German defense minister saying this morning that it is not an option for Berlin to send the cluster munitions themselves because they are a signatory to this ban.

And beyond that, he said that he could not comment, Brianna. So, obviously, allies are approaching this with some trepidation. But U.S. officials don't believe that this is going to cause a lot of disunity or heartburn going into next week's summit.

KEILAR: All right. Natasha Bertrand, at the Pentagon, thank you for that report. Boris?

SANCHEZ: Let's dig deeper on this issue and others with CNN Global Affairs analyst Kimberly Dozier. She's also the senior managing editor at the Military Times. Kimberly, always great to see you. I just want to give you a heads-up. We are monitoring Jake Sullivan, who is giving a press conference right now, so we may cut into that specifically if he gets into the topic of these munitions.

Obviously, this is a controversial subject. We know that some 95 -- 94 percent of cluster bomb casualties are actually civilians. I'm wondering from your perspective, what kind of ethical questions and considerations this raises for the White House?

[14:10:00]

KIMBERLY DOZIER, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Well, the questions it raises for the White House are the same ones it raises for the Ukrainians. This is short-term gain for long-term risk to civilians later, especially since this is territory that Ukraine is trying to take back. But tactically, as Natasha mentioned, the Ukrainians in this offensive are burning through ammunition faster, almost the NATO countries can supply it.

So, this could give them as much as another month of fighting time before the winter sets in. And that can be crucial in terms of winning back square miles on the battlefield. Long term, it also gives them the opportunity to take back more territory by the way they operate the same artillery munitions that are right now, launching and hitting one discrete area.

Instead, these multiple little bomblets spread out, can punch through armor, take out more personnel. So, from Ukrainian perspective, the more that they gain, the more likely that NATO countries are to stop saying, oh, this counter-offensive is going really slow. And the more likely they are to make long-term pledges to keep this battle going.

SANCHEZ: So, in your mind, is this a sign that the West in Ukraine itself is concerned about the pace of the counter-offensive? DOZIER: Look, even President Zelenskyy said the counter-offensive is going slower than they expected. But you got to look at what they're up against. Russia knew where they were going to be coming from, and has heavily mined a lot of those areas to protect its troops.

It's always easier, as the wisdom of war goes, to defend than to attack. The other thing that the Russians did was they allegedly took out that bomb in that dam in the south, which flooded a large area that the Russians then no longer had to defend, and they could move more of their defenses north. So, Ukraine is facing an entrenched enemy that is also well-reinforced. And Moscow just said it's going to be calling up tens of thousands of more reserves so, I have --

SANCHEZ: Kim, if you could for a moment, please stand by because we're going to the national security adviser at the podium at the White House. Here's Jake Sullivan.

JAKE SULLIVAN, NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: And to go into the details of that drawdown package and the specifics on the types of munitions being provided. But I will use this opportunity here today to make a few points. First, we base our security assistance decision on Ukraine's needs on the ground. And Ukraine needs artillery to sustain its offensive and defensive operations. Artillery is at the core of this conflict. Ukraine is firing thousands of rounds a day to defend against Russian efforts to advance and also to support its own efforts to retake its sovereign territory.

We have provided Ukraine with a historic amount of unitary artillery rounds. And we are ramping up domestic production of these rounds. We've already seen substantial increases in production, but this process will continue to take time and it will be critical to provide Ukraine with a bridge of supplies while our domestic production is ramped up. We will not leave Ukraine defenseless at any point in this conflict. Period.

Second, Russia has been using cluster munitions since the start of this war to attack Ukraine. Russia has been using cluster munitions with high dud or failure rates of between 30 and 40 percent. In this environment, Ukraine has been requesting cluster munitions in order to defend its own sovereign territory. The cluster munitions that we would provide have dud rates far below what Russia is doing -- is providing not higher than 2.5 percent.

And third, we are closely coordinating with Ukraine, as it has requested these munitions. Ukraine has committed to post-conflict demining efforts to mitigate any potential harm to civilians. And this will be necessary regardless of whether the United States provides these munitions or not because of Russia's widespread use of cluster munitions. We will have to continue to assist Ukraine with demining efforts no matter what, given the significant use of cluster munitions already perpetrated by Russia.

So, the bottom line is this. We recognize that cluster munitions create a risk of civilian harm from unexploded ordnance. This is why we have deferred the decision for as long as we could. But there is also a massive risk of civilian harm if Russian troops and tanks roll over Ukrainian positions and take more Ukrainian territory and subjugate more Ukrainian civilians because Ukraine does not have enough artillery. That is intolerable to us. Ukraine would not be using these munitions in some foreign land.

[14:15:02]

This is their country they're defending. These are their citizens, they're protecting. And they are motivated to use any weapons system they have in a way that minimizes risks to those citizens. So with that, I would be happy to take your questions. Annie.

ANNIE LINSKEY, WHITE HOUSE REPORTER, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL: Thank you so much. Annie Linskey of The Wall Street Journal. I was hoping we could comment on the news earlier this week that the Russians may be open to a prisoner swap for Evan Gershkovich. And I also had a question for you about how the uprising by the Wagner group may, in your view, impact Russia's leaders' willingness or lack of willingness to make a deal that was to release Evan.

SULLIVAN: So, first, as Karine mentioned before, today is the hundredth day of Evan's unjust and unlawful detention. And for those hundred days, President Biden, the entire national security team, our embassy in Moscow, our Secretary of State, myself personally have been invested in trying to bring him home safely.

Second, I had the opportunity this morning to meet with Evan's employers at The Wall Street Journal and the personal representatives of his family to talk about the latest status in his case and our efforts to bring Evan home. Third, we did see the comments from the Kremlin that there have been contacts between the U.S. and Russia regarding Evan and other unjustly detained Americans.

It is true. And we have said that we remain in contact with Russian authorities at high levels on these cases to try to figure out a way to bring unjustly detained Americans home, including Evan. We have also made clear for months now, even before Evan was detained as we were dealing with Paul Whelan, that we are prepared to do hard things in order to get our citizens home, including getting Evan home.

I do not want to give false hope. What the Kremlin said earlier this week is correct. There have been discussions.

But those discussions have not produced a clear pathway to a resolution. And so I cannot stand here today and tell you that we have a clear answer to how we are going to get Evan home. All I can do is tell you that we have a clear commitment and conviction that we will do everything possible to bring him home.

With respect to the question of whether the recent actions by Prigozhin and the fallout from that creates new openings or opportunities. I can't say that I have perceived that directly. But of course, this is a story that continues to be written day by day.

So, we will have to see how things continue to play out in Moscow. In the meantime, we're going to stay laser-focused on doing everything we can both directly with the Russians and then with other allies and partners around the world who are invested in his safe return to try to get them out as soon as possible. Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: President Zelenskyy said an invitation for Ukraine to join NATO will be the ideal outcome from the summit. Why does the administration believe that's not the right approach for the summit?

SULLIVAN: Well, as you know, the United States strongly supports the open door policy which says that Ukraine and NATO can make a decision together about its pathway towards membership. And Vilnius will be an important moment on that pathway towards membership because the United States or our NATO allies and Ukraine will have the opportunity to discuss the reforms that are still necessary for NATO to -- for Ukraine to come up to NATO standards. So this will, in fact, be a milestone. But Ukraine still has further steps it needs to take before membership in NATO.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So, no invitation coming up at the summit?

SULLIVAN: Ukraine will not be joining NATO coming out of this summit. We will discuss what steps are necessary as a continuous its path.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: In what the stand is the cluster munition -- what convinced President Biden it was the right time to do cluster munitions, given the concern and allies expressed concerns to him? And are you suggesting that the reason you were providing cluster munitions is because Ukraine is running out of unitary artillery rounds? Is that -- is that the fact of that?

SULLIVAN: So first, we have been looking at this for quite some time. And what we have been weighing is this basic question of civilian harm. The challenge of cluster munitions, as you know, is that even at low dud rates, there is some unexploded ordinance that is left and that could potentially pose a risk to civilians down the road.

So, we did not immediately come out of the gate and provide this. But we had to balance that against the risk to civilian harm if Ukraine did not have sufficient artillery ammunition. We are reaching a point in this conflict because of the dramatically high expenditure rates of artillery -- of artillery by Ukraine and by Russia, where we need to build a bridge from where we are today to when we have enough monthly production of unitary rounds. That unitary rounds alone will suffice to give Ukraine what it needs.

So, as a result, this is the moment to begin the construction of that bridge so that there isn't any period over the summer or heading into this fall when Ukraine is short on artillery. And being short on artillery, it is vulnerable to Russian counterattacks that could subjugate more Ukrainian civilians.

[14:20:05]

That is the thinking behind our decision. We consulted closely with allies in deciding to do this. And some allies, who are not signatories to the Oslo Convention, embraced it with open arms, that this is absolutely the right thing to do.

Even allies, who were signatories to the Oslo Convention, while they cannot formally support something that they've signed up to a convention against, have indicated both privately and many of them publicly over the course of today that they understand our decision, and fundamentally that they recognize the difference between Russia using its cluster munitions to attack Ukraine and Ukraine using cluster munitions to defend itself, its citizens and its sovereign territory. So, we feel that this will in no way disrupt the very strong form of unity that we have heading into the NATO summit in Vilnius next week. Yes.

JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Thanks, Jake. To follow up on the cluster munitions. Last year in March, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, she described those munitions as "exceptionally lethal weaponry, which has no place on the battlefield." So, how do you square those comments with this decision? And secondly, has Ukraine provided you with any assurances or guarantees in terms of their use in civilian areas that they won't use them within a certain radius of civilian areas, for example?

SULLIVAN: So, Ukraine has provided written assurances that it is going to use these in a very careful way that is aimed at minimizing any risk to civilians. And by the way, Ukraine -- the democratically elected Government of Ukraine has every incentive to minimize risk to civilians because it's their citizens. It's Ukrainians, who they are trying to protect and defend.

This is not Ukraine taking these and going and using them in the Middle East or in Southeast Asia, or in some faraway land. They're using them on their territory to defend their territory. So, we believe that they're highly motivated to do this. And beyond being highly motivated, they have to directly answer your question provided these assurances to us.

In terms of the ambassador's comments and other comments that have been bandied about, let me just say that the use of cluster munitions by Russia in this conflict is completely unacceptable on multiple counts. First, they are using them to attack a sovereign country in a flagrant violation of International Law. Second, they're using them specifically to strike after civilian targets, not only military targets. Also in flagrant violation of International Law. And with this weapon system, as well as other weapons systems, we have identified war crimes committed by the Russians.

Third, and critically, there is a big difference between the type of cluster munition being used by Russia and the type that we would provide to Ukraine. As I mentioned before, ours have a maximum 2.5 percent dud rate. The dud rate of Russian munitions is between 30 and 40 percent.

And just so I don't get this wrong, I will read it to you. The Department of Defense assesses that during the first year of the conflict alone, Russian-fired cluster munitions deployed from a range of weapon systems have likely expended tens of millions of submunitions were bomblets in Ukraine. And then the final point, I think this is an important point. When I talk about what Russia is doing with cluster munitions, I'm not making an argument which says they do it so we'll do it. The argument I'm making is that Russia has already spread tens of millions of these bomblets across Ukrainian territory. So, we have to ask ourselves is Ukraine's use of cluster munitions on that same land actually, that much of an addition of civilian harm given that that area is going to have to be de-mined regardless?

So, that is why when we look at the situation today, as opposed to a year ago, and when we look at what Ukraine would be doing with these weapons as opposed to what Russia is doing with these weapons, we see a substantial difference. It doesn't make it an easy decision. And I'm not going to stand up here and say it is easy.

It's a difficult decision. It's a decision we deferred. It's a decision that required a real hard look at the potential harm to civilians. And when we put all of that together, there was a unanimous recommendation from the national security team and President Biden ultimately decided in consultation with allies and partners and in consultation with members of Congress to move forward on this step.

DIAMOND: And, Jake, are you satisfied with the pace and progress of the Ukrainian counter-offensive thus far?

SULLIVAN: We get this question a lot. I'm not grading or judging the Ukrainian counter-offensive. I'm standing here in Washington, DC. I'm not on the battlefield. My wife's not on the line.

So for me to sit here and say, I'm satisfied, I'm not satisfied, what I would say is that it is hard going. The Russians are dug in. They have thrown a lot of defense and manpower and munitions at this. And the Ukrainians have bravely systematically been punching and pushing forward and will continue to do so.

The Ukrainians also have a substantial amount of capacity. They have not yet committed to this fight. So, the story of this counter- offensive is far from written and we will continue to support Ukraine along the way. Yes.

[14:25:05]

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Jake, you said that Ukraine provided written assurances for how they would use these munitions. When was that provided? And also, can you just provide more details on what are those assurances? (INAUDIBLE)

SULLIVAN: So, they provided them in the context of their written request to us for these munitions. So, they reached out and requested them. I couldn't give you the exact date, but some weeks ago.

And in doing so, the assurance that they provided was that they intend to use these munitions in a way to minimize the exposure of civilians. So, outside of civilian areas, and outside of areas that civilians traffic. That is to say, on the battlefield, where they are presently both trying to defend their territory and to move forward. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are there specific locations, though red lines and those assurances or do the administration advise them, you know, only use these munitions in these specific locations?

SULLIVAN: This is going to be an ongoing conversation because obviously, the battlefield is shifting at all times. So, it's impossible to set down a map and define this with the level of specificity that maybe your question implies. But it does mean that this conversation needs to be ongoing.

Just as it -- as it is with every other weapons system that we're providing Ukraine. And so far, we have found that when Ukraine provides assurances to the United States about the use of its munitions it followed through on that in terms of the limitations and constraints it's placed on those. And we expect the same in this case.

And I just want to underscore. Again, I know I sound like a broken record. But the idea that Ukrainian men and women fighting for the armed forces of Ukraine want to willy-nilly use these things in a way that you're going to harm Ukrainian citizens, which is somewhat implied in the questions, I find you know at odds with their fundamental desire to protect their countrymen and their willingness to put their lives on the line to protect their countrymen, so that's all --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you have any idea about Prigozhin's location?

SULLIVAN: I did not. Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Just follow up on Ukraine and then I have a second question related to that. Is it the U.S. view that President Zelenskyy should attend the NATO Summit and how might his presence affect the outcome of discussions?

SULLIVAN: So, we would welcome President Zelenskyy at the NATO summit. President Biden would welcome the opportunity to meet with President Zelenskyy at the NATO summit. The NATO Summit will dive into the question of NATO's relationship with Ukraine both the question of its pathway towards future membership and the question of an ongoing partnership that has existed for several years. And there will be important practical announcements in that regard at the summit, so President Zelenskyy's attendance at it would be very much welcome.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: With respect to -- I'm sorry, Eastern European nations want NATO allies to beef up their security on the eastern flank, especially with Mr. Prigozhin's expected exile and the Wagner group's expected exile into Belarus which shares a border with Lithuania. Is the U.S. planning to announce any new security guarantees at the summit?

SULLIVAN: We have the ultimate security guarantee for Poland and the Baltic States, and its Article Five of NATO and we are in -- we intend to defend every single inch of NATO territory. We've also put our money where our mouth is in terms of enhanced U.S. deployments in both Poland and the Baltic States as well as Romania and other eastern flank allies. I had the opportunity this morning to meet with my counterpart from Poland, the Polish national security adviser. The first and main topic of conversation was the evolving threat from Belarus. Both this question of whether Wagner will ultimately end up there, which by the way, is still very much an open question, and the assertions about potential deployments of nuclear weapons on the territory of Belarus and the role of Belarus in -- and complicity of Belarus and Russia's aggression in Ukraine.

These are all things that we have been taking into account going back to the start of this conflict. And we constantly look at everything from the positioning of NATO forces to the pre-positioning of various stocks and ammunition in the eastern flank. That will be a continued discussion at Vilnius. But this is an evolving picture and so I don't think Vilnius is going to be the place where we put the final storyline down. It will continue to evolve as we go forward.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Just to follow up --

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thanks, Jake. Does the U.S. support eliminating the need for Ukraine to fulfill a Membership Action Plan that essentially establishes benchmarks they have to meet to qualify for NATO membership?

SULLIVAN: So, we're looking at that question. That is an active discussion among allies right now, whether Ukraine has in fact moved beyond the need for a map. I won't get ahead of where leaders will end up at the summit, but that's under active consideration.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Well, wait, just one on a Bilat with Erdogan, is this going to be a pull-aside the president is planning to have or will this be like a full-blown bilateral meeting to discuss Sweden's NATO membership?

SULLIVAN: I don't have anything to announce today. But I think you can expect that President Biden and President Erdogan will talk in Vilnius in exactly what format that takes remains to be seen. Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Two questions. First, the munitions. Germany has opposed them. Does that suggest any cracks in the alliances to you? What do you make of that opposition?