Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Fighting in Ukraine, Middle East Show Few Signs of Slowing; Israel Says No to Cease-Fire; Escalating Israel-Hamas Violence Fueling Rise in Anti-Semitism; French President Says Weather May Be One Cause of Air Algerie Crash

Aired July 27, 2014 - 17:00   ET

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

MIGUEL MARQUEZ, CNN HOST: Right now, two enormous stories growing in scope, solving them getting harder by the hour.

DEBORAH FEYERICK, CNN HOST: Fighting in Ukraine and fighting in the Middle East show few signs of slowing down despite outside diplomatic pressure or talks of potential cease-fire. At least 30 people died today in eastern Ukraine, including two children, as government forces advanced on a rebel-held city of Horlivka (ph). Still, the Malaysia airlines crash site which stretches for miles remains under rebel control out of reach of investigators.

MARQUEZ: And in the mid-east, is it a cease-fire or not? Both sides ratcheting up the rhetoric and the fighting as Israeli forces look to expand their offensive, a global push now for a stop in the fighting from the U.S. to the U.N.

Speaking to CNN, Israel's prime minister says enough talk, Hamas must surrender its weapons.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER: Hamas is simply continuing all of its operations and Israel will not let this terror operation decide when it's convenient for them and not convenient for them to attack our people. When it's convenient for them to restock and reload and when it's not convenient for them. We'll do whatever is necessary to protect our people.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FEYERICK: And President Obama spoke by phone today with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

According to the White House, the president, once again, condemned Hamas' rocket attacks on Israel and also voiced support for Israel's right to defend itself. But at the same time, the president shared concerns about the rising numbers of Palestinians' civilian deaths as well as the loss of Israeli lives. Mr. Obama also renewed his call for an immediate and unconditional cease-fire.

More than a thousand Palestinians have been killed, another 6,000 wounded since Israel's offensive began almost three weeks ago. Forty three Israeli soldiers and two Israeli civilians have also died.

Let's bring in two of our reporter, CNN's Karl Penhaul standing by in Gaza and Sara Sidner in Jerusalem. Thanks for joining us.

Karl, first to you. You have new information about the explosion on Thursday that killed 16 people at a shelter in Gaza. What is the latest?

KARL PENHAUL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That is really what is occupying all of our news attention tonight, a statement from the Israeli military. We have to be very concise and precise about their language. This, of course, was a sensitive issue. And in that explosion, according to Palestinian helpful authorities and what CNN team's reported and observed on that day, 16 killed more than 200 wounded.

Now, the Israeli military is coming forward and said it caused the explosion. The Israeli military has said a single errant mortar fell into the courtyard of the school and caused that explosion.

However, the Israeli military says it was extremely unlikely anybody was killed. It goes on to add that it rejects the claim that people were killed. The Israeli military does, of course, accept as does eyewitnesses on the ground that there had been intense fighting going on around that school in the course of the day.

What is the United Nations reaction been because after all that school was a designated United Nations' shelter. Hundreds of people, hundreds of Palestinians were packed in there trying to flee from the war that was raging around them. And tonight, the United Nations spokesman said the Israeli military was aware that school was being used as a shelter for hundreds of people. We asked to evacuate them and the United Nations never got that approval.

Now the Israeli military appears in its statement to be saying that there may not have been anybody in that school. That contradicts what we reported on the day. It contradicts what the United Nations said on that day.

We also went down to the school several hours after to observed and try to observe evidence of what may have caused that blast and some of what we observed is consistent with what the Israeli military is now reporting. We noticed a single detonation point. We saw a blast radius of shrapnel about 30 or 40 yards across. That would be consistent according to our security consultant of a mortar rounds. About 60 millimeter or the 81 millimeter more to round.

A security consultants also suggested that that mortar round, because there was only a shallow detonation -- a shallow indentation in the ground and not a full crater, our security consultants suggested that mortar would have been sent to air burst. That means a mortar would have exploded above the ground before it hit the ground and that it was designed that way to cause maximum damage on enemy fighters. But, in this case, of course, fell into the courtyard that the United Nations and media organizations, including our own, were reporting was full of displaced people at the time. FEYERICK: And Karl, just to be clear, when you were there, you did

see that there were people there, that it was not empty. Is that correct?

PENHAUL: By the time our first CNN seem arrived on the scene, the ambulances were coming out of the school so our CNN team followed that group up a few blocks up to the hospital and that's where they observed -- I apologize. Our lights have gone out. That's one of the problems of Gaza these days. Their power is back and forth, partly as a result of the war.

But what I was telling you was that our CNN teams observed ambulances coming out of the school compound. They followed them several blocks up to the hospital. And they talked to multiple witnesses, multiple victims. Those victims said they had been at the school. The victims also said that they recorded explosions. The victims, incidentally, suggested there may be four or five what they described as shells that have gone off. But there was no doubt in their mind that they had been at the school and that they had been brought bleeding and dying from the school.

FEYERICK: And finally, Karl, just one of the things that the Israeli statement did say is that Hamas militants had fired anti-tank missiles in the immediate vicinity near the school. Is there any indication that perhaps some of the casualties could have been from that?

PENHAUL: No indication from the Israeli military statement. Also, that is not consistent with what we saw on the ground when a second CNN team went back to the school to look for evidence of what caused this explosion. We only saw a single debt nation point. An anti an anti-tank missile, what Hamas fighters are generally using right now, a Russian made Cornett and anti-tank missile. We saw no indication of the blast or any kind of impact caused by that type of weapon.

What it does, however, suggest is that Hamas fighters opened fire on Israeli tanks with an anti-tank missile that could have been the Cornett anti-tank missile. And as a result the Israeli military responded with mortar fire.

We don't know if the military had ground mortar crews on the ground in that area. But what we do know is that the Israelis may battle tank with (INAUDIBLE) is equipped with a single mortar tube, a single 60 millimeter mortar tube and a 60 millimeter round going into that courtyard could have caused the kind of blast radius and the kind of shrapnel field that we observed along with our security consultants.

FEYERICK: OK. All right. Karl Penhaul, thank you so much.

MARQUEZ: All right, we turn now to Jerusalem where our Sara Sidner with us standing by with Mark Regev, the spokesperson for the Israeli prime minister -- Sara.

SARA SIDNER, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Look. So, standing with me here now is the Israeli spokesman for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. And I would like to welcome him to the show, Mark Regev. Thank you for being here.

MARK REGEV, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER BENJAMIN NETANYAHU'S SPOKESPERSON: Thanks for having me.

SIDNER: We have a lot of questions for you and they are tough ones.

REGEV: Sure.

SIDNER: Let's start with what happened with the IDF. The IDF came out today saying that they have done a full inquiry and they did investigation and they have given us the information now saying, look, we did accidently send an errant mortar into the school yard. We do not believe that it killed anyone. In fact, they say it did not kill anyone, but it may have injured people. Shrapnel coming out off that may have injured people. How could they possibly know the difference between whether shrapnel killed someone or injured someone?

REGEV: First of all, what happened at the school was a tragedy. Innocent people were killed. The pictures are terrible and no human being could not be moved. The question is who is responsible. And that we have to look in very seriously and judiciously and we have to make sure we get to the truth.

Now, first of all, for a fact we know because the U.N. itself reported it that there was Hamas fire both in the vicinity of the school and Hamas rockets were landing on that immediate area the day it happened. That we know for a fact because the U.N. reported it and we saw it ourselves.

Secondly, we do know there was a fire fight between our forces and Hamas forces in the immediate vicinity of the school. And as we know, Hamas has got a consistent pattern of behavior of exploiting U.N. facility for their own military purposes.

On Saturday, we lost an IDF soldier from shooting that happened where a Palestinian terrorist was using a school as a backdrop. So he thought that would protect him. So we have to get to the bottom. It's not clear that this tragedy was result of IDF ordinance. What we can say, though, is that by turning the school into a war zone, the Palestinian terrorists, Hamas, were in fact deliberately endangering everyone in there.

SIDNER: But hearing from, you know, they basically said, look, we asked to be able to evacuate this area. You know Israel is very clear on the coordinates of this area and yet still a mortar fell into that particular schoolyard. How do you answer to that?

REGEV: First of all, we admit mistakes. We said that errant fire. This whole idea that Israel, you know, somehow doesn't come clean, is not true. We had a terrible incident on week ago with four boys on the beach. And said straight away, it was us, it was our fault, and we took -- we said we took responsibility and President Peres even apologized for that.

So let's be clear, when we make a mistake, we admit it. In this case, once again, it's not clear what was the ordinance that led to this terrible tragedy?

SIDNER: Last question on this particular situation. And that is, is Israel saying they believe it is Hamas that created the deaths there? We are talking about 16 people according to the health ministry in Gaza.

REGEV: Let's be clear. The U.N. secretary general, not Israel, the U.N. secretary general Ban Ki-Moon has said that when Hamas terrorists turn a U.N. facility into a war zone by storing weapons, by putting their fighters there and doing things that we've seen a consistent pattern of behavior, they are responsible for the casualties that ensure because they've turned what should be a neutral facility, what should be humanitarian facility into a war zone, a legitimate target to use his words.

SIDNER: But to be fair, this school, that U.N. says, did not have any kind of weapons inside of it?

REGEV: No. We know for a fact that Hamas terrorists were using the vicinity of the school as a shield to shoot it --

SIDNER: The area, thought, but not the school itself?

REGEV: If you're standing by the front gate and shooting and you don't want to be shot back because there's a school behind you, it is the same.

SIDNER: All right, let me ask you this. Let's move on to the cease- fire because the world is watching. They are seeing what is happening here and it's disturbing to everyone. Israelis, Palestinians, Americans, you name it alike. Israel has advanced technology. I mean, they have more weapons. They are capable of technological things that Hamas could never do.

The question to you, is Israel considers itself a moral authority? I think we can all agree on that. When is enough, enough?

REGEV: We have consistently accepted humanitarian cease-fires. And remind you, on Saturday, we did a 12-hour cease fire. John Kerry and the foreign ministers in Paris asked us to extend, we extend it in roughly for four hours even though Hamas opened fire immediately. For four hours they were shooting at us and we didn't shoot back.

Then at midnight we said we will extent for 24 hours and we held off fire and Hamas kept shooting rocket after rocket, some 25 rockets. Only at about 9:30, 10:00 in the morning did we make a decision, look, Hamas is not committing a cease-fire. It's just not sustainable that we hold our fire. By then it was for some what they betted up 12 and eight for some 20 hours and Hamas was shooting at us and we were not shooting at them. It is clearly was not sustainable. Then Hamas announces its own cease-fire at 2:00 p.m. this afternoon. And at 23:00 p.m. and three minutes, we get hostile firing from Gaza straight away. They broke their own declared cease-fire. It's not serious.

SIDNER: I want to ask you, though, a little bit further. You talked about of nothing fears. I know President Obama got on the phone to talk to Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu. You were probably in the room for all of that. can you tell me, is the cease-fire over? Are these negotiations just forget it? Is everyone throwing up their hands saying this is war, this is it?

REGEV: No. We are working on parallel on both diplomatic outcomes and, of course, the military operations continues to protect our people. The end goal is to get out of this with a sustained period of quiet so Israelis don't have to live in fear of the incoming rockets. And every month, just, we've had 2,500 rockets.

Five from the Gaza Strip, all these where cities. They are trying to kill our people and they still are just not enough. I heard sirens in the south. Those rockets continue to be mad (ph). We also have these issue of the terror tunnels where they try to sneak under the border, pop out on our side of the frontier with automatic weapons, explosive, rocket propelled grenade. They want to kill out people with automatic weapons and explosives. We want to end this with all that behind us. We want to end this with a period of peace and security for our people. That's our goal. That's possible. Either diplomatically or militarily but that's the goal.

SIDNER: All right. I want to bring in Karl Penhaul and he is in Gaza. And to be fair, Palestinians are saying, you're killing our people. We've got more than 1,000 who are dead and many more civilians. I want to bring Karl Penhaul in. He's in Gaza city.

Karl, you have a question for Mark Regev?

PENHAUL: Yes, a couple of questions. And it is great to have Mr. Regev on.

We, of course, went back down to the scene to try to observe and look for evidence of what caused this blast just a few hours after that site was evacuated. Our security consultant suggested that it the blast could have been caused by there are 60 millimeter mortar round or an 80 millimeter mortar round set to air burst. Does Mr. Regev have any information on that? Could this have been a 60 millimeter mortar round five it is (INAUDIBLE) tank set to air burst?

REGEV: I'm afraid, Karl, I do not have professional knowledge to answer that. I know my ideas. People and my colleagues in the military do. And once again, they say that they haven't found evidence that it was ours mortars. But that sort of discussion, you need to discuss with the professional and not with me. I do know the following, Karl, and as I said before, when we know it's our fault, as with the four boys on the beach, we do -- we do admit that it's our fault.

PENHAUL: I was talking about this single errant mortar that the Israeli military statement says did lamentively (ph) drop into the school courtyard. Also based on our observations, we did notice there were blood pools alongside the main building of the school close to the wall. That area would have been in shade at the time that this explosion occurred.

We also saw part of the shrapnel field down one of the corridors, the shrapnel that blows down one of the corridors which, again, based on our experience, as U.N. shelters, people tend to look for shade at this hot time of day.

Also, the question that I'd like to ask now, we have seen that video footage that that you currently provided to us, that appears to be from a camera of a drone or perhaps some other kind of aircraft. We do noticed, though, that it had the date and the details on the edges of that video. Could you tell us that if that video had been edited or simply that those details were taken out for operational security reasons?

REGEV: I believe it's operational security reasons, Karl. Once again, the IDF comes clean if we've made a mistake. We have a track record on that. And once again, I'd ask you. I heard tonight the U.N.'s spokesman on "Meet the Press" on NBC, and he did not contradict my prime minister when he said we don't what ordinance it is.

A lot of people, I think, rush to conclusions. I think it is more complicated that a lot of people thought at the beginning that people were killed, I don't deny. The question is, whose ordinance was it and in what circumstances did it happen? If there's an allegation that Israel deliberately and knowingly targeted civilians, that is clearly not true.

SIDNER: I want to ask you, Mark, back here in. You talk through this. Let me ask you, you talked about that you didn't know the specifics of this because of this, the IDF investigation.

REGEV: No. I said I don't know. I don't claim to be an expert on munitions and it's not fair to ask me these mortar because it's not my air of expertise.

SIDNER: What I do want to ask you is the investigation over? Because (INAUDIBLE) if an inquiry has been done and that they've come to this conclusion, does that mean this is over and this is all we're going to get from this? Because it is quite confusing. There are bits that are confusing. No, we didn't kill anybody, yes, we did injure but it's from very high up. And it is hard to know if that that actually what happened.

REGEV: First, well these investigation takes as long as it takes. We've got to get to the bottom. We got to find out exactly what happened. Once again, I say for the third time, when we make mistakes, we admit it.

But let's be clear. At the very beginning of this, everyone was saying for sure, it was Israel ammunitions. And then suddenly we found that the U.N. said that there was rocket fire, not agitating fire, rocket fire, Hamas rocket fire that was falling in (INAUDIBLE). We also know that there was a fire fight in the immediate area.

So there's a concept in conflict called the fog of war. And I'm not using this for defense but anyone who's been in combat, whether it's a soldier or someone who has witnessed combat as a journalist knows that your shots are being fired, you fire back very quickly. Sometimes it's complicated. Sometimes it's the situation is not as clear. It's not a computer game. It's combat. People are acting under pressure. People are acting in defense of their lives.

Once again, can anyone tell me that they are sure it was an Israeli ordinance? I don't believe so. Just as I'm not sure that it was Palestinian ordinance. We have to think clearly. We have to let the inquiry continue.

SIDNER: And it sounds like it's going to continue speaking here.

Karl I think has another question for us from Gaza city.

PENHAUL: A couple of points. I've twice heard Mr. Regev mentioned that the United Nations has reported rocket fire from Hamas positions in that part of Gaza when in fact there was a tweet from the under spokesman Chris Gunness. He said on that day reports of rocket fire in Bethanun (ph). He then clarify that he had retweeted that statement that he had no independent confirmation of that. He did not know that the U.N. to our knowledge independently suggests that there was rocket fire. It was retweet.

Second, my second point, is that we have three members of a CNN team including a security consultant going through the two main buildings of that school, as well as the courtyard. We found, as I already explained, a single point of detonation. That, we reported at that time despite facts that some eyewitnesses were talking about three shells coming in but with the three CNN people on the ground for more than 25 minutes observed no other points of impact, no other points of detonation and nothing else that would indicate anything other than shrapnel.

We also didn't observe any rocket parts on the ground which when we have seen rocket misfires here on the Gaza Strip. Subsequently, we do detect fragments of rockets on the ground as well. So again, I thank Mr. Regev, but would also ask if he could, please provide as with information from the Israeli military if this was, in fact, the 60 millimeter or 81 millimeter mortar shell, if that was sent on air burst which we know some militaries do use to causes maximum damage to enemy fighters.

REGEV: Once again, I don't claim to have the technical knowledge to answer your question. I can only say that any allegation that Israel deliberately killed people is obviously baseless. As to the munitions, what caused this, I think there's a serious question. I, once again, I think there are a lot of people who rush to quick conclusions. That's easy. Especially when, of course, you've got Hamas people who will , of course, Israelis, they are willing to blame us for anything when we have been mistakenly targeted people in the past, as I've said, we have admitted it. In this case, we don't think the evidence points in that direction, but we'll see how the investigation goes forward.

SIDNER: All right. We thank you so much for coming in here, Mark Regev. Good to see you again and I am will be talking to you again,

And we do want to hear more about this investigation, as we say, that appears to be going forward because we've gotten a bit of information but I think we need more. Appreciate it. REGEV: My pleasure.

SIDNER: Thank you. Back to you.

MARQUEZ: All right, Sara Sidner in Jerusalem, Karl Penhaul in Gaza. Keep yourself safe. Thank you.

FEYERICK: And we'll be back on the other side of the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MARQUEZ: Now, we've been talking about two deadly conflicts today along the Israeli-Gaza border. Rockets have been fired one after another in an attempt to end a 24-hour cease-fire that has failed. And Ukraine fighting has prevented investigators from examining the wreckage of Malaysia airlines Flight 17.

FEYERICK: And we are joined now by CNN military analyst lieutenant colonel Rick Francona and former CIA operative Bob Baer.

Bob, we want to start with you and the situation in Gaza. You look at everything altogether. People are wondering, is a cease-fire possible at this point or is Israel going to continue trying to increase its security while Hamas not giving any ground? What's going to be done?

ROBERT BAER, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: You know, I don't see any sort of movement in the right direction at all. I mean, Hamas has got a lot more rockets. It's going to continue to fire them. It's got certain demands that the Israelis don't feel like meeting now. And maybe Netanyahu, the prime minister, has got to keep moving against these tunnels until every last one of them is destroyed. And I don't see, right now, him stopping. I just don't see it. He can't afford to.

MARQUEZ: And Colonel, I think Bob seems to be paying attention to what all of these villains are saying right now, is that they are not going to sop with this. But even if Israel is successful in getting rid of Hama altogether, is that going to be the outcome they want?

LT. COL. RICK FRANCONA (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Well, then, you create a power vacuum in the Gaza Strip. And then who feels that void. And you know, if you listen to General Flynn, you know, senior intelligence officer at the department of defense, he says it may be worse. Islamic jihad may spring up as the new Hamas. So, you know, we have to be very California there.

So, as the Israeli perceive to destroy all of these tunnels and to destroy Hamas, they have to be thinking about what is down the road. But I think they are willing to chance that right now.

FEYERICK: You know, and when you think about it, Bob, a new poll in Jerusalem newspaper says that the majority of Israelis support the offensive in Gaza. Do you think that those numbers would be different, for example, if Israel were suffering more casualties?

BAER: No. In fact, I think it's just the opposite if there were more casualties there would be stronger support to go into Gaza and flatten it, you know, frankly. The Israeli populist does not feel that it can put up with this constant threat of rockets. I mean, they've lost relatively few people but if they lost more, I think you'd see the army come in from all directions and the conflict would get much worse. And by the way, I agree with Rick, you know, and General Flynn. If this continues on and Hamas dissolves, we're going to have something that looks very much like Al Qaeda arising in Gaza.

MARQUEZ: And probably beyond its borders as well taking up the Palestinian cause in for a group, for Hamas, that they didn't like to begin with.

FRANCONA: Well, if you see what is going on, you know, outside of Gaza, this has become a recruiting slogan for all of the jihadists throughout the Middle East. If you just look at the (INAUDIBLE) press, but read all of the social media, you know, it's Gaza and ISIS now are rallying for us for all of these people. So while the Israelis are maybe having success against Hamas in the Gaza Strip, they are generating this recruiting effort for ISIS and for Al Qaeda and any of these other Jihadi groups.

FEYERICK: And you have to wonder because there's clearly a strong economic component as well, the Israelis saying, look, if Gaza used some of the money from the outside to actually rebuild the infrastructure, it would shift the dynamics in the politics in the region as well.

(INAUDIBLE) just a little bit because, obviously, there's the Middle East, but there is also the Ukraine as well. Bob, international investigators have permission to bring security with them to the crash site. It's still too dangerous, too violent for them to go in. Do you think that there is some sort of a timeline as to when these investigators are going to go in? And if they do, the evidence so far has been completely compromised.

BAER: I think it's getting worse by the day, Deborah. You look at -- first of all, we're still missing victims of this attack. Secondly, the fighting in and around the crash area is getting worse. You see the Russians pouring in more weapons, you see Ukrainians more determined to take that area back. It's going to be too dangerous for a long time and I just couldn't imagine going into a crime scene like that and making sense of it after such a long period and, you know, I think a lot of answers are just going to be lost there on the ground.

MARQUEZ: All right, gentlemen, stay where you are. We are going to have you back in just a bit.

While Israel and Hamas debate temporary cease-fire, a lot of us are wondering, what about a permanent one? Is any cease-fire just a band- aid, one that will just end with more bloodshed in the years ahead? We'll have that.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MARQUEZ: Now, more than 165,000 Gaza residents say they have no place to go after their homes were destroyed. But every attempt at a humanitarian cease-fire seems over before it even begins.

Earlier today, Hamas finally said it would agree to a 24-hour cease- fire. But Israel said it had been responding to incessant attacks by Hamas.

Joining me now is Bill Van Esveld with a human rights watch.

Bill, we keep talking about temporary cease-fires. Obviously, everyone would like to see something longer. What does human rights want to see there as a more permanent solution?

BILL VAN ESVELD, SENIOR RESEARCHER, HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH: What we really want to see is an ends to attacks by all of the parties that violate very base he can laws of war provisions and longer term for Gaza. I mean, the situation in Gaza has been so bad for so long that the United Nations in a report a few months ago said in the year 20 because the electricity infrastructure was so decayed, the population is growing so quickly, and the water aquifer is so contaminated that that entire Gaza Strip it would be unfit for human habitation by the year 2020. So, we have got to see a lot more systemic changes and the lifting of the blockade and imposed by Israel with the assistance from Egypt before that location with 1.8 million people can get off the ground.

MARQUEZ: And I know HRW has looked into several incidents. The boys on the beach, the U.N. school bombing there. How concerned -- when Israel applies this sort of force in that sort of area with so many people nearby, this is going to happen no matter how careful they are trying to be. How many incidents now that does human rights watch claim are just simply outside the bounds of war?

VAN ESVELD: Well, we've investigated in great detail about ten incidents that appeared to us to have violated the laws of war. I think the message that the Israeli military needs to hear is just a basic reminder. It's not unlawful to attack your enemy in an urban environment. This is not about, you know, you have to tie both hands behind your back. This is about following really, really basic norms. You've got to be sure that you're shooting at a military target before you pull the trigger. And when you do, you've got to use a weapon that's able to distinguish between civilians and your enemy. You can kill your enemy but you cannot just pull the trigger and ask questions later. And unfortunately, that is what we have seen.

MARQUEZ: And I know that you guys have people on the ground there in Gaza that you guys have human rights watch has watched the situation there over many, many years now. I guess, what do you hope the outcome is here? The Israelis increasingly talking about getting rid of Hamas altogether. Does human rights see that as remotely possible?

VAN ESVELD: Well, we don't take a position on the political reasons for going to war and we don't take a position on the political outcomes coming out of war. But what we're really concerned about is that this is the third major escalation and conflict in Gaza and Israel since 2008, 2009. And that has led to hundreds and hundreds of civilian casualties on the Palestinian side, as well as deaths from rocket fires on the Israeli side. There's been complete impunity for this, virtually complete impunity

on the Israeli side. No investigation, obviously, whatsoever on the Palestinian side. That's got to end or we're going to see this cycle repeat again.

MARQUEZ: We hope not. But thank you very much, Bill Van Esveld. Thank you.

Will we ever learn what happened to Malaysia airlines Flight 17? The crash site is a war zone now making the black boxes a potential crucial piece of evidence. What secrets could be inside those boxes? That's ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MARQUEZ: Dutch investigators trying to reach the site of Malaysia airlines disaster where sidelined again today because of the more violence with little evidence collected from the crash scene. Malaysian officials are hoping flights 17's flight data recorder will provide crucial details so investigators can better understand the final moments leading to the disaster.

FEYERICK: And here with some insights, our panel, CNN aviation analyst Miles O'Brien, Clive Irving, a contributor for "The Daily Beast," and former FAA safety inspector David Soucie.

David, when you think about it, it took about 12 seconds for that missile to reach that plane. In that time, do you think the pilots would have been aware that they were about to be hit? Would there be anything on that black box suggesting that?

DAVID SOUCIE, CNN SAFETY ANALYST: I don't think there will be. Where the investigation is going to lead, though, was there an attempt to communicate with the aircraft before the missile was shot? That's the conclusive evidence that needs to be put forth because they have made an attempt try to reach the aircraft and did not respond properly that would have help in their defense. But in this case, no, I don't think they would have known.

FEYERICK: So, and let's be clear, this is a time of war. I mean, usually, if you're firing at somebody you think is their enemy, you are not going to ask whether, in fact, this is an aviation and this is a passenger plane.

SOUCIE: Actually, you are.

FEYERICK: You are?

SOUCIE: There is a thing called command and control. Under command and control in any war zone, especially with this type of weapon, it's required that they have that command and control. In this case, we're suspicious that there's no command and control whatsoever and therein lies the crime.

MARQUEZ: Miles, the Malaysian government has apparently signed a deal with Ukraine to get at this site. Do you have any idea sort of how that deal would work and how they could possibly insert individuals around that crash site?

MILES O'BRIEN, CNN AVIATION ANALYST: It doesn't seem very practical to me right now, Miguel. It's a nice idea but who really controls that piece of turf? Not the Ukrainians in Kiev, the rebels do but they don't seem inclined to protect the investigation. Really, all roads lead back to Moscow here. And Moscow doesn't seem inclined to allow a perimeter around this crash site.

So you know, Dave has been talking about this quite a bit. I think what we're seeing here is a digital investigation. There are copious amounts of images that are out there. Some of them taken as you would as if you were a crash scene investigator documenting with geo-coding capability. They are all on the web for everybody to see. And it is absolutely rock solid certain that this was taken apart by shrapnel. There's no question about that.

MARQUEZ: Yes.

O'BRIEN: So what happens in the black boxes is important. More information is always better than less. But a lot of the key pieces are elsewhere anyway, if you will.

FEYERICK: And so Clive, we want to bring you in as well. When we look at the black boxes, when we look at all of the evidence, it's not just the information that is in the black boxes that is going to provide details as to what happened, but also the pieces of the wreckage.

Do you, in your heart, believe that any of that wreckage will ever be brought back and piece together the way it's normally done under usual circumstances?

CLIVE IRVING, CONTRIBUTOR, THE DAILY BEAST: (INAUDIBLE). Well, I think the thing here is that the investigation would normally be in a preliminary at a normal crash site and I think we have the basic --

FEYERICK: Clive, we're having a little bit of trouble hearing you. There's interference on your end. We're going to ask you to redial in and in the meantime we want to go to David.

David, when you think about this, you look at all of the evidence that's been pieced together, really we think of TWA 800. We think of all of these other incidents. The only thing, it seems you can hope for is recovering the bodies. No?

SOUCIE: Yes. At that point, which has to be the first priority, certainly we look at satellite images that come from the airbus defense and from all source. And what they are telling me and what we can see is there are areas that have not been investigated yet. There's clearly areas of debris. There's no tracks of people walking out and investigating these areas. The entire perimeter needs to be surrounded. And we need to make an appeal to President Putin to make sure because he is the only one, I think, that can say we need to secure the site. He said it on July 18th. He told us at that time he would do everything that he could. Mr. Putin, if you are listening, please do what you said you would do

on July 18th and do what you can to support and honor the dignity of these people. It's an awful situation.

FEYERICK: Yes, absolutely. No question.

All right. Gentlemen, stay with us. We're going to go back to this. Who can keep this crash site safe? There's a group that might be able to do it. Keep in mind, this is miles long, NATO. But does that group actually want to get involved in Ukraine's war or could their involvement actually make things worse?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MARQUEZ: Now, to tragedy of Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 led to international outrage and calls to action. But there is one big player that has been out of the scene and that's NATO.

FEYERICK: And victims and their possessions left scattered around fields in eastern Ukraine for days. The site at the mercy of pro- Russian separatists controlling the area. An investigation of the wreckage is expected to begin soon. But the only security personnel in the ground right now are unarmed Dutch policemen, side by side with separatists fighting the Ukrainian government which now wants to review their actual presence there.

MARQUEZ: Australia is putting a team together to secure the site. But the Dutch says sending troops could be risky. Here's what Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte said today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARK RUTTE, DUTCH PRIME MINISTER (through translator): This option would be such a provocation to the separatists and with these destabilizes the situation, so we would have to bring in more than a massive military setup. It's a big geopolitical risk involved in a conflict close to the Russian border. This option is simply not realistic and we must put it aside.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MARQUEZ: NATO did make a short mention of the crash on the Web site calling for a full investigation but nothing else. And that is all that NATO has asked for so far.

FEYERICK: Exactly. And NATO did report that the movement of Russian arms to eastern Ukraine operations to secure the area right now is simply off the table.

Here to discuss are lieutenant colonel Rick Francona and former CIA operative, Bob Baer.

Rick, you have to ask yourself, where is NATO in all of this? You know, you want to see pressure coming as a collective hole against Russia, against the pro-Russian separatists.

FRANCONA: NATO is probably not the vehicle to do that, though.

FEYERICK: What about the EU then?

FRANCONA: Well, the EU may had. The EU has its own military force. That might be an option. But when you talk NATO, you're talking basically an American presence and that's one thing Vladimir Putin does not want. You mention NATO and Ukraine in the same sentence, that will drive him into orbit and will cause a confrontation.

FEYERICK: And you know, Bob, the Dutch here are getting caught up in the fight between the Ukrainians and the separatists. Could action from NATO effectively indicate that an increase in separatist activity?

BAER: Look, you know, the last thing -- you know, Rick is absolutely right. The last thing we want is NATO. This is one of the reasons that Putin has gone there in the first place, supplied these rebels with arms. That he's afraid that NATO is going to set up a missile shield and send troops. That's a red line, having NATO troops or any sort of NATO influence in the Ukraine. And right now if any role in that -- even if the EU, I would say as well, it's only going to encourage Putin to cause more problems in the Ukraine. And what we want to do is step this crisis down and not make it worse.

MARQUEZ: Colonel, the U.S. has released these photos that they say is artillery being fired from Russia into Ukraine at the same time they are trying to figure out how to get this site secure so they can. But, as we discussed earlier, this investigation now seems like a side note, a footnote of what is happening there.

FRANCONA: Both sides, Ukrainian army and the separatists would like this just to go away because getting in the way of their own operations and now you've got the Russians weighing in by providing more material, they are sending rocket launchers and artillery across the border and they are providing direct fire support in to Ukraine. This -- I'm sorry, but this accident investigation is just second place. They don't care. They just want it to go away.

MARQUEZ: Amazing.

FRANCONA: So they will basically allow someone to come in, just get it out of our plate. We want to get back to our own political problems.

FEYERICK: Although, now at the same time, obviously, all eyes are focused on Ukraine and the various sides that are involved in it. Specifically, Russia and the U.S.

Gentlemen, stay with us. We'll be talking more about this. That's coming up right after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MARQUEZ: Now, before the break, we were discussing MH-17 and Ukraine, and whether or not there's anything that can be done. I want to bring back Bob Baer and colonel Rick Francona. Colonel, Ben Rhodes told CNN today that the Europeans were going to

have a series of sanctions that they will level against the Russians later this month, maybe early in August. Is it too late for sanctions? Are the Russians too invested in what they want out of Ukraine?

FRANCONA: The sanctions could hurt the Russians. But you know, Putin has embarked on a course, he has laid down a marker. Now, he can't retreat from east Ukraine. He didn't retreat from Crimea. He's got that. This is his next target.

I think what -- if there are sanctions and they are too biting, it pushes him into a corner, Vladimir Putin will push back. And we have to ask ourselves, how much are we willing to go -- are we willing to go and fight for Ukraine?

MARQUEZ: Bob, I just have the same question you. I mean, is that where you see this going, are we too late for sanctions and how star the U.S. going to push?

BAER: Let me put it this way. I don't think the U.S. is willing to push on its own and there in only so much you can do with Putin. You have to look at what did he before the Olympics in Chechnya, the northern caucuses. He just flattened that part of the world. He is a determine man. And he is willing uses forced. We saw it against the Crimea. And he will use more force in the Ukraine if pushed.

But you know, if we want to gone at full-out conflict, you know, complete embargo on Russian energy, you know. I can't tell you the outcome but it would be very, very dangerous.

FEYERICK: But is it even going to be in embargo, complete embargo, when you think about it, because they want strong impact on Russian economy, but minimizing the impact, actually on the EU. So, isn't that a little bit contradictory, Bob?

BAER: What's contradictory because he -- Putin can turn off the electricity in Europe. And the Europeans aren't are ready to, you know, to go to the line on this. I just don't see it. I mean, it is an enormous am of Russian gas goes into Europe, keeps it warm and the rest of t and the Europeans don't have the backbone to take him on or the -- economic wherewithal to do it as well. So, it's really a dilemma.

FEYERICK: And as a dilemma, how do you handle somebody who has gone rogue?

Colonel Rick Francona, Bob Baer, thank you. Appreciate it.

And Malaysia airlines felt it was safe to fly over eastern Ukraine, other airlines disagreed. So why isn't there agreement on where planes should or should not fly? What would it take to what have that kind of consensus? Could it actually save lives? That's straight ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) MARQUEZ: Sadly, we have had to report several air disasters recently, hundreds killed, families devastated can they have been prevented? Why was Flight 17 over a war zone? And if it was severe weather near the equator that brought down air Algerie, flight 5017, could storms have been avoided? And how in this day and able of technology and surveillance did flight MH-370 simply disappear?

Let's bring in our panel of experts, Clive Irving, author of "Jumbo, making of the 747," CNN safety analyst and "Daily Beast" contributor, David Soucie, author of "why planes crash" and CNN aviation analyst Miles O'Brien.

David, I will start with you. Don't airlines regularly fly over zone -- war zones and what would it take in order to change that so that all airlines get the same information at the same time, don't fly here?

SOUCIE: Is that for me or --

MARQUEZ: That's for you, David.

SOUCIE: That's for me. That's for me. Well, I tell you what information sharing has been a problem with airlines for a long, long time. They have done a lot to talk about the airlines between manufacturers, airbus and Boeing sharing information and that's -- we've done a lot in the FAA in the last 17 years.

What hasn't happened, what needs to happen now, is the information sharing of this information about the war zones. And that is not happening, why the airlines are getting together in Montreal to discuss just that. The international civil aviation organization has not stepped forward and provided this information sharing yet and they need to do that. That is their role.

MARQUEZ: Clive, how tough would it be to do this, to make that sort of system work?

IRVING: I think it's a problem that lacks solution at the moment because none of these bodies are supposed to be coordinating the information about risk assessment over war zones. It is none of those bodies acts fast. And they are very bureaucratic.

The first thing they do is hold a summit meeting,. The next thing they do for the summit to have committee meetings and just the committee meetings, issue reports. This is what is going on in relation to the disappearance of flight 370 and what will go on in relationship to the accident in MH-17 and I think there is a total gap here. We keep seeing the same problem come round and round again. It is a gap here of an effective international organization that can have standard and consistent regulations.

But, I must tell that you that airline pilots are very concerned about this issue at the moment, because it's been left, often to them and the airlines themselves, where that -- to assess very different standards of intelligence that they are getting. MARQUEZ: Yes. Miles, this is something that Dave and I were talking

about the other day, do we have -- how in the world is it that some airlines knew and made the decision not to fly over Ukraine and others continued to fly over Ukraine, even though an Antinnov 2006 was shot down at 21,000 feet a week before?

O'BRIEN: Well, and that was about the 12th shoot down if you look at all the intelligence that was out there. If you're paying attention to the news, you know that's not a good place to fly.

Now, people had been flying over at 33,000 feet, and nothing happened. But you know what, in the shuttle launches prior to "challenger," there were singed o-rings and everything was fine or before "Columbia. " There was foam falling off the tank and everything seemed fine. And human beings wrongly assumed, because they take a risk and get away with it, that there is less risk. It's just the opposite.

So, there's a bit of apathy that creeps in and hopefully, hopefully the mass of these lives will take away that apathy. So it's a wildly, difficultly competitive business and so when airlines start talking about sharing information, that give him the third realm kind of stuff, but it's high time, they get, because there is no international body that is stuck up to the plate an offered a way for --

MARQUEZ: All right, Miles, thank you very much.

Miles. David and Clive, thanks very much guys.

Now, our international viewers, we are returning you to CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)