Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

President Zelenskyy Addresses Russian Nuclear Threat; Russia Protests U.S. Weapons Shipments to Ukraine. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired April 15, 2022 - 14:00   ET

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

[14:00:00]

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN HOST: Hello, everyone. I'm Alisyn Camerota. Welcome to CNN NEWSROOM.

VICTOR BLACKWELL, CNN HOST: I'm Victor Blackwell.

A sobering warning from Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. He spoke to Jake Tapper in an exclusive interview and said the world should be prepared for Putin to launch a nuclear or chemical attack.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT: Not only me.

I think, all over the world, all the countries have to be worried, because you know that it can be not real information, but it can be the truth, true, because when they began to speak about one or another battles or involves enemies or nuclear weapons or chemical, some chemical issues, chemical weapons, they should do it -- they could it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLACKWELL: Today, Russia is launching a new wave of strikes across Ukraine, after the sinking of the jewel of its Black Sea Fleet.

CAMEROTA: That ship now sits at the bottom of the ocean.

A senior U.S. defense official now says it appears the ship was hit by two Ukrainian missiles. That's a major military victory for Ukrainian forces.

Overnight, Russia appears to be retaliating for that loss, hitting a military facility on the outskirts of Kyiv. Russia also being blamed for another deadly attack on civilians near Kharkiv, as well as heavy shelling in the Donetsk region.

But help is on the way for Ukrainian fighters. The first U.S. flight of new military aid should arrive in the next 24 hours.

CNN senior international correspondent Ben Wedeman is in Kramatorsk, Ukraine, for us.

Ben, we just heard Jake's interview with President Zelenskyy about tactical nuclear weapons. What does that mean there on the ground? BEN WEDEMAN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, I have to

stress that the potential use of tactical nuclear weapons by Russia is a theoretical.

What people here are dealing with is harsh reality now. And I can tell you, they're far more concerned about what's going to happen in this part of the country, the Donbass, in the event the Russians launch this massive assault everyone is anticipating.

We know that they're building up armor, personnel, everything, artillery, in anticipation of this offensive, and, by all accounts, it may very well be extremely brutal. So I think people are possibly alarmed on a theoretical level about the use of nuclear weapons.

But it's the threat of weapons that are used here every day that has people more alarmed. For instance, here in Kramatorsk, we heard a very large explosion which shook this hotel. It appears to have been some sort of strike, whether it was a cruise missile or something on an industrial estate outside of the city.

Yesterday, we were in the town of Severodonetsk, which is the easternmost city under Ukrainian government control. And I can tell you, not a building there was left unharmed by Russia's use, it appears, of cluster munitions on that city. We went to a graveyard full of crosses, all of which have dates of death since the 24th of February, 2022.

So I think nuclear is theoretical. Real, immediate death is not.

BLACKWELL: You make an important point there, that those people are dealing with what is happening daily now. And that's what they have to face.

But let me ask you. The Russians threatened to go after decision- making centers if there were further attacks on Russian assets or Russian territory. There was this claim of hitting a military facility near Kyiv. Is there any connection there potentially?

WEDEMAN: Well, that's not really a decision -- decision-making thing. It's a military asset that, not surprisingly, the Russians would take out.

Let's keep in mind, of course, that it's fairly clear that the Russians were trying to assassinate President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in the opening weeks of this war. So they have no compunction, if they feel the need, to obliterate whatever it is, whether it's government buildings, leadership facilities.

And the worry is that, the worse this war goes for the Russians, the more ruthless their tactics will be.

[14:05:03]

CAMEROTA: Hey, Ben -- Ben, we're just getting some new numbers out of Kyiv The head of the Kyiv region police says that more than 900 bodies of civilians were discovered since the Russian army withdrew from that area. Of course, that number could change, but 900, that's higher than we had heard.

WEDEMAN: Yes, I think when -- Alisyn, when you look at just the sheer enormity of the destruction and the killing that has gone on here, all these numbers we're seeing, I think we should treat as tentative.

We were in a relatively small town yesterday, Severodonetsk, where there were bodies in the morgue that clearly they couldn't deal with just piled up. So -- and then think of Mariupol, where the mayor has said that as many as 5,000 people have been killed in the course of that medieval siege. The president says more than 10,000.

And until, for instance, the government regains control of Mariupol, we will have no idea how many people were actually killed. This country is so focused on fighting the Russians, that it's unlikely that they have accurate statistics about the death toll.

And when I see the death toll and compare it with what I have seen with my own eyes, I think it's a fairly certain thing that the death toll when this war is over, whenever that is, is going to be horrendously high -- Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: Ben, having you on the ground there for us is so valuable. Thank you very much for your reporting.

The Kremlin today warning the U.S. not to send more weapons to Ukraine. In a diplomatic note, the Kremlin says the deliveries are adding fuel to the conflict and could bring -- quote -- "unpredictable consequences."

BLACKWELL: So, let's take this to Kylie Atwood, CNN's national security correspondent.

Kylie, is the U.S. now making any changes, anything different because of this note?

KYLIE ATWOOD, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Well, listen, messages like this always raise tensions, particularly when it is such an incredibly tense moment in U.S.-Russia relations.

But U.S. officials are saying today, when asked about this diplomatic note that we and "The Washington Post" have reported on, that it is not going to change the Biden administration's strategy, that they are going to continue providing military support to Ukraine.

Listen to what State Department spokesperson Ned Price said on CNN earlier today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NED PRICE, STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESMAN: We have an obligation to continue to do what we're doing, support our Ukrainian partners. We're going to continue to do that. The Russians have said some things privately. They have said some

things publicly. Nothing will dissuade us from the strategy that we have embarked on.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ATWOOD: Now, we should note that this diplomatic note, we are reporting, came to the Biden administration Tuesday. That is when reports were beginning to break that the Biden administration was going to announce new military assistance to Ukraine.

But it wasn't until Wednesday that President Biden made that announcement. So, just in that timeline there, you see that the Biden administration received this and still move forward with this new $800 million in security assistance for Ukraine.

And I'm also told by a senior administration official that they believe that Russia wouldn't have sent this if they felt like they were in a powerful position on the battlefield.

CAMEROTA: Kylie, how about that plan to send some high-ranking U.S. official to Ukraine? Has that been solidified?

ATWOOD: Yes, so we have recorded that there are some preliminary conversations in the Biden administration about sending a high-rank official. It's not expected it would be President Biden or Vice President Harris.

But there have been discussions about the secretary of state or the secretary of defense. Our understanding is that those are still preliminary conversations. The administration is very concerned, of course, about the security situation on the ground before they would move forth and plan any visit like that.

And State Department spokesperson Ned Price said yesterday that they had no travel to announce. He didn't count out the possibility of such a trip. But we should note that, in recent days, members of Congress have begun to travel to Ukraine.

CAMEROTA: OK, Kylie Atwood, thank you very much for all of that reporting.

Let's discuss with CNN military analyst retired General Wesley Clark. He's a former NATO supreme allied commander.

General, great to see you.

I just want to start with what President Zelenskyy told our Jake Tapper just now, and that was that the world needs to be prepared, because it's possible that Putin could use a tactical nuclear weapon. We just heard from our Ben Wedeman that, obviously, on the ground, the concern is so much more about what the daily onslaught that they're dealing with.

BLACKWELL: Yes.

CAMEROTA: And we take that point.

But is the world prepared for Putin to use a tactical nuclear weapon? What would the response be?

[14:10:01]

WESLEY CLARK, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Well, I think Ben Wedeman gave the right answer, that, when you're in war, there are many different things that can kill you or disrupt you. And they're dealing with some difficult situations in Kyiv.

As far as whether Putin would use a nuclear weapon or not and what the impact would be, yes, it would be a shock if the world knows that he's using nuclear weapons. And, really, that's why he would use them. He would use them to intimidate, to frighten NATO to get some members of NATO to say, OK, we can't continue to assist Ukraine or something like this.

So, just as before the war began, the United States was releasing information and disclosing all of its intelligence about how Russia was going to attack and so forth. And we took away the shock effect because we had done that.

So I think it's very important what President Zelenskyy said. We shouldn't be shocked if Putin does this. He's in a desperate situation. He thought he was going to take a risk and overrun Ukraine. Instead, he's gambling his whole nation on this. And his military's not doing well.

It's taking them a long time to prefer this offensive. He said the 9th of May is when he's got to have a big victory. So, yes, we should be prepared for something like this. And it should not be forgotten. But it has to be understood it's just one more weapon at the tactical level.

BLACKWELL: General, you were out front on this long before most were talking about the potential of use of nuclear weapons.

But a low-yield nuclear weapon, a lot of people envision these huge clouds if nuclear weapons are discussed. What is this low-yield nuclear weapon? What would it look like in Ukraine?

CLARK: Well, it might be -- it would be smaller than the weapons that were used by the United States on Japan.

But it would also likely have a different, let's say, distribution of effects. In other words, it would have less power of blowing things up, and probably spew out more radiation. It would be, in essence, like a neutron bomb was supposed to be back in the 1980s.

We stopped working on these, but I guess the Russians have continued to work on it. And, probably, that's what they would use. If you used a big explosion, dig a big hole in the earth, blow down a lot of trees, make obstacles, it's not very useful militarily.

But if you could get a weapon that would mostly just kill people, their tanks are sitting there, but everybody insides dead because you have been killed by neutron radiation, that's a different kind of weapon. So that's probably what Putin thinks that he has.

CAMEROTA: General, the U.S. now does assess that it was two Ukrainian missiles launched from -- by the Ukrainian fighters, I should say, that did bring down that Russian warship and that has now sunk in the Black Sea.

And so what does that mean? I mean, what does that tell you? How does that change the fight?

CLARK: Well, it says that Ukraine does have a high-technology capacity, that Ukraine is very artful in using the weapons that it has.

The story that came out was a drone was placed overhead the ship and the ship was distracted and couldn't use its defensive equipment. And so the missiles then slipped in and sunk the ship. And that's good tactics. So, the Ukrainians know what they're doing. They have the technology to develop weaponry.

And just as we saw with the Russian ground forces being not very well- prepared, kind of sloppy, ill-disciplined, it looks like this ship wasn't very well prepared either. And so it's another blow to Russia's prestige.

It does take out the flagship. But, mostly, it's symbolic of Ukraine's determination to resist and its skill in doing so.

BLACKWELL: General, the Russians claim that they took out some military facility near Kyiv.

More than just the loss of that asset, what does that suggest, if anything, about the broader strategy? We know that the focus is the eastern part of the country, but still going after elements near the capital.

CLARK: Well, I think that kind of an attack on a building in Kyiv, maybe it was a military facility -- not sure what was in it -- it just says that the Russians' strategy for using its missiles and airpower isn't very well-focused.

They haven't gone systematically after the electrical grid, the communication system, or the fuel supply system. Instead, they're playing tit for tat with symbolic targets. That's a sign of a weak military, of faltering strength.

That doesn't mean -- however, I want to emphasize, if you line up enough artillery pieces in Donbass, and you put those tanks hub to hub and start moving, and if you can get across that terrain, that's a formidable problem for any army, and it will be a problem for Ukraine.

[14:15:02]

So, the fact that the Russians haven't done a systematic, effective air campaign doesn't mean we can't and shouldn't do everything we can to push in the heavy equipment, including some fighter aircraft and attack aircraft, that Ukraine needs to deal with Donbass.

BLACKWELL: Well, we know that the first shipment from this $800 million is expected to be there tomorrow morning, fighter jets not included, but some of what the Ukrainians have been asking for on the way.

General Wesley Clark, thank you, sir.

Now, as we just discussed, Russia is warning of unpredictable consequences if the U.S. does not stop arming Ukraine. We will discuss the diplomatic fallout of that ahead.

CAMEROTA: And the secretary of state has a new assessment on how long this war could last.

That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:20:18]

CAMEROTA: Secretary of State Antony Blinken is telling European allies there's no end in sight to Russia's war on Ukraine.

The U.S. believes the conflict could last through the end of 2022. CNN also learning that Russia has formally protested the U.S.' ongoing shipment of weapons to Ukraine.

BLACKWELL: A diplomatic note from the Kremlin to the U.S. says that continued shipments could bring unpredictable consequences.

CNN national security analyst Steve Hall is a former CIA chief of Russia operations. And John Herbst is a former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine.

Gentlemen, welcome back.

Steve, let me start with you.

Of course, the Russians don't like the continued military support of Ukraine. But what's this note mean? What's the potency of this threat? Should the U.S. do anything differently?

STEVE HALL, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Well, Victor, the Russians are very -- they're sticklers for protocol and for things like reciprocity and diplomatic notes.

They use those very effectively, basically, just to register and signal their concerns. And, of course, your comment is correct. They're, of course, none too pleased that the United States and the allies are sending significant amounts of military hardware to Ukraine, which is, of course, making Russia's attacks much more difficult, much more complex.

So, primarily, this is a formality that sends a message to the U.S. government and, of course, to anybody else listening that this is of concern. Now, of course, they have also left open some questions. So what does it mean that this could be unpredictable? What are they talking about?

And, of course, they want to leave that operation, so as to keep the allies guessing and to keep the American policymakers wondering exactly how far Putin is going to go if the shipments continue.

CAMEROTA: Yes, Ambassador, if only the Russians were sticklers for the protocols of war and the rules of not killing civilians. I mean, obviously, they choose what they're sticklers about.

But how seriously, Mr. Ambassador, do you take their threat? And what do you think those consequences could be?

JOHN HERBST, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO UKRAINE: I think this is designed almost exclusively to intimidate us from defending our own interests in helping Ukraine stop the Russian war crimes in Ukraine.

I think that's what this is all about. And, sadly, the administration has been self-deterring, as Moscow has waived its nuclear wand, since even before the war began. We all know that they refused to do a no- fly zone, which I can understand. But they have also refused to send Americans, our military, to rescue American civilians in Ukraine. They said that before the war.

And, of course, they made the serious mistake of not sending MiGs and Sukhoi bombers to Ukraine, because they were afraid Putin would consider it provocative. So, he has made -- gotten battlefield advantages by threatening us with nukes. And that's a serious problem that we have let him do that to us.

BLACKWELL: Mr. Ambassador, let me stay with you and what we heard from the secretary of state. He told European allies that this war could last through the rest of this year.

The U.S. and Russia have to cooperate, maybe is the best way to say it, on other issues beyond Ukraine. Is that plausible that there can be some kind of continued relationship between the U.S. and Russia if this goes on for another eight-and-a-half months?

HERBST: I think this may go on well beyond this calendar year.

And I don't rule out the possibility of somewhere, somehow we might cooperate with Moscow on something. But without a doubt, the gravest threat right now to our security, to international security is Moscow's wanton invasion of Ukraine. And we need to do everything we can, short of sending in American troops, to help Ukraine defeat it.

CAMEROTA: Yes, that same question to you, Steve.

How can anyone ever know how long a war is going to last? I mean, I hear their assessment that it's not going to be short-term. It sure doesn't look as though Vladimir Putin is backing down right now. But how can they know how long it will last?

HALL: Yes, it's extremely difficult, I think, to guess on these things.

But I would agree with the ambassador that, if I were a betting man, I would bet this is going to be a long-term situation. This is going to turn into one of these wars of attrition, which is something that the Russians have considerable experience with.

But it's also faced against the Ukrainian military, which has every reason to dig in and fight for absolutely as long as necessary, because, of course, the alternative is annihilation. The Russians have made it quite clear that their intention is to eliminate Ukraine and to eliminate the nationality of Ukraine, and hence the conversations we're having now about, is that genocide?

But when you're talking about eliminating a state, when you're talking about eliminating a nationality, the state that you're that you're referring to and the people that you're talking about now all of a sudden realize, well, this is an existential -- this -- if I stop fighting, I'm going to cease to exist.

And that has a tendency, I think, to make them fight even harder. So it'll be interesting see how it ends up, but I do think it's going to be a long-term proposition.

[14:25:02]

BLACKWELL: Steve, the sinking of this ship the Moskva, on Russian television, state TV, they are outraged by this. What role does this play potentially in the propaganda war for Vladimir Putin?

HALL: Yes, the Russians have to be very, very careful about the sinking of the Moskva, because, on the one hand, they're going to, of course, spin it, and they're going to completely fabricate whatever story it is that they would like to somehow fabricate.

But the reality of the situation is, either, as now appears to be the case, the Russians -- or -- excuse me -- the Ukrainians destroyed the ship with their own armaments, or the Russians set the thing on fire themselves and it sank, neither of which is a positive story.

So the propaganda piece is going to be -- is going to be somewhat difficult for the Russians to manage. But, that said, the Russians essentially just make things up out of whole cloth, especially for their domestic audience. And it'll be important for them to have some explanation as to why and how this happened that is somehow palatable, or at least a little more palatable, for the Russian population.

BLACKWELL: Steve Hall, Ambassador Herbst, thank you.

CAMEROTA: So, China holds military drills around Taiwan, as a bipartisan group of U.S. lawmakers visits Taipei, and Beijing is now blaming the congressional delegation for raising tensions.

BLACKWELL: Plus: The FBI says North Korean hackers stole more than $600 million in cryptocurrency on a single day.

We have got new details.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)