Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Putin's Power In Question After Armed Revolt; Ukrainian Forces Press On With Counteroffensive Amid Uprising In Russia; Maritime Probe Launched After Sub Implosion; U.S. Surprised BY Revolt's Rapid Escalation; Former CNN Executive David Bohrman Dies At 69. Aired 9-10p ET

Aired June 25, 2023 - 21:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[21:00:11]

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN HOST: A good Sunday evening to you, I'm Jim Sciutto. And welcome back to CNN special live coverage of the Russian rebellion that erupted without warning and then ended quickly this weekend not long after it began.

Yet, and we should be clear, the world is only beginning to assess the fallout. There are growing questions tonight about Vladimir Putin's leadership going forward and whether his iron grip on Russia is weakening.

There is also this, new video that has emerged which shows the crash site of a Russian military plane reportedly brought down by the Wagner Group yesterday. The cause of the crash, not clear. The footage indicates the aircraft had been struck by a missile or rocket. There's still no sign of Wagner's leader, Yevgeny Prigozhin, who led the short-lived march on Moscow after he apparently cut a deal to go into exile in neighboring Belarus.

Also not seen Putin. We're going to have the very latest on the White House reaction and President Biden's conversation today with Ukraine's leader.

First though an update from CNN's Matthew Chance who's in Moscow.

MATTHEW CHANCE, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Jim, on the face of it tonight, it seems like a Russian crisis has been averted. Rebel Wagner fighters have been dispersed, and the Kremlin is back in control of areas that were simply taken over by the mercenary group.

But amid the relief that more bloodshed was avoided, there's also anxiety about what this unprecedented challenge that Vladimir Putin has authority may unleash.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

(CHANTING "WAGNER")

CHANCE: For the Kremlin, these are some of the most disturbing scenes from a weekend of shocking images.

On the streets of a major Russian city, Rostov-on-Don in the south, residents cheered Wagner fighters as they withdrew. Many Russians see them as heroes, not as the traitors the Kremlin paints them.

And Wagner's leader, Yevgeny Prigozhin, has become a celebrity too, watch his supporters hailed down his car just to shake hands. The Kremlin says he's now moving to Belarus next door, but it's unclear if this is the last we'll see it in.

What is definite, though, is a sense of relief, at least here in the Russian capital.

It's calm now, but in the mayhem of the weekend, Moscow was on high alert. Military checkpoints on the outskirts of the city, residents bracing for Wagner fighters to enter and for the confrontation that never came.

It was really uneasy yesterday, says Andre [ph]. But look now, people are walking in the streets and it's all good. Let's hope it will stay peaceful, he adds.

But even here, the sympathy for Prigozhin's unprecedented challenge is to raids against the conduct of the war in Ukraine appears to have struck a popular chord.

I think it was an expression of an opinion, says Olek [ph], another residents of Moscow. And opinion of a powerful person who wants some justice and clarity. The belief Prigozhin should be listened to is widely shared here.

But that's not what the Kremlin wants to hear. Vladimir Putin hasn't appeared in public since making his angry pledge on Saturday. Filmed behind the scenes by state television to punish those responsible for what he called an armed mutiny, the biggest challenge to his authority in 23 years of power.

But now that challenge has been maimed. There are growing concerns about what a defensive President Putin stung by the events of this weekend will do next to stay in power

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[21:05:12]

CHANCE: Well, another question tonight is, where is mercenary leader, Yevgeny Prigozhin? As we know, the Kremlin says he's agreed to move to Belarus. But officials there tell me they have no details on when he will arrive or what his status will eventually be.

Prigozhin's office isn't saying much either telling CNN that that is currently out of contact and will respond to any questions only later. Jim, back to you.

SCIUTTO: And the Russian record on telling the truth about matters like that is not great. Thanks so much for Matthew Chance. CNN's Alex Marquardt with me now.

First, let's talk if we can about how far Wagner got in to Russia and towards the Russian capital. And just how remarkable that is.

ALEX MARQUARDT, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: It's extraordinary and they got very far. Jim, this whole march on Moscow, as it were, started down here in southern Russia in Rostov, which is a key logistical and supply hub for the Russian military. It's the home of the Southern Military District. So this is really where things began.

Starting Saturday morning, this is when Wagner troops moved into Rostov, really shutting down much of the city and then taking control eventually of that military headquarters.

SCIUTTO: They're running the war in eastern Ukraine and southern Ukraine out of here. And logistics means ammunition, means weapons. It's important.

MARQUARDT: This is where all the fighting in Ukraine --

SCIUTTO: Yes.

MARQUARDT: -- is taking place right now. And so that's where -- that's why that place is so important.

From there, the Wagner troops started their march northwards on this M4 highway, it's like an American interstate. It's a critical artery going from southern Russia all the way up to Moscow. They made their way to Voronezh, which is where you mentioned that plane crash. We believe that that's where it came down, according to Russian state media and skirmishes between Wagner forces and the Russian military.

We should not overstate those because there was barely any resistance from the Russian military. This is where there was also a very large fire at an -- at an oil refinery, a fuel tanker fire.

Then farther north near Lipetsk, that's where there were also some Wagner vehicles seen yesterday during the day. This is around 300 miles from Moscow. We know that when Prigozhin finally called this march off, according to him, his own claims, that they were closer to Moscow. He says around 125 miles, 200 kilometers when out of nowhere, he suddenly said, we're stopping our march, we're turning right back around and we're going back to what he called the field camps.

SCIUTTO: It's a remarkable thing. It'd be the equivalent of a militia driving up I-95 and getting within 100 miles of Washington, D.C. I mean, remarkable --

MARQUARDT: With no resistance.

SCIUTTO: Even with a turnaround. Now, we know that U.S. officials were concerned about just what an open military confrontation would look like in Russia.

MARQUARDT: Right. SCIUTTO: What are they telling you?

MARQUARDT: So they're watching this very, very closely. What I was told is that there was a U.S. assessment that what they expected as the Wagner troops started moving north was a lot more resistance, fierce fighting. I was told by a U.S. official, a lot more bloodshed.

That, of course, did not come to pass. There was a real surprise on the American side that there was -- the professional army didn't come out to face them down, the -- we didn't really see FSB troops or any of those border guards, so they were surprised about that. And they were surprised about the suddenness of this deal that was apparently brokered by Belarusian president, Alexander Lukashenko, which is, we think, going to see Prigozhin ending up in Belarus.

There was less surprise, Jim, as you know about this actually happening. The intelligence community was aware of troops gathering, equipment being built up in a way that the intelligence community did think that a move like this by Prigozhin was imminent, but that doesn't make it any less stunning.

SCIUTTO: So they saw Prigozhin preparing for weeks, it seemed, to building weapons, making contact. It seems he hopes with regular Russian army units who try to bring them -- bring them together.

So now, the story is, and by the way, we should take the story you get from Russia, from Russian officials with a grain of salt, is that he is here, that Prigozhin is now here. And perhaps some of his forces here as well in Belarus. Do U.S. officials buy that?

MARQUARDT: Or at least on his way there. We really just don't know where he is right now. The last time we saw him was yesterday night down here in Rostov, getting a hero's farewell. I mean --

SCIUTTO: We can show some of the pictures.

MARQUARDT: -- just extraordinary scenes of people taking selfies with him. So we believe, according to this deal, again, that apparently Belarus brokered that he's supposed to be heading to Belarus.

CNN did reach out to -- he does have a press service. They say that he will get back in touch when he has communication. So we simply do not know where he is right now very silent since that message saying that he was turning his troops around. We should note, we also haven't heard from Vladimir Putin. The key players in all of this are completely silent.

SCIUTTO: Well, it's amazing, he's got his own army, he's got his own messaging service. He's got his own sort of sort of political operation, it seems.

MARQUARDT: Right.

[21:10:00]

SCIUTTO: Alex Marquardt, thanks so much. Well, the United States top diplomat says that the brief and chaotic insurrection in Russia shows, quote, "cracks emerging in Vladimir Putin's control of the country." Those cracks, if they do exist, would be the informal power structure Putin has built in his more than two decades of power.

The West is now trying to figure out just how deep those cracks go, and possibly could they be exploited. Joined now by senior -- CNN senior global affairs analyst, Bianna Golodryga.

And, Bianna, great to have you on the show. Clearly, U.S. officials are conscious that they don't want to be seen to be meddling inside Russian affairs, perhaps out of fear that they don't want folks to get the false impression the U.S. was behind all this. What is the approach going forward?

BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN SENIOR GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Well, to that point, Jim, it is stunning that typically, you know, Vladimir Putin, his MO was to blame the West, they blamed the West and the expansion of NATO for this war. He has blamed the West and cultural wars for what he views as interference inside Russia.

And we didn't see this this time. We saw him briefly over the weekend, come out and condemn Yevgeny Prigozhin, and his control of the Wagner Group, calling his actions treasonous. And all of a sudden, you have a complete 180 and his version of a pardon and everything going back to quote-unquote, status quo.

And now, what's really unsettling is the fact that there doesn't seem to be much going on. As Alex noted, we haven't yet seen Yevgeny Prigozhin. We haven't seen Vladimir Putin yet. We haven't seen the Defense Secretary yet. We haven't seen the chief commander of the war, General Gerasimov yet, and that is a bit unnerving.

Given everything that we've seen and transpire in less than 72 hours, mind you, there is somewhat of a bank holiday, a work day off in Moscow. So what the United States wants is more stability right now. And there's concern that that's not going to happen. And obviously, the U.S. wants the war to end and that's not going to happen anytime soon either.

SCIUTTO: It's not clear is it that if Putin were not to survive, this is power on [inaudible] from survivors. It's not clear that his replacement would be any better or any more conciliatory and any less aggressive.

GOLODRYGA: And I think that's with intent. That's why Vladimir Putin built this indestructible power vertical, right, that that we've seen for the past 20 odd years, 23 years that he's been in power, and that was, for this very reason, that there would be no ability for a coup to take place.

And it's worked to his benefit, up until this point, to have his rival sort of pitted against each other. That's why he completely demolished any sort of opposition. He viewed that as his biggest threat. Where is Alexei Navalny right now? He is in prison. And yet, here, there's just been some surprise as the amount of freedom Vladimir Putin had given Yevgeny Prigozhin, not necessarily to attack him, but to attack his military. And he allowed that to happen until obviously what we saw transpire on Friday.

SCIUTTO: The Wagner group has had a central role in Russian military operations inside Ukraine. It was Wagner who made the gains around Bakhmut, and to some of the bloodiest fighting of the war. Wagner, now, forces seem to be removed. Certainly its leaders removed, if some remain, some have certainly left.

Does that weaken the Russian invasion and does it give Ukrainian forces an opportunity?

GOLODRYGA: Well, that is the big unknown. I mean, it's interesting, because leading up to this, there had been some concern that this counteroffensive wasn't going as quickly and as according to plan as the Ukrainians had wanted obviously as the West had wanted as well.

And this completely threw everything off course and surprise, most Russia watchers and war watchers at that. That having been said, I'm not necessarily sure what if anything that we'll do in terms of the state of Russian military and its fighting.

I think the bigger question is, who's going to be in control of the Wagner Group? It was interesting that Vladimir Putin seem to give them all amnesty. These are trained fighters. I don't know if they're in this -- in the number range that Yevgeny Prigozhin says he has about 25,000. I think that's a skeptical figure that having been said, they've proven to be vital actors and players in this war thus far.

SCIUTTO: Final question, if I can. It seems that U.S. officials have acknowledged some -- the extent of their knowledge, inside Russia, they did see, according to our own reporting, that Prigozhin was planning something they were concerned, that he was planning to -- an open military confrontation with Russia.

But U.S. officials I speak will grant that this is, you know, like Fareed quoted the old Churchill quote, Russia mystery wrapped in an enigma and so on.

Does the U.S. have good vision into what's actually happening in Russia?

GOLODRYGA: It appears that U.S. intelligence had some foresight into what was going to happen here in terms of the growing conflict between Yevgeny Prigozhin and the Russian military. And it's interesting that Prigozhin, all of a sudden, seem to use this as an excuse to say that things were turning south for him and his forces rapidly. Well, that was not the case. In fact, as we just noted, there had been some concern and frustration that this counteroffensive wasn't going as quickly as Ukraine had hoped.

[21:15:20]

So the speculation perhaps is that Yevgeny Prigozhin was concerned and knew that his days, in terms of ruling and controlling the Wagner Group, were numbered. And this was sort of his last hurrah in terms of getting attention.

And I think he may have just been as surprised as everyone else was in terms of the response and that he could make it all the way up to just a few 100 miles outside of Moscow without any sort of response.

And equally stunning, Jim, we've been talking about the one area of the Russian military that has remained somewhat intact and powerful thus far and untouched, and that was its Air Force. And you could arguably say that they had some of their worst days in terms of troops and soldiers that had been killed by their own Russian fellow soldiers that being the Wagner mercenaries.

So I take with a grain of salt that Yevgeny Prigozhin said this came to an end because he didn't want any more bloodshed. We already saw some bloodshed and that was Russian's aggression.

SCIUTTO: And in all these mysteries, the one hard fact is that the Wagner Group was able to take a major city of the south and drive good two-thirds of the way all the way to the Russian capital, almost without resistance. That's remarkable.

Bianna Golodryga, thanks so much.

GOLODRYGA: And he welcomed, yes, welcomed with open arm. Yes.

SCIUTTO: Exactly. Bianna, thanks so much. I know we'll be talking more about this.

GOLODRYGA: Sure.

SCIUTTO: Coming up next, I speak with the Ukrainian, the only Ukrainian board member of Congress, on the uprising, what she says about Russia's next military move.

Plus, fears about adventure and space tourism after the deadly implosion of the Titanic's submersible. Should folks be going on trips like this at all? This is CNN special live coverage.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[21:20:34]

SCIUTTO: Through all the events in Russia this weekend, the war in Ukraine is still ablaze bloody fighting underway in the east and the south, as Ukrainian forces continue to press their counteroffensive.

Could the turmoil and division inside Russia prevent -- present an opportunity for Ukraine? CNN's Ben Wedeman reports now from Zaporizhzhia.

BEN WEDEMAN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Jim, after the brief but intense drama in Russia, it's back to the war in Ukraine. While Wagner Chief, Yevgeny Prigozhin, was on the rampage against his foes in Moscow, officials in Kyiv work largely silent following Napoleon's advice, never to interrupt your enemy while he's making a mistake.

Briefly, many Ukrainians entertained the prospect that chaos in Russia would lead to an early end to the war, but Prigozhin sudden about-face dashed those hopes.

Sunday, Ukrainian presidential adviser, Mikhail Podolyak, said in an interview, he was hoping for something more concrete, perhaps Civil War. He added that he's still confident that will happen.

While attention was diverted away from the war ever so briefly, the fighting did go on. Sunday, Ukrainian defense officials claimed their forces had seized a kilometer stretch of trenches near the town of Bakhmut, killing, capturing, or wounding an entire battalion though they didn't give exact numbers. It was a limited tactical success, but the much anticipated counteroffensive has yet to hit its stride. Jim.

SCIUTTO: The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee called the conflict between Prigozhin and Putin, quote, inevitable. Republican Mike Turner adds that he's been briefed multiple times in recent days.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MIKE TURNER (R-OH): There's a number of accomplices, including as we saw some of the Russian people on the border with Ukraine who clearly support the Wagner Group in contrast to their support for the Russian government. This is something that would have had to have been planned for a significant amount of time to be executed in the manner in which it was.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Joining me now is Republican congresswoman, Victoria Spartz, who is the only Ukrainian born member of Congress. Congresswoman, thanks so much for joining us.

REP. VICTORIA SPARTZ (R-IN): Thank you for having me.

SCIUTTO: So, first, I know that everyone examining this situation is working on limited information. But let me ask you, from your point of view, does Putin emerge from this weaker or stronger?

SPARTZ: Well, I think we have to look at the two sides of the story. One thing, it's definitely big damage to his reputation. Worldwide, definitely. You know, you can see his grandiose speech that he is going to be destroying all bad people. And, you know, in what he said, and kind of talking strangely about 1917 was really awkward. And now let Prigozhin pretty much get out of that situation and caused him some damage definitely is.

There are some other things that you can think of now. A lot of people will think, well, maybe Putin not as -- not as bad having nuclear weapons. And, you know, you could have someone like Prigozhin being in charge, you know, that could potentially benefit him in some way. But definitely, it showed that he doesn't have full control of the situation in Russia was all of the bad and good things. SCIUTTO: Now Prigozhin was perceived as a threat to Putin even before this attempt in the last 24 or 48 hours here. Is Prigozhin less of a threat now to Putin's leadership? That's why I asked initially, whether it's possible in some ways Putin emerged stronger from this.

SPARTZ: Well, if you think about it, Russia is controlled by bandits, by clans, and they divide in resources, divide in power. Putin thinks he's the puppet master, he can control them. But at some point, this clan have a lot of money, they have a lot of weapons, and it's getting out of control. And I think he probably was very nervous about it.

But they've worked very closely with GRU, his, you know, top spy agency and he has a lot of friends over there too. So there are a lot of things that conflict was brewing for some time, but the end, and this is very, very curious, and I think we have to be vigilant and pay attention next steps that Prigozhin is going to do and Putin is going to do.

SCIUTTO: In terms of the effect on the ongoing war in Ukraine, is this an opportunity for Ukrainian forces to reassert themselves in this ongoing counteroffensive?

[21:25:09]

SPARTZ: Well, I think, you know, that, you know, the front line is still, you know, pretty tough. You know, I think it's important for us to continue to supply weapons fast to Ukraine, because I think it's an opportunity to send the message to bandits right now. The United States is serious, and then they will not be able to take advantage of some situations happen in there too. And I think that is a very -- if you think about it, this is not an easy war. And we cannot underestimate how much efforts and how many people Russia is willing to kill there in quantities, you know.

So I think it's important for us to be able to help Ukraine and not really just have these Kumbaya moments, but very serious. I think that's actually time for us to increase our support and be very vigilant.

SCIUTTO: As you know, a number of your Republican colleagues have been demanding the opposite, either less aid or an end to U.S. funding for Ukraine. I wonder, what do you say to them? What argument do you make to them to respond to that position?

SPARTZ: Well, listen, I think it's a very serious war, and we need to get to peace. But when you deal with bandits like that, you only can deal with, you know, weapons, you know, that's the only way to bring peace. They don't understand, you know, be nice, you know. They only understand I fly [ph]. And unfortunately, these people don't negotiate until they see a threat to them and their regime.

And I think the oldest threat could be Ukrainian military, which is very strong. So I think it's expensive for us. And we don't want to have, you know, have this never ending wars. But the cheapest way for us, you know, it's actually to provide better, faster weapons quicker to end this insanity. Because if you think about, this escalation can, you know, actually escalate very serious. If you think about Prigozhin, he didn't seem like he moved back to Africa. He's moving to Belarus, which is very strange, in a very curious, you know, events, you know, happening. So I think there are a lot of things that's very strange there, and it's a very complicated war.

And my -- some of my colleagues, they really just -- well, they have concerns with, you know, our president and oversight and want to make sure that he reports back to us, which actually, I'll be honest with you, administration has not been very good reporting back to Congress.

SCIUTTO: Well, on the campaign for 2024 Republican candidates, including Will Hurd, of course, a former Republican congressman, criticized the Biden administration for, in his words, being too slow to react to this crisis.

I wondered, do you share that criticism? Do you think there was something more President Biden could have said or done to attempt to take advantage of this?

SPARTZ: Well, I think he said a lot, but it's better when he does more, because ultimately, being more proactive, you know, that's the biggest deterrence, and he's been slow work. And then dealing -- doing bare minimum. And the aggressors like that don't, you know, cooperate unless they have to cooperate.

I think we made a lot of mistakes, you know, made a -- it was assessments in Afghanistan. We made mistake in Ukraine. But I think if we want to stop this war, which is very dangerous war, you know -- and you know, it's very serious situation.

When you deal with these countries, there's a lot of nuclear station, nuclear weapons, you deal with countries that have a lot of bandits roaming around everywhere. If you want to do it, you need to send the message, we're serious in this incentive. You need to stop and really put pressure on the international community to put pressure on Russia, because Russia should have never been allowed to get away. But unfortunately, we didn't learn mistakes including from World War Two.

SCIUTTO: As you note, bandits, as you describe them factions, often with their own armed militias now. Wagner Group is not a singular case there.

I wonder, before we go, it was our reporting this week that from the view of Western intelligence, Ukraine's counteroffensive has not, to date, at least, and it is early, achieved the goals as expected or made the progress that some had expected at this stage of the counteroffensive.

I wonder, do you -- are you concerned that Ukrainian forces are running into greater resistance in the east and the south than that perhaps they even they expected?

SPARTZ: Well, I think, you know, no worries one-on-one battle. But I'll tell you one thing that Russia is nervous, and definitely more support will help them to advance faster, but Ukrainian forces, I had mentioned, and Russia has all of its army now in Ukraine.

So I think they are dealing with a lot of quantities and, you know, and they are very brave people that fight in a big fight and they're going to win that war. It's a matter of how many people are going to die before they win that war. And we want to -- if we want to save more lives and stop this conflict, we need to help more.

But I think it's you know, never underestimate your position and what Russia could do and cruelty and they're very cruel. They're really destroying, you know, population and they're real been very harsh.

[21:30:10]

SCIUTTO: Deliberately targeting civilians repeatedly again and again. Congresswoman Victoria Spartz, thanks so much for joining us this evening.

SPARTZ: Thank you for having me.

SCIUTTO: There are new developments tonight in the ongoing search for the wreckage of the lost Titanic submersible with Coast Guard says it's looking for and what it's found.

Plus, astronaut Leroy Chiao will join me on new questions over regulation of space tourism in the wake of this disaster.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCIUTTO: Today, the U.S. Coast Guard announced it is leading an investigation into the cause of last week's deadly submersible implosion. The initial phase is focused on collecting evidence salvaging debris of the destroyed sub and then determining what went wrong as it descended into the depths of the Atlantic, two and a half miles down.

Five people died in that extreme excursion as it's known. The company OceanGate had openly flouted the safety regulations in the name of innovation is now causing many to wonder if commercial spaceflight is doing the same.

Joining me now to discuss, NASA astronaut, Leroy Chiao. Good to have you on, Sir. Thanks for Joining us tonight.

[21:35:02]

LEROY CHIAO, RETIRED NASA ASTRONAUT: My pleasure. Thanks.

SCIUTTO: So I wonder as you watch the sad events in the North Atlantic last week, did you think similar things about commercial spaceflight for tourists? Did you say wait a second, is it -- is it safe enough? Is it really all worth it?

CHIAO: There are definitely many analogies, many things that are similar. Some things are quite different. But, yes, it absolutely came to my mind. And, you know, the biggest difference is that the FAA does regulate or have some, a lot of say, over the commercial spaceflight industry, it doesn't certify the vehicles per se, but it actually has to issue launch licenses, and do review, safety reviews, make sure that, you know, no damage will likely occur to the surroundings.

But at the same time, you've got similarities, you're going into a harsh environment with non-professionals. Yes, you can take these adventures and tours, you know, there are other analogies here on earth or in the atmosphere, and under the sea.

But, you know, there are big, difficult questions come up, you know, rescue operations, recovery operations, what's available, there's a more available in -- under this, you know, in the ocean than in space. And, you know, and who pays for that.

SCIUTTO: You know, question, who pays for it, of course. Let me ask you more specifically about the safety regulations, because it amazes me certainly covering the submarine story that he was able to operate this for tourists, and did not have any kind of regulating body that looked at this design to, you know, put some tests on it and said, this is safe to bring people two and a half miles below the surface.

In terms of tourists' space tourism, do the safety standards, are they just about damage it could do to others, right? If the rocket goes off course, et cetera? Or is it also about safety standards protecting those on board?

CHIAO: You know, the FAA treats commercial spacecraft differently than commercial airplanes. Of course, in the airplane world, in the airline world, the FAA is involved in every aspect of the certification of the airplane, certification of the operations, all of those things regulatory.

In the commercial spaceflight, it was agreed upon by all the players, including the U.S. government, that the FAA would have oversight over primarily, you know, just keeping the environment, safe keeping people in surrounding areas safe, and not so much in certifying the spacecraft, because, you know, there really wasn't much data yet.

And so it was decided that these commercial operations would self- certify, if you will, to a degree. And also, of course, the participants would have to sign informed consent. And so it's -- there's some similarities, but it's very different also. There's at least some regulation on the spaceflight side.

SCIUTTO: I mean, you could get folks to sign anything, right? I mean, they could sign away a liability if they want to take those risks, I suppose. But -- and you will hear from the folks who do deep underwater stuff and folks who do space stuff that, well, it's not just about the tourism, the adventure, it's also about science, et cetera.

I wonder for someone like you when you look at this at space tourists -- tourism, is it worth it? Does the why justify the costs and the risks?

CHIAO: It's really up to the individual rights. First of all, the individual has to have the means to go on an adventure like this. Also, the individual has to decide for him or herself whether the risk reward ratio is worth it.

And so, you know, the talk about science and other things, those are, in many ways -- well, you know, if we're honest about it, it's secondary for these adventures. It's about the adventure, it's about the experience first.

And so, you know, it really is up to the individual, I guess, to decide for him or herself whether this really is worth it. For me going on a -- on a government vehicle, on a NASA vehicle, I was absolutely confident that everything had been done. I had met the teams that had worked on these things. And I was absolutely confident that everything that could have been done had been done, and I was happy to get on these vehicles.

Frankly, I would be very wary myself, just my personal self. I would be wary of getting on any of these commercial vehicles because, frankly, I've had the experience on NASA vehicles.

SCIUTTO: Right there. That speaks to some of the standards as well going forward.

Leroy Chiao, NASA astronaut, thanks so much for joining us.

CHIAO: My pleasure. Thank you.

SCIUTTO: Well, coming up, a monster that Vladimir Putin himself created attempts an insurrection. What happens now between the Russian military and the Russian mercenary group?

Plus, why were U.S. officials caught off guard by just how quickly this all unfolded? Though they did see signs that Prigozhin was planning this. Former Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, he joins me live.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[21:40:41]

SCIUTTO: To understand the importance of events in Russia this weekend, we have to turn the clock back a bit, 2014, when the Wagner Group was first identified fighting to seize Crimea from Ukraine. At the time, it was thought to have about 5,000 troops fighting mostly in Africa and the Middle East.

Fast forward now to January when the Ukraine -- the U.K. Ministry of Defense put its numbers at 50,000 fighters in Ukraine alone. Those troops most recruited from Russian prisons played a crucial role in the war, particularly in places like Bakhmut in the east where some of the bloodiest and longest battles of the war took place.

With me here now is former U.S. Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, years of experience decades, I should say, looking into Russia and what's happening there. Thanks so much for joining us.

JAMES CLAPPER, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Well, thanks, Jim.

SCIUTTO: So first on Putin's leadership, is Putin -- does he emerge from here irreparably damaged?

CLAPPER: Well, he's clearly damaged. I think irreparably remains to be seen. I think we're perhaps rushing to judgment here about the end of Vladimir Putin. And I don't -- I think it's a little early to do that. But clearly, his stature is prestige. His image is diminished both internationally and domestically, which is one of the reasons why I don't think he's going to let Prigozhin run around free and easy.

[21:45:09]

SCIUTTO: What is the fate of the Wagner Group which has enormous military influence, its role in Ukraine central, its role in Syria, the war in Syria, central, its role in several little wars in Africa that Russia has interests in central, but also Prigozhin with his own power center inside Russia? Are Prigozhin and the Wagner Group now themselves irreparably damaged?

CLAPPER: Well, that remains to be seen. And as a group -- a critical question is, what is the fate of the Wagner Group? And as you indicated, and Ukraine, they're the most effective fighting force that the Russians have had. And they're very active, and from the Russian standpoint, very effective in lots of other areas that you enumerated.

So that's a great question, what is going to happen to them? They are ostensibly under the loose aegis of the GRU, military intelligence organization, which also controls the Spetsnaz, their special operations forces. So there is somewhat of a functional kinship there.

And whether the Russian government would attempt to have a more control over the Wagner Group and its activities by tethering it to some elements of the government ministry of defense, GRU, or whatever, remains to be seen. But it's -- clearly, this is a big problem for the Russians because of its effectiveness.

SCIUTTO: No question. So the public story is that Prigozhin, peacefully, ended his advanced towards Moscow, has taken a deal to go to Belarus, and some of his forces are going to sign up with regular Russian army units. And Prigozhin is going to live safely in Belarus. Do you buy that deal?

CLAPPER: Well, Jim, maybe I spent too much time in intelligence, but this whole thing -- this deal to me is kind of fishy that all of a sudden, goes and stopped, turn left or turn back. And then he's going to go to -- agreed to go all -- of all places, Belarus, which is essentially, from a security standpoint, of an extension of Russia.

I just -- I just wonder whether it was a deal or somehow behind the scenes. Putin exerted some form of leverage over Prigozhin that caused him to fold. This is an unanswered question, obviously, and hopefully is, as we learn more, we'll find out just what happened. But on its face, it's a little fishy to me.

SCIUTTO: For a moment this weekend, I know that Western intelligence was looking at this. And speaking of open military confrontation in Russia, there are still militias, there's still a Wagner militia, there's still other militias, other potential challenges to Putin's leadership, or at least it's a factional fighting there. Does the U.S., does the West have to prepare for at least the possibility of Russia becoming a failed state?

CLAPPER: Well, absolutely. I mean -- and there are those out there, there are the Russia watchers who are already are saying this could easily be the beginning of the end of the Russian Federation. I personally think, again, it's a little premature, but it could be.

And as far as U.S. government needs to be prepared for all those -- all those options. Above it all though, from, I'd say this from an intelligence standpoint, anytime you have a nuclear power, in a situation like this, you get real sensitive about the status of their nuclear forces. So that'll be on point. You're uppermost in the minds of intelligence community.

SCIUTTO: Was there at any point do you think this weekend, the threat that Russia's nuclear weapons were at risk?

CLAPPER: No. No, I didn't. I didn't. And I felt that way from ever since the invasion that while despite the threats, that obviously -- the probability of use of nuclear weapons is not zero, but it's still pretty low. And I don't think this situation changed that.

SCIUTTO: There are U.S. intelligence folks have told me for some time that if Putin were to lose power, he's far more likely to face the threat from his right flank than from any sort of progressive, you know, inside the country.

If he were to leave power, who -- what kind of person -- just also say, from what category would be most likely to replace him? Would it be someone more aggressive more --

CLAPPER: Well, I would -- I think it would -- it would all depend on the circumstances of his departure. If he weren't a part. I've all -- you know, he does have a close inner circle which is held together pretty well. I've always wondered about his National Security Adviser equivalent, Patrushev, as to whether he might emerge, but a longtime crony, KGB crony, of Putin.

[21:50:14]

So -- but I agree, I think that -- with you that the -- of the two theories an attack of some sort from the right is more likely than the left.

SCIUTTO: Final question, if I can, in terms of the effect on the ongoing war in Ukraine, if you were advising Ukrainian leaders now, military commanders, would you say, now is the time to strike even harder?

CLAPPER: Well, actually not. I think I'd probably tell if I were in that position, Ukrainian military to just press on with what they're already -- they've already gotten underway. And let the disarray take, you know, take its course among the Russians.

The thing you want to think about is if you get very aggressive right now, will that provoke a counter retaliate -- a retaliation that we might not want to see. So I think they just need to press on what they're doing. And I think the demoralization and the incompetence of the Russian military is probably going to be emphasized even more because of this event.

SCIUTTO: More questions about their will to fight. Director James clapper, thanks so much for joining.

CLAPPER: Thanks, Jim.

SCIUTTO: Coming up, a deadly and horrific incident at an airport, ground crew worker there ingested into a plane's engine. Just how did that happen? Could the company behind the Titan submersible be held liable even criminally liable? We're going to speak to a maritime lawyer in our next hour.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[21:55:43]

SCIUTTO: We do have some sad news from inside CNN tonight. We say goodbye to a television legend and CNN pioneer, David Bohrman. David died early this morning following complications after hip surgery. He was 69 years old. Bohrman had a long and storied career in television starting in local news in Los Angeles before moving up to the network's.

Later, he became a top executive at CNN and served as our Washington bureau chief for many years. David was known for his innovative approach to .T.V producing, which garnered him so many industry awards.

In 2004, it was his idea to anchor CNN's election coverage straight from the floor of party conventions, giving viewers a more realistic sense of exactly what was going on as it happened.

And in 2008, he implemented what is commonly known today as the magic wall where, for instance, John King, can be found every election night digging deeper into voter data.

David launched dozens of network television programs including the Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer now in its 18th year on the network. Bohrman's post CNN career including stints at Current TV, CBS News as well. He leaves behind his wife, Catherine, two children, and two grandchildren. Our heartfelt condolences go out to his family. And we'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)