Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Israel Has Attacked Iran, Explosions Reported. Aired 12-1a ET

Aired April 19, 2024 - 00:00   ET

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

LAURA COATES, CNN ANCHOR: The idea of what the foreign minister had to say earlier today. Also, the questions being raised of what impact the advanced notice will be on the United State's ability to remain distant from this particular interaction and retaliatory swapping of strikes.

[00:00:19]

So important to hear this. We're going to continue our live coverage of the breaking news tonight. Israel launching a retaliatory strike against Iran. Stay with CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

MICHAEL HOLMES, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, everyone. I'm Michael Holmes in Atlanta, and we are following major breaking news for you. Iranian media reporting several explosions near the city of Isfahan.

Details still coming in, but a U.S. official confirming to CNN this is Israeli retaliation for Saturday's Iranian drone and missile strike on Israel. The official says the target's not nuclear.

Iranian state media report the country's air defenses have been activated in several provinces and flights to and from a number of major cities have been suspended.

CNN's Alex Marquardt is live for us this hour in Washington, but we begin with Nic Robertson in Jerusalem.

Nic, I know a lot of caution already, because what we don't know is far greater than what we do know. But what have you been hearing?

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: Yes. What we're learning from Iranian state media is that they turned on there, that they turned on their air defense systems, because there were some objects in the sky, possible targets in the sky.

They have said that they later saw drones, three drones in the skies above Isfahan, but Iranian state media is really talking more about the situation after the explosion of those drones or whatever happened to those drones, because it isn't entirely clear from Iranian state media. What they're saying, it is important to note, is that all the facilities around Isfahan where these drones were seen are, in fact, secure. They say important to say that the nuclear facility at Isfahan is entirely secure.

Iranian media is also reporting that it was an army base that may have been the target. Other Iranian media reporting that it potentially was a radar site and that windows in offices around -- around that facility have been blown out.

I think what we're also understanding from Iranian media is playing this down, playing the situation down, talking about quadcopters when they're talking about drones. And of course, these are the really tiny little drones that fit in the palm of your hand.

Now this is not the official government line, as best we can understand at the moment. But the overall impression that's been created by the Iranian government and other media outlets in Iran is -- is that this -- whatever events have happened -- and they do leave it rather ambiguous -- it has not damaged significantly any important facilities near Isfahan. And they're playing down the type of attack.

I think it's worth noting here that while -- or after they switched on the air defenses in Iran, they shut down Tehran airport, Isfahan airport, Shiraz (ph) Airport, as well, and closed the air space in the West of Iran.

But state media is reporting that they have not had any aircraft, any enemy aircraft come into Iranian airspace. So again, minimizing, it appears, what has happened.

Of course, there is so much that we don't know at the moment. We do know that U.S. officials say that Israel has struck back at Iran, but we don't know from Israeli officials what has happened. The IDF is telling us at the moment that they have no additional comments to make.

So perhaps, until we begin to get clearer satellite imagery of these sites and can compare and contrast with 24 hours ago, we won't know the extent of the damage on the ground.

And -- and one other thing worth noting. There were reports in the overnight hours of explosions in some other Iranian cities. Again, state media indicating that this was just air defense systems activated.

The overall impression, again, that this has not caused any major disruption in Iran. That's a picture being painted by government and local media there.

[00:05:08]

HOLMES: All right. Nic, thank you.

Alex Marquardt in Washington. I know you've been on the phone. What have you you been hearing about, you know, how big or measured this attack is. What are U.S. officials telling you now?

I know you've been on the phone, or I know you've been on the phone or what have you you been hearing about? How big are measured. This attack is. What a U.S. official telling you, how worried are they about, you know, what comes next?

ALEX MARQUARDT, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Well, they've been telling us all week and how frightened they are at the prospects of what could come next, if Israel did decide to undertake this counterattack against Iran, which has now come.

I spoke with a senior U.S. official earlier in this evening who made it clear that this response by Israel was not endorsed by the United States. The U.S. did not give the green light for what we saw play out tonight.

Now, throughout the course of the week since that massive Iranian strike against Israel last weekend, some 300 ballistic and cruise missiles, as well as drones being targeted at Israel, the U.S. has repeatedly said Israel, of course, has the right to defend itself. It has the right to respond. But they certainly did not want Israel to risk escalation.

What we have heard from the Biden administration is take the win. They told Israel to take the win, recognize that you defended yourselves formidably last weekend. There was almost no damage. No one was killed in that attack. And that was a response, you'll remember, Michael, to the Israeli strike two weeks prior in Damascus against a building at the Iranians claim was a consulate building in which seven IRGC members, including a senior commander, were killed.

So in the view of the Biden administration, the playing field had been leveled. Clearly, Israel did not see it that way, and they felt the need to respond to what truly is a -- was a historic and unprecedented attack by Iran.

So in the course of the past few days, Israel has been telling the U.S. that they did, they do, they did intend to respond to Iran but in a limited way, in a narrow way.

And what we have reported is that the scope would be quite limited. The expectation would be that Israel would go after military targets. I was told tonight that -- that nuclear and civilian targets were outside the range of what was expected.

And that does, indeed, seem to be what we have seen play out tonight.

Now, when you hear Isfahan, and you know anything about Iran and its nuclear program, you instantly worry that perhaps the nuclear facility there was an Israeli target. That was not the case. I was quickly told by a U.S. official that the nuclear facility was not the target.

We heard from Iranian officials that the nuclear facilities are secure, but there are a number of other military facilities around there that certainly could be targets and fall within that narrow scope of what the expectation was. I'm told that earlier today, Israel did tell the United States that

they intended to carry out, in more concrete terms, an attack against Iran, but didn't put a terribly fine point on it, put a range of several days.

Of course, it came quite quickly. It came tonight. We started getting indications earlier in the evening that this could happen. And then we started to see reports on social media, videos on social for media. And eventually, it was confirmed by a U.S. official to me, not too long ago.

I should note, Michael, the Biden administration has not said a word. We have not heard anything either from the IDF or from Israeli officials.

But here in Washington, I think what that says is this is firmly an Israeli operation. The U.S. doesn't want to be speaking publicly to this, in case Iran would take it -- see it as, for example, American participation. The U.S. has made clear that they did not support this operation.

And that is really important, because should Iran choose to respond, certainly, American service members, American diplomats, American assets could be in harm's way in Iraq and Syria, and Jordan and elsewhere.

And when we heard the foreign minister speaking to our colleague Erin Burnett several hours ago, he made clear that, if Israel chose to respond, that there would be an immediate maximum response, in his words, against Israel.

So that is something, certainly, that Washington is bracing for now, Michael.

HOLMES: Yes, I wanted to pick up on your reporting that, you know, Israel may have given the U.S. a heads up about this attack, but the U.S. didn't green-light it, and far from it. What does that say about U.S.-Israel relations, because frankly, Israel doesn't seem to be listening to the U.S. these days.

MARQUARDT: No, they certainly were going against the U.S. wishes, right now.

But this is clearly something that Prime Minister Netanyahu and his war cabinet felt like they needed to do.

We should note that, since the Iranian attack last weekend, there were at least, at last count, I believe, five war cabinet meetings, which really indicates to us, Michael, that the Israelis were really having a hard time trying to figure out what to do, really hemming and hawing here.

[00:10:11]

And that really does speak to the uncertainty, I'm told, by U.S. officials that there was real division among the Israeli cabinet members about what to do. The real -- they really felt the need to respond in some kind way. So there were a whole menu of options.

You know, one thing that we could have seen tonight instead was Israel striking back against proxy groups in Iraq and Syria. And that wouldn't have been nearly as serious as what we're seeing now, which is a direct strike by Israel against Iran but in a rather limited way.

So clearly, the hope is here, despite the fact that they're not listening to the U.S. and basically ignoring the U.S. request to not do this, they're not doing it in a massive way. We don't believe that Israel has gone after a nuclear facility.

We don't believe that Israel has necessarily gone after multiple sites in Iran. They are clearly, Michael, trying to thread this needle of responding to the Iranian attack, trying to re-establish deterrence. But at the same time, hoping perhaps that this does not provoke a massive Iranian response.

I think there is -- the best-case scenario, if you will, could be that both Israel and Iran go back to what we had before, which was essentially a shadow proxy war, where you have these covert actions where each side is targeted, perhaps in other countries.

But clearly, we have crossed a line here. And the real worry by the U.S. and its allies is that we could start to see escalations from both sides as the other each tries to establish deterrence over the other, Michael.

HOLMES: Yes, certainly, some red lines have been crossed in the last week or so. Alex Marquardt there in Washington, appreciate it. Thanks so much.

All right. Joining me now from Washington also, retired U.S. Air Force colonel and CNN military analyst Cedric Leighton. Always good to see you, sir.

I mean, it was -- it was hugely significant when Iran took action with its missiles directly at Israeli territory, not using proxies. How significant, then, in the geopolitical sense, and security sense, how significant is it that Israel hit Iranian territory directly?

COL. CEDRIC LEIGHTON, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Yes, I think it's pretty significant, Michael, and it's great to be with you. There are so many aspects to this.

But I think it was very clear that what the Israelis for doing was responding directly to what the Iranians did. They took the time to actually see how the Iranians were executing their attack. Of course, they shot down about 99 percent of the missiles and drones that were thrown against them back over the weekend.

And now we have a situation where it's, in essence, the reverse. What the Israelis have done is they have responded practically in-kind to what the Iranians did, but they've proven one thing. And that is the reigning air defense system is no -- is nowhere near the capability of the Israeli air defense system. And that, of course, is a significant message to Tehran. It also

indicates that the Israelis can basically come in with impunity, if they so choose, to attack Iranian targets. And that, of course, is a significant factor that should be part of Iran's calculations for any future escalation.

HOLMES: Yes. The U.S. military, as you know, has significant assets in the Middle East. U.S. Central Command personnel are there. The U.S. Navy Fifth Fleet is in Bahrain.

How do you think U.S. military assets in the region are monitoring this development and perhaps preparing to respond in some way even defensively.

LEIGHTON: They're certainly monitoring it very easily.

And one of the key things, Michael, is that they hope not to get involved in any of this. President Biden made it pretty clear to the Israelis that any actions that they take against Iran, that's on Israel to do those.

But what they do have to do is they have to be prepared to not only to defend any -- you know, themselves from any incoming attacks that could potentially be logged against U.S. facilities.

Although the Iranians seem to be very careful about this. And they seem to be saying that we don't want to involve the U.S. at this juncture, at least.

So it's, you know, in an interesting situation where we're monitoring this on the U.S. side, but we're looking at it as a -- in essence, a non-participant would look at something like this, more as a spectator than anything else.

HOLMES: Right. Yes. But, you know, when -- when you look back at last weekend, U.S. military assets were instrumental in helping to blunt the -- Iran's strikes.

What -- what do you think would be going on behind the scenes right now to, you know, perhaps shift around, redeploy, perhaps personnel to be in place to assist Israel if there were another counter strike?

[00:15:05]

LEIGHTON: Yes, we will be spectators until Israel is attacked again.

HOLMES: Yes.

LEIGHTON: And so that's where that -- that would end. And I think what will happen is they're looking at how to redeploy these assets or whether they need to redeploy these assets.

Of course, that depends on what the Iranians are going to do next. And it also depends on the availability of those assets.

It was quite a significant a show of force that was put on by the U.S., Britain, and France, as well as other countries, to help Israel in this particular situation. And the fact that that was carried out and carried out, I would say, successfully that, of course, makes the bar higher to achieve something similar the next time this happens.

But that is basically the challenge: to maintain the kind of readiness that would be required, especially if Iran doesn't give notice, if they were to attack again.

HOLMES: How concerned do you think the region is that, you know, it's retaliation, then retaliation, and then retaliation? How worried do you think the region is that, you know, one of those retaliations will go too far, and that long-feared regional war erupts, the old, you know, unforeseen consequences?

LEIGHTON: Yes, those unforeseen consequences, I think, are giving people in the region a lot of pause, because that's precisely what they fear, you know, in the Gulf capitals and other places that are a little bit further away from the Persian Gulf. They're looking at this, I think, with great trepidation. Because what they want is this to simmer down into end to be something that is of less consequence or, at least, a less hot conflict.

But the situation is such that I don't think we will see a de- escalation as long as each side feels necessary to respond to the other. And that, of course, gives you that ladder of escalation that could result in some pretty dangerous things happening.

Right now, there seems to be some discipline in the messaging from both sides and in the attacks from both sides. If that discipline can be maintained, that is basically a good thing, although it would be best if they just stopped it all together.

HOLMES: Yes, no kidding. Retired U.S. Air Force Colonel Cedric Leighton. Always good to see you, Cedric. Thank you.

LEIGHTON: You bet. You bet. Thank you, Michael.

HOLMES: All right. A U.S. official telling CNN Israel has launched retaliatory strikes against Iran. When we come back, we'll continue covering this breaking story from all angles. Do stay with us. You're watching CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[00:21:58]

HOLMES: All right. Let's get you up to speed on the apparent Israeli strikes on Iran. A U.S. official confirming to CNN that Israel, indeed, did launch attacks but says nuclear facilities are not the target.

Hours ago, Iranian semiofficial news agency reported three explosions near an army base in Isfahan province.

The report says Iranian fighter jets are stationed there, but the target could also have been nearby military radar. Iranian media saying nuclear facilities in the region are, quote "completely secure," citing a reliable source.

Israel's military not commenting on those reports.

Now, Iran had warned Israel against taking any action before Israel carried out this strike. The Iranian foreign minister speaking with CNN's Erin Burnett in an exclusive interview just hours before Friday's hits. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HOSSEIN AMIR-ABDOLLAHIAN, IRANIAN FOREIGN MINISTER (through translator): Our response to the Israeli regime was limited and stayed within a minimum of frameworks. Whereas we could have given a much harsher response to the Israeli regime.

Following that, we announced that this response is within the framework of legitimate defense, according to international laws. We will not continue.

However, in case the Israeli regime embarks on adventurism again and takes action against the interests of Iran, the next response from us will be immediate and at a maximum level. It will be decisive.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HOLMES: All right. Trita Parsi is the executive vice president of the Quincy Institute and author of "Losing an Enemy: Obama Iran, and the Triumph of Diplomacy." He joins me now from Reston, Virginia.

Always good to see you, Trita. Look, red lines crossed by both sides in terms of hitting each other's territory directly. I mean, it' s a new world in that regard, isn't it? I mean, red lines being erased left and right. What -- what are the new ones or are there any now?

Iran versus Israel is now out in the open.

TRITA PARSI, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, QUINCY INSTITUTE: So the new red line that the Iranians were trying to establish, and may have established, is that in the future, if the Israelis ever strike another Iranian embassy or Iranian assets of personnel in Syria or Lebanon, there will be retaliation.

Now, the Israelis are trying to defy that. They wanted to make sure that that is not the new norm. It's not the new equation in the region, as the Iranians put it, because they want to continue to have the freedom of action that they have enjoyed for decades, in which they have been able to strike at almost all of their neighbors, more or less with impunity.

[00:25:07]

This was the first time in decades that we saw that the Israelis appear to have lost that impunity. And whether this strike today against Iran will be able to re-establish that impunity remains very doubtful in my view. HOLMES: The U.S. had, by all accounts, urged Israel to, you know, take the win, as it was described. At least be measured in what it probably -- in what was probably an inevitable response.

Do you think it's looking at the moment like it was measured? Are both sides just trying to thread the needle here when it comes to the potential of escalation?

PARSI: It's not entirely clear, but what it is appearing to become clear at this point is that the Iranians are downplaying this significantly. Denying that were actually any missile attacks: that they were drones, that there were microdrones, that they didn't do any damage, that they didn't explode on the ground but in the air, because the Iranians shot them down.

If that is a way for the Iranians to essentially wave this off as if nothing happened and stop the escalatory cycle, then I think most of -- most countries in the region and in the world will welcome that, whether that is true or not, because the worst thing that can happen is for this escalatory cycle to continue.

But I think we also have to say Biden's so-called pressure on Netanyahu clearly has not had much of an effect, because he keeps on defying it because Biden refuses to put any red lines in front of Netanyahu.

HOLMES: Yes. Yes. You mentioned the cycle, and it's true. I was just talking about this with Cedric Leighton. I mean, you know, Israel says it's retaliating for Iran's launch of missiles and drones, which Iran says was retaliation for Israel bombing its embassy compound in Damascus a few days before that.

The question is, where does that retaliation stop? And will it stop before things really get out of hand?

PARSI: Well, again, if the Iranians downplay this and then treat it as something that does not deserve to be responded to, then at least the open escalatory cycle will end.

The conflict between Iran and Israel will continue, unfortunately. But it will likely go back into the shadows where it was before. There's been a shadow war going on between the two of them for quite some time.

That's not necessarily great news, but it has one significant benefit. A shadow war does not run the same risk of escalation towards a regional war as this open exchange of fire between Israel and Iran does.

HOLMES: Always great to get your analysis. Trita Parsi in Reston, Virginia. Thanks so much. Good to see you.

PARSI: Thank you for having me.

HOLMES: All right. We are staying with our breaking coverage, of course, of the explosions in Iran. Live reports from the Middle East coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[00:32:15]

HOLMES: Welcome back, everyone. I'm Michael Holmes in Atlanta, and I'll bring you up to date now on the breaking news. We're told that Israel has carried out a strike inside Iran, where it is now 8 a.m.

A senior American official says that Israel told the U.S. on Thursday that it would be retaliating against Iran in the coming days. That's, of course, after Iran directly attacked Israel for the first time last weekend, which itself followed a suspected Israeli attack on an Iranian embassy compound in Damascus in Syria.

Iran's Fars news agency says three explosions were heard near an army base in Isfahan province, where fighter jets are located. That U.S. official said that the target is not nuclear, although the explosions did happen near a major nuclear facility.

CNN asked the Israeli military about all of this, and we were told it has no comment to make.

Paula Hancocks is standing by in Beirut, but first, I want to go to CNN's Nic Robertson in Jerusalem.

Nic, I know you've been working your sources there in the region. What have you been hearing?

ROBERTSON: Yes, a couple of things, Michael, I move would just hearing from the Iranians now that they have now reopened their airspace. They apologized to passengers on planes.

I've also spoken with a -- a regional intelligence source, who tells me has understanding is that Iran will not be -- this is his understanding -- Iran will not be responding or retaliating to Israel's airstrike.

And this does seem to sort of comport with what we've been able to pick up, with -- from Iranian state media and from other media in Iran, some media in Iran has really been playing down what state media said about three drones being spotted in the skies over Isfahan and taken down.

Now those sort of local media are casting these drones not as some big military drones, but in fact, as small four quadcopters. So really sort of playing it down.

We know that state media in Iran has said that no aircraft came into their airspace and violated their air space.

They've talked about explosions that have been heard in other towns around or other cities around Iran as being the air defense systems just sort of triggering on something.

So it does appear that the Iranian state media; local, more independent media are very much playing this down. And I think -- and I think what I'm hearing from this regional intelligence source is significant at this time, this sense that what has happened overnight is small. And this is something that Iran can effectively move on from without retaliation.

[00:35:14]

Now this is an early read, of course, of the situation; and things can change. We don't know what Israel's coming posture is going to be.

But if this is the case, this would be the outcome that the United States and other countries were hoping for when they've been applying pressure on Israel to dial back to narrow the focus, to have a smaller type of response on -- to counter Iran's attack over the weekend.

And what we've seen, of course, is nothing to match the scale of what Iran did in Israel over the weekend. More than 350 missiles: they were drones, ballistic missiles, cruise missiles. Only a few of them made it through Israel's air offenses, which its allies have been saying, look, that was a success for you.

So both sides perhaps have learned things about each other's air defenses, that Israel has been at a posture itself to show that it can reach deep into Iran.

But the early assessment seems to be that maybe -- maybe in terms of this particular confrontation at this moment -- and we have to caveat that -- this could be -- sort of put a hold on this tit-for-tat at the moment.

HOLMES: Signs of cooler heads, perhaps. Nic Robertson, thank you so much there in Jerusalem.

Paula Hancocks in Beirut. As Nic was just sort of saying, a fairly limited strike by Israel. Significant, of course, in terms of striking Iranian soil directly, but not in terms of how big it was by the look of it,

The thing is, it's a cycle of retaliation. I mean, walk us through how we got here.

PAULA HANCOCKS, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Michael, I think it's important, really, to go back to the beginning of this month when we're looking at this -- this current uptick in the -- in the tit-for-tat between Israel and Iran. And it's been a shadow war between the two for years.

But April 1, Israel did carry out, or was a suspected of carrying out a strike against what was believed to be an Iranian diplomatic compound in Damascus, Israel claiming that it was more of a military building. But they did carry out this strike, according to Iran. and killed seven Revolutionary Guard members.

Now Iran at the time had said that they saw that as an attack on its own soil, because it was a diplomatic compound within the consulates, they said. Now, then what happened after that was, we did see last weekend that unprecedented attack by Iran on Israeli soil, more than 300 missiles, drones fired towards Israel. We hear from the U.S. side that 99 percent of them were shot down, because there was a concerted effort, not just by Israel, but also by the U.S., by the U.K., Iran [SIC] and Jordan to prevent those from reaching Israeli soil.

And then as far as Iran was concerned, that was it. They were very clear that they believed that the situation had been concluded. So even as that unprecedented attack was being carried out, last weekend, they said that this is it, this is a response to what Israel did to our diplomatic compound in Damascus. As far as we are concerned this has been concluded.

Now of course, that wasn't the case that for Israel. It has clearly felt that it needed to give some kind of response to such an unprecedented attack, the first direct attack from Iranian soil onto Israeli soil.

The question, of course is, is what exactly did Israel hits? And that's that's what we don't know at this point. It does appear as though it may have been a limited strike, and that's certainly what we heard from U.S. officials telling our colleagues in Washington that they believed it was going to be limited in scope.

But we don't know for sure what was hit at this point and whether or not that is something that Tehran would be able to live with.

What we have heard publicly -- and of course, some of this may be posturing. Some of this may be for domestic consumption, as well. But we have heard publicly from Tehran that an Israeli attack on Iranian assets would be met with a bigger and more significant response than what we saw on the weekend.

The Iranian foreign minister speaking to CNN just hours ago, saying that they could have an immediate reaction if Israel were to carry out some kind of attack on its -- on Iranian assets. We heard from president Raisi also saying that it would be a heavier response to what we saw last weekend.

[00:40:05]

So really, I think the question at this point is, what exactly did Israel hit, and is it something that Tehran can make peace with or is it something that they feel that they will have to respond to?

And they have been very clear that, if they respond again, it will be in a more significant way than what we saw last weekend -- Michael.

HOLMES: All right. Paul Hancocks there in Beirut. Appreciate it, Paula. Thank you.

All right. For more. I'm joined by Malcolm Davis, a senior analyst at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. He's in Canberra. Always good to see you, Malcolm. I mean, it was -- it was hugely significant, obviously that Iran took

action with its missiles directly at Israeli territory and didn't use proxies.

How significant, Dan, is it that Israel hits Iranian -- Iranian territory directly in the context of red lines and regional tensions, no matter how big the strike turns out to be?

MALCOLM DAVIS, SENIOR ANALYST, AUSTRALIAN STRATEGIC POLICY INSTITUTE: Look, I think it is important. It does mark an escalation by both sides in terms of their long-running conflict. You know, a precedent has been set by both Iran and Israel now. And you could see future such attacks occur, even if Iran chooses not to retaliate against this Israeli strike.

It's possible that in future circumstances where, for example, Israel might attack an Iranian proxy. Iran could then retaliate against Israel, and then Israel would have to retaliate against Iran.

So it does set the stage for that long-term escalatory tit-for-tat cycle that does generate more danger in the region.

HOLMES: Yes. In a military sense, you know, obviously Israeli missiles, it would seem, hit targets in Iran. And if that is indeed the case, then from a military sense, their missiles are defeating Iran's air defense systems in a way that Iran failed to do in its the attack on Israel. So a learning opportunity for Israel, perhaps, in that military sense.

DAVIS: A learning opportunity for both, I would imagine.

I think that, when you look at the Iranian attack on Israel the other weekend, it was staged or sequenced in a rather weird manner in terms of the three different types of capabilities the drones, the cruise missiles and the ballistic missiles were not timed to arrive in Israel simultaneously and thus have the best chance of overwhelming the Israeli air defenses.

So that attack filed because the Israelis had time to intercept each of the individual waves alongside the U.S., the U.K., and France.

With this attack, you've seen Israel's -- Israel launch a very limited attack at very high-tech capability. We have F-35s probably firing from inside Iraq or Syria to targets inside Iran and reach their targets, irrespective of the Iranian air defenses.

So I do think that sends a message to Tehran that, really, they are more vulnerable to Israeli strikes than they would like to admit.

HOLMES: Yes. Israel, of course, fighting in Gaza. It's fighting on its Northern border with Lebanon.

And now this conflict breaking out into a more direct way with Iran.

How difficult would it be for Israel to be, you know, spread out like that in a military sense? DAVIS: It does raise the concern in my mind that Israel is now confronting multiple fronts simultaneously. And the Iranians, you know, can retaliate in ways without necessarily attacking Israel directly from Iran.

They can activate Hezbollah, for example, in Southern Lebanon to launch large-scale attacks into Northern Israel. They can use proxy forces in Iraq and Syria to launch attacks, as well.

So I do think there is a risk that, particularly if the Israelis do go ahead with their plans to intervene in Rafah, that the Iranians could take advantage of that and try and do something in the North.

And of course, as I said, a precedent has been set. So Iran could then choose to strike against Israel.

But the Iranians do have to now consider that maybe their ability to strike and their ability to defend is not as effective as they would have liked.

HOLMES: Yes. Yes. Alex Marquardt was reporting earlier, you know, the U.S. did not give the green light for this attack and had been, actually, actively trying to dissuade Israel from reacting, given the failure of the Iranian attack to do much damage. You know, sort of take the win was the phrase.

You know, Israel did it anyway. What does that say in the context of the U.S.-Israeli dynamic?

DAVIS: Israel is a sovereign state. It's going to act in its sovereign interests. It -- Israel could not have accepted an Iranian attack of that scope, even one that failed, on its territory and done nothing.

So I think that it was unrealistic of the Biden administration to say to Israel, take the win and do nothing. I think what Israel has done, if all the reporting is accurate, is done a limited strike on Isfahan against military bases, but not the towns, which is the nuclear facility there. And they have inflicted limited damage, but they have gone no further than that.

And now the ball is firmly in Iran's court as to decide whether they retaliate and risk further escalation or where they -- whether they leave it at that.

But I don't think Israel is necessarily beholden to the United States to the level whereby they hold their fire in the face of a direct attack.

HOLMES: What -- what -- what do you think the U.S. will do now to try to hose down the broader situation? Nic Robertson was just reporting he's been talking to people in the region who say that their sense is that Iran's, you know -- we, we, we lost Malcolm Davis, but we appreciate him making the time. Malcolm Davis there in Canberra for us.

All right, more breaking news on the explosions in Iran when we come back. We'll bring you the latest developments.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[00:50:29]

HOLMES: All right. A quick recap of the breaking news we've been following for you.

A U.S. official confirming to CNN that Israel has carried out a strike inside Iran. Israel telling the U.S. it would be retaliating against Iran in the days ahead over Tehran's attack this past weekend. And that came to fruition, obviously.

But the U.S. official says Washington did not endorse this latest action from Israel, did not, in any way green-light it.

The events of the past few hours started when Iranian state media reported explosions heard near an army base in the province of Isfahan and reports of flashes in the sky.

The U.S. expectation was that Israel strike would be limited in scope and would not target civilian nor nuclear facilities.

Let's go live now to Istanbul, Turkey, and CNN's Scott McLean.

Good to see you, Scott.

Obviously, all of what's been happening concerns more than Iran and Israel. There are a lot of countries in the neighborhood who have been worried. What -- what are you hearing? What have other countries been saying and doing?

SCOTT MCLEAN, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Michael.

Yes, obviously, the countries that we want to hear from most are the Iranians and the Israelis. And hear exactly what their plans and reaction to all this will be.

In terms of reaction for the region -- from the region, it's still quite early here. And so we've heard precious little. Perhaps countries are wanting to let the dust settle on this a little bit, gather all of the facts before saying anything. Just given the volatility of the situation in the region.

And look, for the fact -- the past almost three weeks now, you have had countries in this part of the world furiously trying to convince, first, the Iranians not to strike the Israelis, not to further escalate tensions, inflame the situation, cause a regional war.

And then in the last week, you've had them trying to convince the Israelis, and the West and the United States to try to compel the Israelis not to strike Iran, which could obviously provoke a further attack.

And there's really been a flurry of diplomatic activity happening, both in private and in public, as well. Just yesterday, you had the Emiratis on the phone with the Iranians, urging them to sort of restraint, dial down the temperature a little bit.

Over the past week, you've also had the Egyptians saying that they've been in touch with both the Israelis and the Iranians with a very similar message to try to cool things off a little bit.

Obviously, the Saudis have been taking calls from the West and from around the region. And here in turkey just this week, you have the foreign minister in Qatar to visit not only with the Qataris, but also the leader of Hamas, Ismail Haniyeh.

And Hakan Fidan said that it's Turkey's position that the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, is trying to inflame things, trying to drag the region into a war in order to maintain his grip on power.

And this week we also heard from the Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan. His criticism, one of many, has been that the West was quick to denounce Iran's strike on Israel, strikes on Israel, I should say. But was not so quick to denounce what started this all on April 1st in the first place, which of course, we know was Israel's strike on that Iranian diplomatic compound in Damascus.

And the Iranians have made very clear over the last week or so that, if Israel were to strike back after its barrage of missiles onto Israeli territory, that there would be a harsher response, a more decisive response.

Because they say that look, yes, maybe 99 percent of those missiles were shot down. But the intent there was to warn. And the next time, well, that may not be the same.

Of course, President Biden, in the aftermath of the strike on Israel, his message to the Israelis had been, look, you shot down 99 percent of these. Take the win.

Whether or not Iran can be convinced to do the same, given that perhaps this was rather limited, and the incoming may have been shot down. It seems at this point, can Iran be convinced to do the same and just let sleeping dogs lie?

HOLMES: All right. That's Scott McLean there in Istanbul. Appreciate it. Good to see you, Scott.

Now, reports of these explosions in Iran sent oil prices surging nearly 4 percent, U.S. oil prices climbing above $85 a barrel. Let's have a look at the prices there right now. Brent crude, the world benchmark, at $1.79. That -- sorry, up. 1.79 percent at $88.67, flirting with $90.

[00:55:08]

And WTI crude is at $84.25. So both of them up one and three-quarter percent.

Meanwhile, the news drove U.S. stock futures lower with the Dow Jones sinking -- the futures sinking 480 points early. You can see there, futures down three-quarters of 1 percent.

The NASDAQ futures down over 1 percent. And the S&P 500 just shy of 1 percent.

I'm Michael Holmes in Atlanta. Our breaking news coverage continues after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)