Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Putin Warns Of War With NATO If West Lifts Missile Limits; Biden Administration Unveils New Evidence Of RT's Key Role In Russian Intelligence Operations Globally; Trump Repeats Claims About Haitian Migrants In California Event; Taylor Swift Drives Thousands Of Voter Registrations; Since Taliban Takeover, Suicide Rate Among Women Increases. Aired 3-4p ET

Aired September 13, 2024 - 15:00   ET

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

[15:00:38]

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN HOST: It is 8:00 p.m. in London, 10:00 p.m. in Moscow, 3:00 p.m. here in Washington.

I'm Jim Sciutto. Thanks so much for joining me today on CNN NEWSROOM. And let's get right to the news.

We begin with Russia's war on Ukraine. Russian President Vladimir Putin has a new warning for NATO if the U.S. and NATO give you Ukraine permission to use U.S. supplied weapons to strike deep inside Russia. The war, Putin threatens, will expand.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VLADIMIR PUTIN, RUSSIAN PRESIDENT (through translator): If this decision is made, it will mean nothing less than the direct participation of NATO countries, the United States and European countries in the war in Ukraine. This is their direct participation, and this, of course, significantly changes the very essence, the very nature of the conflict. This will mean that NATO countries, the United States, and European countries, are fighting Russia.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: His warning, which is not the first time he's warned similar, it comes as President Biden host British Prime Minister Keir Starmer at the White House. Both of their foreign affairs advisers were together meeting with President Zelenskyy in Ukraine this week, while Biden appears poised to lift restrictions on U.S. made weapons striking inside Russia, White House national security spokesperson John Kirby says there are no plans to make such an announcement today.

CNN's Kevin Liptak. He's at the White House.

Kevin, help me understand the administration's movement on this because they have resisted this change as they've resisted previous supplies of new weapons systems, et cetera, on the fear that if they do so, it might raise the risk of escalation with Russia.

So what is their thinking now about changing that restrictions, or lifting those restrictions?

KEVIN LIPTAK, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Yeah, I think this conversation is happening now for a couple of reasons. One, it's just the battlefield is dynamic in Ukraine, of course, coming under sustained aerial assault from Russia and looking for ways to sort of counter the momentum there. I think the other complicating factor that is account factoring into these talks is the revelation this week that Iran is providing Russia with its own ballistic missiles and that has changed the calculus in some ways, according to Western officials and it has all added up to enormous pressure on President Biden to come to some decision here, including from members of his own party, some very senior Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee who say that Ukraine needs this capability if it is to win this war.

And they make the point that, the point that you made, that over the last two years or so, the warnings about escalation have not necessarily come to pass and that this is a capability that would, could really, really make a difference for Ukraine. On the flip side of this, you do hear from administration officials who wonder about the effectiveness of this kind of move. And you did hear the Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin lend some voice to this earlier this week when he said that Russia has in fact already moved some of its most high- value you targets outside of the range of these long-range missiles. He also makes the point that the supplies of these are not limitless.

So this will all be sort of an intensive discussion for President Biden and the prime minister when they sit down later today. What you hear from American officials, they're tamping down expectations that President Biden could approve the use of the U.S. provided ATACMS missiles going deep into Russia. What does seem more likely is that president Biden would give sign sign-off for the UK, as well as France to use for Ukraine to use missiles from those countries in on Russian targets inside Russia. So that will be a topic of discussion.

But as you said, John Kirby, the national security spokesman, saying today that he doesn't expect an announcement to come out of this meeting today. So it's a conversation that will be continuing.

SCIUTTO: Kevin Liptak, thanks so much.

Well, President Zelenskyy sat down for an exclusive interview with CNN's Fareed Zakaria to explain why he believes it's critical for the Biden administration to lift those restrictions on U.S.-made weapons. Here's what he had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT: Everybody is looking the decision of the United States. Everybody is waiting for that decisions. After that, they make decisions, it's true.

And so we wanted very much to you this weapon and just to attack these jets on the military bases, not civilians infrastructure, military base.

FAREED ZAKARIA, CNN HOST, FAREED ZAKARIA GPS: So you just wanted to be able to attack --

ZELENSKYY: Yes.

ZAKARIA: -- the bases that are being used to launch these weapons, these planes, these missiles.

ZELENSKYY: Yeah, because these jets, Fareed, these jets -- these jets from there, they use not only missiles. They use these jets and jets use per months 4,000 guided aerial bombs on -- just on the east of our territory, 4,000 bombs.

ZAKARIA: And these bombs and missiles are hitting Ukrainian civilians --

ZELENSKYY: Schools --

ZAKARIA: -- energy --

ZELENSKYY: -- universities, all our energy infrastructure. They destroyed 80 percent by these guided bombs, 80 percent.

Now I said, we have some meetings with officials and, I said we waited too long. Now, Russia began to move that jets from 100, 150 kilometers, 300, to 500 after that, I will tell you that now we need more permissions, but now you will tell me, we maybe we will give you 100 or 200, but for what, they destroy what, if they began to move? So, we're again, like with the packages, again, slow decisions and again, we can't win in such circumstances.

ZAKARIA: Do you have permission now to --

ZELENSKYY: No, until now, no.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Joining me now to discuss this very question, Lieutenant General Mark Hertling, former commanding general for the U.S. Army Europe and Seventh Army.

Sir, good to have you back.

LT. GEN. MARK HERTLING (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Great to be with you, Jim, as always. A tough subject we're talking about right now, Jim.

SCIUTTO: No question. We've talked about this before because the administration has long expressed concern that each new advanced weapons system or expansion of Ukrainian capabilities could spark an escalation with Russia. So far, those haven't borne out with, for instance, tanks, Abrams tanks, HIMARS, ATACMS, F-16s.

Do you believe though that this is fundamentally different that using highly capable U.S. missile systems to strike targets inside Russian territory might be the bridge too far?

HERTLING: Well, let me push back a little bit on what you just said, Jim. Some of the delays in massing equipment to Ukraine have been based on projections of what Ukraine could handle at the time. And I'm not denigrating Ukraine's armed forces. What I'm saying is they've had a lot of people in the fight. It's very difficult to pull them out of the fight, to train them on things like M1 tanks, Bradley fighting vehicles, F-16s.

You just don't throw him the keys to those particular pieces of equipment and say, go at it, fellas.

The problem is those have been provided to Ukraine over time when there is -- people thought it was the right time in terms of the assault. Now, we're into these long-range systems and yes, its very different for a variety of reasons. And first, id like to basically say it has nothing to do with the fear of giving President Zelenskyy too much in ammunition or equipment, or trying to spark more issues in the war, it has to do with the national security of the United States and an indicator of what Russia might do.

Now, there's a bunch of things that Russia might do and as we've read in some of the open-source intelligence, it could be anything from using nuclear weapons. I don't know what the probability of that is, but I know they have -- they have basically bluffed their way in that area and sometimes it's a false bluff or it could be saying, hey, now the United States is attacking us. These missiles that are coming across are supplied by the United States.

And oh, by the way, what happens if one of those attack a missile shot at 200 kilometers hits an apartment building, and he kills a bunch of Russian civilians. Then the same kind of lessons were learning out of Israel would be applicable in Ukraine. So there's a lot more decision- making involved in I think most Americans thinking this, in this particular arena.

SCIUTTO: So we hear Putin make the threat again, we played it a short time ago in his words, he says this would be in effect direct conflict between the U.S. and Russia or at least implying that. Now, you mentioned the nuclear threat before. He has rattled that nuclear saber before.

That said, in the fall of 2022, there was enormous U.S. concern that Russia was prepared to use a tactical nuclear weapon in Ukraine. And I -- I and others have reported that.

I mean, the question is what's reading someone like Putin, you know, perhaps most of the time those are empty threats. Is there a point when it becomes a real threat, right? I mean, that's the difficult calculus for the president and for the U.S. -- U.S.'s allies.

[15:10:00]

HERTLING: Yeah, that's -- that's the difficult calculus indeed. I mean, what we're talking about is there are a lot of outsiders, people viewing this conflict and saying, hey, Putin has been bluffing all along and he hasn't used nuclear weapons. We can't keep submitting to that bluff. And yeah, what I would say is there's probably a 99.9 percent chance that Putin won't use nuclear weapons. But there's still a 1 percent chance because he has them. And who would then be responsible for the tens of thousands of deaths and the radiation of Western Europe, if that did occur? It isn't the experts on the TV shows like this one saying, yeah, go ahead and let them shoot inside of Russia, because the results of the risk is far too great to calculate.

And the other thing that I'd say, Jim, is I'm all for Ukraine winning this war against Russia but as you just said a minute ago, Putin's going -- he has already said if something comes in from the United States at hand, this sovereign territory, it is now a strike by NATO and the United States inside the territory of Russia. And it's against Russia as Mr. Zelenskyy just said, those -- those bases could be to 200, 300, 500 kilometers for the front line.

And if I were the Russian presidents, I would also say they're now attacking inside of mother Russia, and it becomes an existential threat. And anyone that knows anything about Russian doctrine knows that when they perceive an existential threat and they will use nuclear weapons is a final determinant.

SCIUTTO: I mean, the question is, what do you do to help Ukraine if you don't allow those strikes because Ukraine doesn't want to do is just for the hell of it, right? I mean, wants to go after Russian firing positions, right? Where they are targeting deliberately, quite deliberately Ukrainian civilians and civilian infrastructure, as you know, in schools and how hospitals and apartment buildings? I mean, is there an option in the middle?

I mean, I suppose you could cover the eastern part of Ukraine with patriot missile systems. We just don't have those, right? We don't have those in numbers. So I mean, what's the option short of striking those targets inside Russia? That still protects Ukraine from these Russian airstrikes.

HERTLING: Well, you just hit on the potential option B, and that's increasing the amount of air defense systems from all the NATO allies that will be delivered to Ukraine. Secretary Austin has been attempting to do that for the last six months and has made some gains. The other way is to increase the electronic warfare capability, knock the planes out of the sky with EW capacity.

The third is continue to help Ukraine develop weapons systems that are under their label and under there dynamic, like the drones that they have been using very effectively, a hit the long-range targets.

But truthfully, Jim, the other thing we have to consider is Russia is target rich environment. It's 11 time zones long as you well know. So Russia can move a lot of people around, people in planes around different bases, and it will be increasingly difficult to strike those even if they are 500 kilometers away from the frontline.

This is a tough war. This is a tough conflict. The thing we would all like to see Russia stop hitting inside of Ukraine, so the way you do that is in my view, air defense electronic warfare and the potential for helping Ukraine develop their own weapon systems, all of which are hard.

SCIUTTO: Yeah, and take time, right? Meanwhile, Ukrainian civilians are watching the missiles fallen their heads.

General Mark Hertling, always good to have you.

HERTLING: Thanks, Jim. Pleasure to be with you.

SCIUTTO: Well, the Biden administration is unveiling new evidence showing that a Russian media network, RT or Russia Today, plays a key role in the Kremlin's global intelligence and influence operations as they're known.

Today, the State Department revealed classified, now declassified information, suggesting that RT and Russian intelligence operations are working together to try to sow division as well as harm to the democratic process here in this country.

CNN's Kylie Atwood first broke this story.

So tell us exactly how RT is intertwined with Russian intelligence on these operations?

KYLIE ATWOOD, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, well, we've long known that the two are correlated. What were learning now, or some more details about how Russian intelligence operations have actually embedded inside of RT, the Russian news media organization. One of the examples that we learned today when the secretary of state spoke at the podium alongside some other senior officials here in the State Department is that there was a cyber unit of Russian intelligence that was embedded in RT and allowed them to collect information and then share that information back with Russian intelligence.

And it had a global reach type of capability. That's according to now the senior State Department official here, who works on these issues, who spoke with reporters earlier. We also know that there was an effort that was stood up, a crowd-funding effort, Jim, to try and raise money to then actually purchase weaponry that was used by the Russians in the battlefield in Ukraine.

[15:15:09]

Some of that was procured from China, according to the declassified intelligence that the United States has provided today. What the State Department is aiming to do with this is to make known the correlation, the direct relationship that RT and Russia intelligence actually have, and let countries know, there's going to be now a global diplomatic effort, diplomats going to countries around the world, discussing with them, their concerns about RT, their fears of RT operating in those countries. We'll watch and see kind of what a result that diplomatic campaign has.

And we should note, this comes on the heels of the Biden administration, the Department of Justice going after RT's presence here in the United States, trying to undermine the U.S. presidential elections.

SCIUTTO: So, how key -- I mean, that was quite a revelation evidence that U.S. influencers in this country, perhaps not unknowingly, were receiving funds to help spread in effect, Russian propaganda. I mean, how essential were U.S. official -- U.S. influencers rather to Russia's campaign?

ATWOOD: Hugely essential, Jim. So RT, which is the Russian state media company, actually stood up its own organization here in the United States, in Tennessee called Tenet Media. And what Tenet Media did was then go and pay right-wing influencers in the media space particularly proponents of former President Trump, to come on as their contributors. They were paying them millions of dollars and according to the Department of Justice filings and reporting that CNN has done these folks didn't actually know that this was a company that was tied to the Russian government, to Russian intelligence and influence operations.

Now they know, it's made public by Department of Justice, Tenet Media obviously has been the focal point of that. But it's incredibly noteworthy that those influencers here in the United States are who rushed intelligence and then Russian state media actually got out and contacted and use them to try and push their influence campaigns here in the United States.

SCIUTTO: Kylie Atwood, thanks so much.

Well, now to the skies high above us, the Boeing Starliner astronauts who just finished a news conference from the International Space Station. They arrive, you'll remember in early June, on the maiden voyage of the first crewed mission for Boeing's new spacecraft. They were supposed to return just a few days later, but thruster problems and leaks led mission controllers to postpone their return until next February when the next SpaceX mission arrives.

Last weekend as it turns out, their Starliner capsule did returned safely to Earth. As you see there, without them on board.

Joining us now, CNN space and defense correspondent Kristin Fisher.

So, Kristin, I wonder, the Starliner did get to go home without them. It was safe. Do they express any regret or maybe thoughts that they didn't make the right call?

KRISTIN FISHER, CNN SPACE AND DEFENSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Jim, Butch Wilmore, the commander, Starliners commander, did say -- and I should say, he's a navy pilot, right? So that's his background. He did say that it was tough to see his ship go off without us, but with that said, he stood by NASA's decision to keep himself and his crew member the pilot, Suni Williams, off of that spacecraft, even though it did land back on Earth safely.

You know, Jim, it was funny because there were so many questions about their mental health, how mentally were they handling this transition from what was supposed to be a days-long mission to eight months now, and they both said, you know, what, we've done long duration space missions before. I asked how long that mental transition was for them, they said it was instantaneous, just the flip switched and they were committed. They were ready to go.

They were much more worried about the families that they were leaving behind back on Earth. And, Jim, they also had this message for all of the earthlings that have been so worried about them.

SCIUTTO: No question. Well, Kristen, it was good to see it returned safely. We'll see what that means for the future of the Starliner. Thanks so much.

Coming up, we don't have to wait a fortnight to see the effects of Taylor Swift's endorsement of Vice President Harris. Well, you do it right now and we're going to have a look at the numbers coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:22:47]

SCIUTTO: Welcome back.

Former President Donald Trump spoke to reporters today his California golf club after rejecting Harris's calls for another presidential debate where, you'll remember, he once again repeated racist, debunked, kind of silly, and dangerous attacks, it turns out, about Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT & 2024 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: In Springfield, Ohio, 20,000 illegal Haitian migrants have descended upon a town of people destroying their way of life. I can say this. We will do large deportations from Springfield, Ohio, large deportations. We're going to get these people out. We'll bring them back to Venezuela. It's like an invasion from within.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: CNN's Kristen Holmes is following all this for us.

So, Kristen, the whole stupid eating pets, conspiracy theory that apparently led to threats to schools in Springfield, led to elementary schools to be shut down twice in a row for two days in a row.

Pete Buttigieg told CNN yesterday, he says this, this is a strategy and an intentional effort to distract -- I mean distract from what? I mean, if Vance and Trump are sticking with this line of attack, they must see some benefit to it. So what benefit to them do they perceive?

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, having covered this campaign for the last two years, I wouldn't say it's necessarily an effort to distract. I would say it is an effort to double down on the fearmongering that they have put in place around immigration.

It is clear from polling that immigration is a very important issue to many voters. They want to seize on that. They believe that Donald Trump is stronger than Kamala Harris when it comes to immigration. I mean that with voters, that voters see Donald Trump as stronger on immigration, what they have done is brought up immigration and then in turn made it fearful.

He often brings up crimes that were committed by migrants, reminder that most migrants do not commit crimes. In fact, it is more unlikely that migrant would commit a crime -- than commit a crime. But there have been some high profile cases.

Donald Trump has dwelled on those. We saw him do the exact same thing in 2016 when he started talking about immigration, when he started talking about the wall. That is what they are doing here.

[15:25:01]

They are bringing up a scenario in various places because there is a problem at the border which we know, but they are inflating it, and they are making it scary and they are trying to do that when they tried to reach different voters.

And that has been a strategy. Again, we have seen now for roughly eight years from Donald Trump, from Donald Trump's campaign, it's a completely different campaign now than it was in 2016. Although I will say Corey Lewandoski was there and now he is back but it is the same kind of messaging and the same kind of tactic that they are using now.

SCIUTTO: Yeah, what hasn't changed is the man at the top of the campaign, right? Trump and his messaging and deliberate race-baiting that is so common.

Trump was also pushed to this press conference about his recent appearances, including of all times on 9/11 with a 9/11 denier, Laura Loomer, but it appears based on his answer that that is not enough for him to at all criticize her.

HOLMES: No, I asked him directly about this. I asked him about the concerns that we have heard both publicly and privately from Republicans about his relationship with Laura Loomer, the complaints about the fact that she has tweeted out racist remarks. Right before the debate, she tweets -- tweeted out racist remarks about Kamala Harris. She has questioned 9/11, again, even today, was raising questions about 9/11.

He said, one, that he had not heard of any of these remarks and, two, he asked me why I was asking this question. He didn't understand. He kept saying why I was asking this question in that he seemed to defend Loomer. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Laura has been a supporter of mine, just like a lot of people are supporters and she's been a supporter of mine. She speaks very positively of the campaign. I'm not sure why you asked that question, but Laura is a supporter.

I don't control Laura. Laura has to say what she wants. She's a -- she's a free spirit.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HOLMES: He's also asked a series of other questions, why she was riding on the plane. There's a lot of people riding on the plane. He was asked if she disavowed her various remarks. He said he didn't know anything about them, so he'd have to look at them first.

At one point, he was asked, what does she bring to the campaign and then he said again, she brings some spirit or version of spirit to the campaign because she is such a loyal supporter. One thing is true though, Jim, when I talk to anybody around Donald Trump, she has been one of his most loyal and ardent supporters and we know that that is something that's very important to Donald Trump.

SCIUTTO: Yeah. It seems to trump -- to choose a phrase or it seems to trump the concerns about her many alarming statements.

Kristen Holmes, thanks so much.

Well, now to the Harris campaign. Last night, in Michigan, a special shout out from one cat person to another.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. TIM WALZ (D-MN), VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Look, look, it's not as if I didn't warn these guys a few months ago, you mess with cat people and you will find out, you will find out.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: That message for Taylor Swift, the pop superstar is in her political era, speaking now for the Harris-Walz ticket. And long story short, her endorsement is driving real change, upping registration, voting registration across the battleground states as we're learning in newly released voter registration data, shared with CNN. Could Taylor Swift abandoning red actually turn this election blue?

CNN's Priscilla Alvarez is on the ground with the Harris campaign in Swift's home state of Pennsylvania and has more.

So, on Tuesday, she posted -- Swift posted on Instagram right after the debate, endorsing Harris and at the same time encouraging fans to register to vote. She shared this custom vote.com or vote.org rather link in her Instagram bio. It's now sharing some of those results.

What do we find?

PRISCILLA ALVAREZ, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Jim, and actually, I was in the debate spin room the moment that that endorsement he came out, I was with campaign -- Harris campaign officials who were completely surprised.

They did not expect that she was going to make that endorsement on Tuesday night, but as soon as she did, I ask campaign officials whether they were going to invite her on the trail and they very much welcomes that possibility and it is true that Democratic officials have been looking at her calendar to see you it is possible that there could be a joint rally with a superstar Taylor Swift.

Now, the numbers here tell the story when it comes to voter registration. So if you look at vote.org, over 52,000 new voter registrations. That's what they reported. And 100 -- more than 144,000 voters verified there register status.

Now, this is also very important in the battleground states, especially those blue wall states, we often talk about including here in Pennsylvania with over 2,000 new voters. And while these numbers may not seem very large, they're very important in a race like this one that is going to be decided on the margins.

So, any new voters flocking to the vice president or any new voter registrations are very much taken into account by the campaign where they know that this is going to be such a tight race.

[15:30:04]

Now, of course, it is -- Democratic strategists are never quite sure how these celebrity endorsements move the needle. But at the very least bringing, attention to getting especially young voters to go out to the polls in November, maybe just enough to move the needle in a race that's so close.

SCIUTTO: Yeah, imagine, they must to be excited about not just the endorsement, but the explicit direction to go out and get registered, right? And some of that being seen in those numbers.

Priscilla Alvarez traveling there with the candidate, thanks so much.

Well, Pope Francis says, American voters must choose in November between, his words, the lesser of two evils. On the papal plane on his way back from a 12-day trip to Asia, the pope was asked about the advice he gives Catholics voting in the U.S. presidential election. He says both candidates are against life, his words, citing Donald Trump's stance on migrants and Kamala Harris's position on abortion rights. He did still, though, urge people to vote.

Ahead this hour, cultivating an allegedly toxic and sexist work environment. Exclusive CNN reporting on how the New Hampshire national guard is accused of failing to protect female soldiers from sexual harassment and assault and threats.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCIUTTO: There are more problems today for the leadership at Boeing. More than 33,000 workers walked off the job overnight after overwhelmingly rejecting a new four-year contract proposal with the company, kickstarting the first strike at Boeing in 16 years. The contract would have allowed for raises of around 25 percent over the course of the agreement.

[15:35:04]

For more on the strike and where negotiations stand, CNN business and politics correspondent Vanessa Yurkevich.

So, Vanessa, I mean, how far apart are the two sides on getting to a deal? I know that pension issues are at the center of this.

VANESSA YURKEVICH, CNN BUSINESS AND POLITICS CORRESPONDENT: They're pretty far apart. And that was very apparent in the numbers, from membership. Ninety-five percent of membership voting down the deal and the 96 percent voting to go on strike. And as you mentioned, a lot of the members wanted to see a return to a traditional pension, which they did not get in this contract. They wanted 40 percent in pay increase wages to account for all of the concessions they believe that they gave up during the past 16 years.

So it seems like what was on the table was very different from what membership wanted.

Take a listen to some of these union workers who on the picket lines early this morning and what they had to say about it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Recognize whose building these planes out here on the floor and the quality that we put into our work every day to make sure that passengers and crew members that fly our airplanes are safe.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We definitely need more wage increase, that's for sure. More time off would be nice and if they bring back the pension, that would be really nice.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I believe we deserve way better because without us, there is no Boeing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

YURKEVICH: Now, Boeing for their part says they are eager to get back to the negotiating table. This is a company that has posted $33 billion in operating losses, has not turned to profits since 2018. They want to get a deal done. They want to get production up and running again.

Just earlier this morning, we heard from Brian West, the CFO of Boeing, who said that this is disappointing and that there is going to be an impact to their bottom line. Boeing is the one of the largest American manufacturers and exporters and they say that they generate about $79 billion to the U.S. economy. They provide 1.6 million jobs in terms of a ripple effect from what they -- from the people that they employ, and they say that suppliers could ultimately be impacted the longer this goes on.

But as you mentioned, Jim, doesn't seem like they're really close to a deal right now. Everyone wants to see them get back to the table, easier said than done, of course.

SCIUTTO: Yeah, add this to the list of woes.

Vanessa Yurkevich, thanks so much. Well, now to a CNN exclusive reporting on the New Hampshire national guard and how it became a hotbed for sexual harassment and assault, according to interviews with current and former members of the guard. They describe a culture of retaliation against whistleblowers and neglect of victims of sexual assault. In one instance, a lieutenant colonel deployed to the southern border in October 2022 sent sexually suggestive messages to women, took photos of women without their knowledge, and then shared them. He even ordered women to come to his hotel room and threatened to make their deployments miserable if they complained.

CNN Pentagon producer Haley Britzky joins me now.

I mean, it's just alarming -- alarming accounts in this investigation. Can you describe how rampant this kind of behavior was in the guard?

HALEY BRITZKY, CNN PENTAGON PRODUCER: Yeah, Jim. So the current and former members that I spoke with said that this was incredibly normal and this organization, it had really taken root within the New Hampshire National Guard. And I think a good, you know, illustration of that is in this investigation that you mentioned of this lieutenant colonel down at the border. They say, you know, in talking to soldiers, talked over 50 soldiers in this unit, and the soldiers tell them that he frequently bragged about beating past investigations, that he'd been investigated a number of times. It never stuck.

And it really impacted the trust that they had. And I think also illustrates just how long this was going on for. And, of course, we should mention that Lieutenant Colonel Patterson's attorney told us that he perceived the women and under his command as being friendly to him and simply aired and letting that familiarity go too far.

SCIUTTO: So, your investigation has shown systemic issues in the New Hampshire National Guard that could enable this kind of his contact. I wonder -- misconduct rather -- what are your sources telling you about that?

BRITZKY: Right. So I mean, Jim, as you know, that the national guard is a complex part of the military and that its made up of these part- time service members. This is not their full-time job, and therefore, they're not held to the same regulations as their active duty counterparts.

And so multiple sources said that impacted the way that change is able to sink down into these organizations. But the other main thing that sources both within the guard and experts outside of the guard pointed to was this kind of gray area of who ultimately owns them. They -- you know, they report up to the state governor, but they also report to the National Guard bureau in Washington. So there's kind of this lack of clarity as to who takes ownership over them and ensures this conduct doesn't happen.

SCIUTTO: I imagine you spoke to a lot of guardsman and women about this kind of behavior going on. What have they told you about that? I mean, certainly their frustration that it wasn't effectively policed.

[15:40:03]

BRITZKY: Yeah. I mean, frankly, Jim, people just have zero confidence in the leadership, it seems, to handle these things appropriately. You know, they talked about how much it has impacted morale in the unit, saying that people are leaving service because of it. And, you know, we should mention that the New Hampshire National Guard TAG, which is the general officer in charge of that unit, says they take these occasions very seriously, that they've made changes to kinds of address them, and there's legislation being proposed within the Senate from Senator Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire to try to address some of these concerns.

But ultimately, even in talking to people about those proposed changes, there's a lot of concern that it won't actually sink down and it won't actually have the impact that it's meant to. You know, as one person put it to me, it's not that there's not rules on the books for the National Guard, is that there's simply not being followed.

SCIUTTO: Haley Britzky, thanks so much.

Coming up, three years after the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, we want to take a look at what life is like there now for women, in the only country in the world that bans higher education for girls.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:44:09]

SCIUTTO: Welcome back. Continuing our coverage of the three-year anniversary of the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan now.

Two weeks ago, the Taliban introduced new vice and virtue laws, they call them, banning women from showing their faces or speaking in public, taking the country into an even more medieval direction. To protest these draconian new laws, 130 Afghan women gathered in Albania in an active protest. The all Afghan women summit aims to create a united declaration addressing how they want the international community to react to the Taliban's assault on their rights.

Joining me now to discuss, Hosna Jalil. She was a member of Afghanistan's ministry of interior affairs, the first woman appointed to that ministry.

Jason Howk is the director of Global Friends of Afghanistan and is himself a U.S. veteran.

Thanks so much to both of you for joining.

[15:45:02]

JASON HOWK, AFGHANISTAN WAR VETERAN: Thanks for having me.

HOSNA JALIL, FORMER MEMBER OF AFGHANISTAN'S MINISTRY OF INTERIOR AFFAIRS: Thank you for having me.

SCIUTTO: Hosna, I want to begin with you because in 2021, the Taliban insisted somehow they had changed and that they would not restrict women's rights the way they had in the past. And yet, three years on, were looking at laws like the ones they just past two weeks ago, banning speaking. I mean, it's just incredible.

I wonder, do you blame the West's lack of action in part for those growing restrictions? Is it your view that the international community has not done enough to penalize the Taliban for this?

JALIL: I would like to raise two points here, Him. The first one is that this was not unexpected. If we go back to August of 2021 and even before that, months before that, every Afghan women stated quite the same thing that first, Taliban has have not changed. The only change that they might have had this time is that yes. Media-wise, they are sharper, so they might impose all of these restrictions and bans gradually. And that's I think exactly what they did.

So that was quite -- I mean, predictable. I mean, that was the prediction of the Afghan women.

The second one is I cant state on the West's inaction, but I would definitely say that the West did not listen to anyone and the West still is not listening to anyone. So that door -- the conversation door between all the Taliban Afghans and the West has been closed for quite some time now. And I think that is one of the reasons that led to the situation.

SCIUTTO: Jason, before the U.S. withdrawal, millions of Afghan girls were in school, there were women judges, artists, professors, pilots, more than a quarter members of the parliament were women. Now so much has been changed and rolled back.

I wonder from your point of view, can change be achieved from outside the country, right? Pressure from the outside. Can that make a difference or are we just waiting for the Taliban to go at this point?

JASON HOWK, DIRECTOR, GLOBAL FRIENDS OF AFGHANISTAN: I think change will come from outside, but also inside the country. You just mentioned the meeting that's happening in Albania today.

A good majority of those people were just in D.C. with us, the Global Friends of Afghanistan conference talking about the future of the country. And they were people from all walks of lives and all the political parties and they're talking with their constituents and their colleagues across Afghanistan.

So I think the changes will come, but they're going to come from both places. And I agree with hosting a completely, the West needs to do a better job of listening to the people of Afghanistan and many of the refugees and people that can freely speak are very, very well- connected what's going on inside the country, your family are still there.

And so we need listen to what their ideas are because they have great ones.

SCIUTTO: Hosna, for some Afghan women, the sad fact is that suicide has become the only escape, approximately 80 percent of all suicide attempts made in Afghanistan are by women and two years ago is estimated that at least two Afghan women committed suicide every day. I hate to bring up those numbers because it's so sad to hear.

But I wonder, when you maintain contact with women inside the country, do they have any hope? Or do they feel that that escaping the country somehow getting out is their only way forward?

JALIL: The first one is that they at the same time, that they're very hopeless in a sense that they not only we keep talking about there lack of access to education, but if you look at the lack of -- their access to health care, to justice, to their security we think it has deteriorated. So it's not just the higher education.

So I mean, on one side, yes, they are hopeless and that sense and they are looking for getting out. But it has become a closed border for women in Afghanistan. And nobody can get out of Afghanistan.

The second one is -- I mean, on the other side. There is hope and their hope is for those -- lies on those Afghans who are outside the country and can speak on their behalf, and can I would say represent their interests, ideas, wants, and needs and concerns.

So, yes, they are both at the same time hopeful and hopeless.

SCIUTTO: Yeah.

Jason, in the immediate aftermath of the withdrawal, U.S. veterans in particular were active getting not just Afghans who served alongside the U.S. military and government who were high risk of retaliation by the Taliban, but also their families and some women as well. They were able to get out of the country.

I know that a lot of those pathways have been closed off now.

[15:50:03]

But are foreigners still able to help get at risk women out of Afghanistan?

HOWK: They are able to. Those pathways are getting closed and that's the frustrating part. And many countries have slowed the process down, including the U.S. I mean, our own government could pass something like the Afghan adjustment act or something like it, to speed up the immigration of refugees, to make room for more and be more active in getting people out of those third countries, and they should be working to help get them out of the country to safety.

I think there's going to be a lot more violence ahead as the Taliban and Haqqani has continued to crack down. So this is a good time to get anybody out of the way that we can.

SCIUTTO: Yeah, I hear you.

Hosna, I wonder, you've experienced so much. You were one of those women, right, serving in the old Afghanistan government and now had to flee the country to have any semblance, you know, of the rights you deserve.

Do you have any hope that Afghan women will gain rights in your lifetime? And how do you stay hopeful?

JALIL: Jim, that this is a time that we as women of Afghanistan, we're like, okay, we have to create that hope. We are on that path to create that hope. And yes, I'm very hopeful that there would be a change in my lifetime. Part of the reason is because if we look at the African history, things happens quite fast and quite quick. And that creates that opportunity for the women of Afghanistan to take the lead and create a path for themselves together with the Afghan men.

SCIUTTO: Jason, before we go, is there a way for folks who are watching here, whether here in the U.S. or elsewhere around the world who want to help Afghan women. Is there a good way for them to do that?

HOWK: Absolutely. And I'm going to talk about on a bigger scale, that the United States and all of the nations that helped invest in all those women in Afghanistan should be meeting with the political opposition. They should all be designated the Taliban as terrorist groups.

They should stop meeting with the Taliban so they can disempower them, you can make gender apartheid an illegal act, and that will give some more leverage. That is something needs to be codified into law. Even keep the embassies open in those NATO countries instead of closing them and let those be a space for the political opposition to organize and get themselves sorted out.

They're over their shock now and the people who got out of the country are ready to make changes. So we should be helping them do that. And I hope our political candidates will stop talking about the past of Afghanistan and start talking about what they're going to do to make it better in the future.

SCIUTTO: Yeah, it's a fair question.

Hosna Jalil, Jason Howk, thanks so much to both of you and for the work you're doing.

HOWK: Thank you.

SCIUTTO: And we'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCIUTTO: Before we go today, have a look at this time lapse video of a glacier melting in Greenland. That melting triggered a landslide and a mega tsunami last September, offering answers to what were puzzling seismic activities that lasted for days after the event.

Scientists at the time couldn't figure out why the Earth seemed to be rumbling for nine days not only near that glacier. A new report in the "Journal Science" linked it back to that melting glacier or collapse in a mega tsunami, and warned that similar events may become more common and more deadly as the planet continues to warm.

[15:55:11]

Thanks so much for joining me today. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington.

"QUEST MEANS BUSINESS" is up next and please, have a good weekend.