Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Israeli Security Cabinet Approves Lebanon Ceasefire Deal; Trump Vows New Tariffs On Mexico, Canada, China On Day 1; Special Counsel Jack Smith Drops Federal Cases Against Trump; Biden Addresses Lebanon Ceasefire Deal. Aired 3-4p ET
Aired November 26, 2024 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[15:00:41]
JIM SCIUTTO, CNN HOST: I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington. Thanks so much for joining me today on CNN NEWSROOM. Let's get right to the news.
Israel and Hezbollah have now agreed to a ceasefire deal. In just the last two hours, the Israeli security cabinet voted to approve what is a U.S.-backed proposal which aims to stop the fighting for 60 days.
The Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the nation, explaining its decision after following the vote.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER (through translator): So why doing ceasefire now? There are three main reasons. First, focusing on the Iranian threat and I will not expand on that. Two, refreshing the military forces and our equipment. The third reason for ceasefire detaching the front of the war from Hamas.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: In the hours leading up to and throughout that cabinet vote, Israeli airstrikes continued to pound Beirut.
Look at the smoke there. The Lebanese health ministry says those strikes killed at least ten people. Since September, more than 3,000 people in Lebanon have been killed. More than 1 million displaced by Israeli strikes. A senior Hezbollah official tells "Reuters" that group will remain active after the war ends. By helping the many who were displaced return home and rebuild.
We are now waiting for President Biden to speak at any moment. We're going to bring that to you live. He'll be speaking on this agreement.
CNN's Jeremy Diamond joins us now from Israel. Arlette Saenz, as well.
Jeremy, tell us the outlines of the deal as we know them and tell us what you're seeing right now, more importantly.
JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN JERUSALEM CORRESPONDENT: Well, first, Jim, I just want to -- yeah, I just want to bring you your attention to this. We just had sirens go off here in Nahariya. We just heard one interception that happened quite close to us, it appears. And this has been happening all evening. And it's to be expected in the hours before a cease fire agreement actually goes into place this has been the norm in this region and in particular in the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah.
We saw the same thing in 2006, in the last days of that war before that cease fire agreement went into place, you saw an intensification of activity and indeed, that is what we have been seeing here in Nahariya with multiple air raid sirens going off, multiple interceptions of Hezbollah rockets, as well as drones that have been in the skies above northern Israel, but also, of course, with Israel striking not only in the Lebanese capital but in areas of central Beirut that they really have not struck before or have struck very, very rarely.
And so, expect that until this agreement goes into effect, which will likely happen sometime tomorrow morning, that there will be a continuation of the crossfire between these two sides. But tonight, what we heard from the Israeli prime minister was his rationale for why he felt it was necessary to move forward with this ceasefire agreement, why he brought it to the security cabinet for a vote, and ultimately, why the security cabinet approved it.
And that is effectively translating what he described as the military successes that Israel has had in Lebanon in terms of a, you know destabilizing and really disarming in some ways, a large amount of Hezbollah's military capabilities, in particular, over the last few months and translating those achievements into a political solution, one that he believes will allow Israel to focus more closely on the Iranian threat, as he said, in that sound bite that you just played, but also, of course, on it's -- it's the threats that it faces in the region.
And critically, he said on de-linking, this conflict with Hezbollah from the conflict between Israel and Hamas and the hope from Israeli officials as well as American officials, is that this will leave Hamas more isolated and that it will allow that perhaps that additional pressure will allow an agreement to take place between Israel and Hamas.
That is, of course, a long ways away, and there's no indication of whether that strategy will actually translate into real results. But certainly this is a major moment, as this conflict is expected to come to an end. The question now, of course, will be -- will the residents of the north trust this agreement to return to the north? We've heard -- to their homes in the north.
[15:05:05]
We've heard a lot of opposition from leaders of those communities. And then, of course, how long will this cease fire actually last? As the Israeli prime minister made clear, if Hezbollah violates the ceasefire, Israel will carry out strikes against Hezbollah inside of Lebanon and, of course, if that happens, that could unravel this agreement altogether.
SCIUTTO: Jeremy Diamond, thanks so much.
I want to go to Arlette Saenz now.
And, Arlette, typically in the lame duck period of administration, it's difficult to get things done, not only domestically but internationally this had been a priority of the Biden administration, for some time. I wonder from -- from where you are, how did they manage to get this through?
ARLETTE SAENZ, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, I think President Biden would chalk this up to one word, and that is diplomacy.
U.S. officials have been working for months in trying to secure this ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon. There have been many fits and starts in the process. You'll remember back in September that the U.S. and allies had announced that they were supportive of a 21-day cease fire, something that they had really viewed as a potential breakthrough in this fighting in Lebanon, only to have Israel pour cold water on that proposal.
But still, in recent weeks, you have seen a senior White House officials really led by Amos Hochstein shuttling between the U.S. and Israel and Beirut trying to get this type of deal across the finish line. Of course, he's been communicating with Israeli counterparts and then working through Lebanese officials, which acted as the mediator towards Hezbollah.
But for President Biden, this ceasefire that's expected to be announced between Israel and Hezbollah really helps him try to show that he's achieving one of the aims of his foreign policy agenda, and that is trying to bring the fighting to a close in at least one front of this war in the Middle East.
Of course, this has dogged President Biden for the better part of the last year, as he has tried to get some type of agreement between Israel and Hamas, then also looking towards this agreement with Israel and Hezbollah across the finish line. It's also interesting when you take into consideration that former -- President-elect Donald Trump will be coming into the White House in just less than two months. The ceasefire is expected to last for 60 days, with the hopes that there would then be a movement towards a permanent ceasefire.
But our understanding is that Trump team had indicated to U.S. and Israeli officials that they weren't going to try to upend these negotiations. It's clear that this is not something that Trump himself also wanted to have to address in his second term, come January. So it's been interesting to see what those conversations have been like between the Trump side and the current administration.
But for President Biden, he is likely to talk about how this is just another sign of American diplomacy in action. Of course, there is still that push to try to get some type of a ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas that really right now there's been such little traction on, but something that Biden still wants to try to see done, though it could be unlikely before he leaves office.
SCIUTTO: Well, getting beyond 60 days will be the job if it intends to, of the next administration.
Arlette Saenz, thanks so much. We should note again, we are waiting for President Biden to address this ceasefire deal at any moment. And once those comments begin, we will bring them to you live.
In the meantime, for more, I want to bring in Firas Maksad. He's a senior fellow and senior director for strategic outreach at the Middle East institute.
Good to have you on.
FIRAS MAKSAD, SENIOR FELLOW & SENIOR DIRECTOR FOR STRATEGIC OUTREACH, MIDDLE EAST INSTITUTE: Thank you, Jim.
SCIUTTO: So this is meant to hold for 60 days. Will it hold based on the outlines of the agreement as you see it?
MAKSAD: Well, you know, Jim, coming on your show today, I knew that this interview wasn't going to win me many fans, I'm not optimistic. I'm very glad that we finally got into this agreement. We a lot of us know people in the region who have been suffering, suffering through this conflict. But the deck is stacked against it and I'll talk briefly why.
Very clearly here, Iran is going to want to try and replenish Hezbollah's now diminished stockpiles of missiles and precision guided munitions, Hezbollah being on its back foot. But this is part and parcel of a much broader conflict between Iran and Israel to reshape the balance of power in the region -- in the region. And it would be very surprising to me if Iran does, in fact, step back from this.
And then also just listening to the speech by the Israeli prime minister, Bibi Netanyahu, again underscoring that the his troops need to refresh. I believe, was the word that he used and that this is part and parcel of the broader campaign against Iran and that he has succeeded in dividing the various fronts, the unity of fronts having been a core strategy of Iran in this war, but that this war, this conflict continues with Iran and its various manifestations.
So I really do think that were perhaps we're going to see a pause of some sorts.
[15:10:02]
And then this doesn't have to be a binary outcome. It's not war, no war. I would predict that we're going to go to some kind of a low intensity conflict with new rules of engagement after this 60-day reprieve.
SCIUTTO: Part of the goal, and Netanyahu referenced this, is that it separates, at least for a time, the wars in Lebanon with Hezbollah from the war in Gaza, with Hamas, which were intentionally joined right following the October 7th attacks, Hezbollah stepped up its attacks on northern Israel in sort of solidarity with Gaza.
Does this effectively, and again for a time, separate those two, that linkage?
MAKSAD: I think it does. And I think that's a major victory there for the Israeli prime minister. Again, the unity of fronts as the Iranians and their allies in the region have liked to term it was a key component of what they tried to do from day one in support of Hamas. So be it the Houthis in Yemen, the various Iranian sponsored militias in Syria and Iraq, and then Hezbollah, the crown jewel of Iran. And the first line of defense for the regime, should it come under attack from Israel in Lebanon.
And so Hezbollah now has been diminished enough, demoralized enough particularly the will to fight amongst the Lebanese population, which really did not want to be dragged into this war from the first place that I do not, I do not see that Hezbollah will in fact, rejoin this fight on behalf of Hamas. But if there is an expansion of the war in a significant way to Iran, then all bets are off.
SCIUTTO: There are some elements to this that just based on experience, have failed. One being that we will again see U.N. peacekeepers involved to some degree in keeping the peace along -- along the border there. But then there are other questions as well, because if Netanyahu is saying that he wants to focus on the Iranian threat now, does that mean that we see another exchange of fire between Israel and Iran?
MAKSAD: I think that's very much possible. And, you know, I've been talking to many analysts here who follow Iran very closely. And I could tell you that there are many of them who see a window of opportunity. Iran's air defenses are down as a result of Iran's -- sorry, Israel's last strike on Iran. Iran is very vulnerable right now, and then again, Hezbollah being the first and most formidable line of defense, that proxy group sitting right there on Israel's northern border to defend the regime should it come under attack, that is also down right now and on its back foot.
So there are many who are looking around and saying, you know what, in the coming months, if Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu really wanted to take it to Iran's nuclear program -- well, he's got an open window right now, and there's a good chance that he might act. Or at a very minimum, he's going to want to try and keep Hezbollah down, keep Iranian defenses down to extend that period of time in which he can act against its nuclear program.
Of course, there's a role for diplomacy, but we'll have to see if there will be backroom diplomacy here when the Trump administration comes in.
SCIUTTO: Well, given that we will have a new president in less than 60 days, what do you believe the Trump administrations reaction would be if Israel were to push ahead and attempt to take out Iran's nuclear program? We know that the Biden administration quite explicitly pushed Israel back from attacking nuclear facilities in its most recent retaliatory strike. But we also know that Trump, as much as he backs Israel, does not want a war in the Middle East.
So would he attempt to hold back Israel as well? And would Netanyahu listen to him?
MAKSAD: Well, here's what we know about President Trump. President Trump has at least two camps under his -- his broad tent when it comes to foreign policy. There are isolationists and then there are hawks -- foreign policy hawks who are very, very anti-Iranian and very much would like to see Iran being dealt a blow. And President Trump and his style likes to listen to both these camps and then make the decision on his own.
And so, I really do think that we saw Elon Musk meet with the Iranian ambassador to the United Nations not too long ago. I really do think that the Trump administration is going to go at diplomacy with Iran. They're going to give him an opportunity to come in to try and iron out some kind of new arrangement for a new -- a much more diminished Iran in the region.
But that fail if that fails, I do think that the hawks will get the upper hand. And there would be an argument for doing something, or at least allowing the Israelis to do something.
SCIUTTO: There are a lot there are a lot of folks who believe they can negotiate better than the diplomats who have been attempting to negotiate some sort of agreement between Israel, between Iran and the U.S. through the years. Of course, you did have the JCPOA during the Obama administration which Trump then removed. The U.S. from, but now he's talking about his own agreement.
Is Elon Musk the right emissary for that kind of negotiation?
[15:15:00]
MAKSAD: Yeah, hardly. So I mean, I don't -- I don't see any track record there of diplomacy at large, let alone diplomacy in a complex place like -- like the Middle East or with somebody like the Iranians, who are, of course, renowned for being strategists and who plan for many, many years ahead.
So I don't see that Elon Musk himself would be the right person. But there certainly could be an envoy. Brian Hook, for example, is somebody who might come back into the new Trump administration. He was the previous envoy for Iran with the first Trump presidency.
So there are capable figures. It is, you know, it's beyond me why Elon Musk was the person to meet with that Iranian ambassador. But then again there are many things that happen in the Trump camp that we'd all don't understand.
SCIUTTO: Well, there'll be four more years of surprises.
Firas Maksad, thanks so much for joining.
MAKSAD: Thank you.
SCIUTTO: Still, to come, as we await President Biden's comments on that ceasefire deal. President-elect Trump's day one promise significant tariffs on goods coming into the U.S. not just from China, but from U.S. allies Mexico and Canada.
What does that mean for the U.S. economy? For U.S. consumers, for your wallet. That's coming up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCIUTTO: Welcome back.
It was the Truth Social heard round the world threatening trade by social media posting. President-elect Donald Trump has announced a first tranche of tariffs targeting not just China, but close U.S. allies, Canada and Mexico, unleashing global economic panic today as he announced them, per the posts on Truth Social.
It's a 25 percent tariff on our North American neighbors, a 10 percent tariff on top of existing tariffs on China, all with the goal of stopping immigration and fentanyl trafficking. What does that mean, then, for products you buy food, cars, tech, other goods, key to American life?
Julia Chatterley joins me now to discuss. She is anchor of "FIRST MOVE".
[15:20:02]
So, Julia, what particular products and who's going to actually pay for these tariffs? I think it's always important to ask that question, right, because well, that might be a surprise to some people.
CHATTERLEY: We know the president-elect likes to use tariffs as a weapon. It's who are they weaponized against. And that's what it comes down to, Jim. And what you're alluding to, I think, is that ultimately the consumer pays the price the way that tariffs work, the tariff is paid by an American business on a good that it imports from somewhere else, in this case China, Mexico or Canada. They then have to somehow offset that cost. They then try and not -- but they end up doing passing on those costs to the consumer.
So that's how it works. And we've seen this work all the way along. Now, businesses do try and substitute -- perhaps change their supply chains, perhaps manufacture in the United States. But that takes time.
So I think the automatic assumption you can make when anyone's talking about tariffs is that there will be some kind of tit for tat, three out of four times when you're in an active tariff, another country does the same thing or similar, and you see prices go up.
So this is not good news if he decides to do it. China I think to be expected, most analysts out there were saying, look, the first thing that president-elect is going to do when he comes in, ultimately is going to hit China with more tariffs. Canada, Mexico, a little bit different.
Let me show you what our key imports from these nations are, just to give you a sense of where we might see prices rise. For Canada, some of the big oil imports, the biggest one, of course,
would be energy oil imports that we import from Canada. So you have to expect perhaps we would see prices rising there. The United States can't replace that if they tariff and raise prices on Canada oil in any way or shape or form in the short term, minerals, cement, wood paper goods.
Mexico is another one car, car parts is a great example, agricultural products as well. And if you look at some of the big U.S. automakers and actually the Mexican president, Jim, has said this today, some of the biggest American carmakers import manufacture in the united -- in Mexico and import into the United States. Their share prices are down because they know its going to be bad for them, and bad for American consumers.
And the final one with Mexico, grocery prices, we import lots of groceries from Mexico, Jim.
So the one thing that people said going into this presidential election that had hurt them was food price inflation, he's risking higher prices on groceries, not a great idea.
SCIUTTO: So tell me how businesses in these countries involved Mexico, China and Canada are reacting. I mean, they -- they had to see this coming right? I mean, Trump was quite public with these threats during the campaign. What do they do now?
CHATTERLEY: We've seen companies like Steve Madden, the shoe maker for example, already saying, look, we're going to change our supply chains. We're not going to bring our manufacturing to the United States from China. We're going to go to places like Vietnam. So, they're going to move in the region. That's one example.
We did hear from Matt Priest today as well, the president and the CEO of the Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America now. These guys represent Nike, Crocs, Under Armour, Walmart.
And their statements are very clear: Look, we hope President-elect Trump rethinks these tariffs as they relate to footwear. As such measures would place an unnecessary burden on American families where budgets are already stretched thin. They all know, ultimately, as we said at the beginning, Jim, these companies pay the tariffs in America. They pass on the cost to consumers. Americans will pay more.
SCIUTTO: And then as you said, other countries might be expected to impose their own tariffs and -- well, that's how you end up in a trade war.
CHATTERLEY: Yeah.
SCIUTTO: You know better than me, Julia Chatterley. Thank you so much.
CHATTERLEY: Thank you.
SCIUTTO: Well, new today, CNN can now confirm that special counsel Jack Smith does plan to release a final report into his prosecutions of President-elect Donald Trump. There were, of course, two parallel cases. One, over Trump's effort to overturn the 2020 election and one over his mishandling of classified documents after he left office.
This comes one day after Smith dropped both cases citing internal DOJ standards against prosecuting a sitting president.
With me now to discuss is Tim Heaphy. He's the former lead investigator on the congressional January 6th committee and a former federal prosecutor.
Tim, good to have you back.
TIM HEAPHY, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Thanks, Jim. Good to be back.
SCIUTTO: So, first, on Smith's decision yesterday. This is a Justice Department policy. It's not a matter of law. Did he make the right decision?
HEAPHY: Yeah, I think it's actually pretty cagey of special counsel to do it this way. He gets to do it, first of all, on his terms by in a motion affirmatively saying there's no reflection on the merits of the case. He also does it without prejudice, which means that he's asking the judge to dismiss it for now. But that doesn't mean that it can't come back later.
He actually drops a reference in the motion to the possibility that that the OLC opinions, or the fact that he cant be brought tolls the statute of limitations setting up an argument sometime down the road that this time shouldn't be counted against the ticking statute clock.
[15:25:02]
So I think by doing it this way, Jim, there's a pretty good argument that he does it sort of on the best terms as opposed to waiting for it to be dismissed by an attorney general could be with prejudice, could be the statute of limitations will have run, you know, the department taking official positions, that it would make it impossible to bring the case back.
SCIUTTO: So leaving the door open, in effect, there is, as you know, a debate about that statute of limitations question whether the clock is effectively paused while Trump is president. And where do you think the law stands on that?
HEAPHY: You know, that's one of the many questions that demonstrate were on freshly fallen snow with no footprints to follow here. It's an open question.
I think the department if a future attorney general chose to bring back this case would have a pretty good argument that the original indictment that the special counsel brought told the statute, effectively meant it was brought within the statutory period, and then the dismissal was just because of the desire to not interfere with the executive function, and shouldn't be counted against it. So there's a pretty good legal argument that the statute has been told, and that statute of limitations would not be an impediment.
But that's an open question. A judge and an appellate court and ultimately, potentially the Supreme Court would have to evaluate that argument. So I've heard this phrase repeated throughout the last four years of prosecutions against the former president.
SCIUTTO: And now soon, president, to be again no one is above the law that the president isn't above the law. But we've seen a series of cases here through a mix of things -- delays, but also the Supreme Court decision, which expanded the definition. It seems, of presidential immunity that folks watching here might reasonably conclude that, well, he was kind of above the law.
I mean, he was he was indicted by grand juries in a number of cases. But those cases were never adjudicated, and now that he has been --
HEAPHY: Yeah.
SCIUTTO: -- elected, you know, you have the special counsel for now dropping those cases.
So what do you say to someone who says to you, I don't know, kind of seems he proved himself to be above the law.
HEAPHY: Yeah. Look, that's -- that's a pretty persuasive argument. I can't say I disagree.
This long standing Department of Justice opinion that the department will not prosecute a sitting president because doing so would unduly interfere with the very important responsibilities of the executive, essentially puts that person, and that person only uniquely in American jurisprudence to some extent above the law.
And therefore, because of these countervailing interests, the need for accountability versus the desire to ensure that the executive can go about his business without impediment, it does, in effect, place him for some period of time above the law. Not -- maybe not forever. Maybe there's a scenario by which he could have been charged before. He could be charged again. That remains to be seen.
But at least for right now, Jim, I do think the elections have consequences. His election as president elect and his subsequent service does make him for now, above the law for responsibility for those acts of 2020.
SCIUTTO: But that's not what the founders intended. Of course, elections have consequences, which is famously a quote from Barack Obama. But the founders injected the Constitution with checks and balances explicitly to prevent particularly a president to some degree, right, because they were conscious of a well, they were conscious of having lived under a king, right. And they didn't -- they didn't want to create a kind of constitutional king.
So where does that leave what is what is the check now in a second Trump term, if he were to break the law, attempt to break the law, or come close to breaking the law? What is the -- what is the recourse? HEAPHY: I mean, the check in the second Trump term will be the same as it was in the first Trump term, which is norms and people individuals willing to step up and defend the rule of law.
SCIUTTO: Yeah.
HEAPHY: Democracy, Jim comes down to people being willing to stand up and do what's right, to accept that those standards are in everyone's best interest to apply.
There were people that stood up in the first term and said, no, you can't invoke the Insurrection Act to deploy troops. You can't disclaim that the election was stolen and send a letter to state legislators.
I hope that there will be similar voices in a second Trump term. I'm not so sure, though, that those same guardrails will be as strong. So I think it is going to be a bit of a rough ride over the next four years.
SCIUTTO: Democratic Congressman Dan Goldman said this yesterday on CNN about his worried that the incoming Justice Department will or might target Jack Smith and other prosecutors involved in these criminal cases. Have a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. DAN GOLDMAN (D-NY): There's no question that the Department of Justice could initiate investigations that would of Jack Smith or others that would severely hamper them financially.
[15:30:06]
And they can use the Department of Justice as a weapon to get retribution against the investigators, to financially bankrupt them, and certainly can do that against anyone in the executive branch who they consider to be the enemy within.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: Do you share his concern?
HEAPHY: I share his concern about the debilitating effects of investigations. Absolutely. An attorney general can say, we're going to launch an investigation of the January 6th committee or the special counsel's team.
There's still an important check though, which is in our criminal justice system, it's people. It's grand jurors. It's juries of our peers and the facts ultimately have to be present for there to be a lasting criminal consequence.
I don't think that matters. I think as, as Congressman Goldman correctly says, its the saber rattling launch of investigations and the inconvenience and expense that that causes that may very well be the point, even if there is no ultimate criminal culpability. SCIUTTO: Yeah. Good point. I mean, eventually, you'd have to get a
jury to indict which the special counsel did twice and not clear that would happen, otherwise.
Well, Tim Heaphy, thanks so much for joining.
HEAPHY: Sure, Jim. Thanks for having me.
SCIUTTO: Well, still to come, we will have more on our top story. Israeli security cabinet now approving a ceasefire deal with Hezbollah. Hezbollah also appears to be on board. We're going to be live in Jerusalem, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCIUTTO: We're turning now to our top story this hour as Israel and Hezbollah have reached a ceasefire agreement. The Israeli security cabinet approved what is a U.S.-backed ceasefire deal with Hezbollah, which aims to stop the fighting for 60 days. We are still waiting for comments from President Biden.
[15:35:04]
He's going to speak live from the White House. We will bring those to you live as they happen.
Let's go now, though, to CNN's Nic Robertson, who is in Jerusalem. This has been a long time coming.
As you know, Nic, you've been covering it weeks and months, an effort here.
I wonder from your reporting what put this over the finish line?
NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: Well, the prime minister says a couple of things. One, that he wants to focus on Iran and that seems to imply to me it's certainly something of a necessity that Iran is behind all the proxies that are threatening Israel at the moment.
But I think this also speaks to the fact that pretty soon, President- elect Donald Trump will be in the White House and Prime Minister Netanyahu can align his views on Iran with the views of Donald Trump, which are not entirely dissimilar. And also, President-elect Donald Trump had indicated that he didn't want there to be wars here in the region. So I think some of it is that.
The prime minister also said that part of this had to do with the fact that he wanted to give troops a chance to recuperate and restock the military hardware and he said as well that that Hezbollah are delinked from its war with Hamas in Gaza. They'd always said all along that each strike was in support of those in Gaza, although there was an indication that it was subsequently learned about that Hassan Nasrallah before Israel began upping the -- upping the strikes against Hezbollah in the middle of September, that Hezbollah had actually agreed to that. Hassan Nasrallah had said they were prepared to de- link, that's come to light subsequently.
So it does seem to give put the prime minister in a better place with an incoming administration. And I would just point to what the defense minister said yesterday about the occupied West Bank. He said that that the government was going to increase the speed at which fences, security fences were going to go up there because Iran, the government believes, is trying to infiltrate supply weapons and money to groups inside the West Bank.
So the focus, I think sharpening on Iran.
SCIUTTO: No question. Listen, Israel has not been shy about attacking those supply lines in Lebanon, but also in Syria and elsewhere. I wonder how folks in Israel are reacting to this, particularly the residents of the north. The many tens of thousands of them who have had to move south since October 7th because of that increased Hezbollah fire. Is this deal enough for them to go home?
ROBERTSON: Yeah, I think that's how they feel about it. It will be enough to go home but it's going to be with very heavy hearts. I was speaking to a businessman right in the north, just north of Kiryat Shmona. He lives about a mile from the border and I visited with him a couple of times over the past year. He was bringing in tens of millions of --
SCIUTTO: -- apologies because President Biden is now walking to the podium for his comments on the ceasefire deal. Let's listen in.
JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Good afternoon.
Today, I have some good news to report from the Middle East. I just spoke with the prime minister of Israel and Lebanon, and I'm pleased to announce that their governments have accepted the United States' proposal to end the devastating conflict between Israel and Hezbollah.
And I want to thank President Macron of France for his partnership in reaching this moment.
For nearly 14 months, a deadly conflict raged across the border that separates Israel and Lebanon -- a conflict that began the day after the October 7th attack by Hamas on Israel. Hours later, at 2:00 a.m. in the morning, Hezbollah and other terrorist organizations backed by Iran attacked Israel in support of Hamas.
Let's be clear: Israel did not launch this war. The Lebanese people did not seek that war either, nor did the United States.
Over the past year, including in the days immediately -- following October the 7th, I directed the U.S. military to flow assets and capabilities into the region, including aircraft carriers, fighter squadrons, and sophisticated air defense battery to defend Israel and deter our common enemy at critical moments.
Since the war with Hezbollah began, over 70,000 Israelis have been forced to live in refugee -- live as refugees in their own country, helplessly watching their homes, their businesses, their communities as they were bombarded and destroyed. And over 300,000 Lebanese people have also been forced to live as refugees in their own country in a war imposed on them by Hezbollah.
[15:40:10]
All told, this has been the deadliest conflict between Israel and Hezbollah in decades.
How many of Hezbollah's senior leaders are dead, including its longtime leader Nasrallah? And Israel has -- and Israel has destroyed Hezbollah's terrorist infrastructure in southern Lebanon as well, including miles of sophisticated tunnels, which were prepared for an October 7th-style terrorist attack in northern Israel.
But lasting security for the people of Israel and Lebanon cannot be achieved only on the battlefield. And that's why I've directed my team to work with the governments of Israel and Lebanon to forge a ceasefire to bring the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah to a close.
Under the deal reached today, effective at 4:00 a.m. tomorrow local time, the fighting across the Lebanese-Israeli border will end -- will end. This is designed to be a permanent cessation of hostilities.
What is left of Hezbollah and other terrorist organizations will not be allowed -- will -- I emphasize -- will not be allowed to threaten the security of Israel again.
Over the next 60 days, the Lebanese Army and the State Security Forces will deploy and take control of their own territory once again. Hezbollah terrorist infrastructure in southern Lebanon will not be allowed to be rebuilt.
And over the next 60 days, Israel will gradually withdraw its remaining forces and civilians -- civilians on both sides will soon be able to safely return to their communities and begin to rebuild their homes, their schools, their farms, their businesses, and their very lives.
We're determined this conflict will not be just another cycle of violence. And so, the United States, with the full support of France and our other allies, has pledged to work with Israel and Lebanon to ensure that these -- this arrangement is fully implemented, the agreement totally implemented.
You know, there will be no U.S. troops deployed in southern Lebanon. This is consistent with my commitment to the American people to not put U.S. troops in combat in this conflict.
Instead, we, along with France and others, will provide the necessary assistance to make sure this deal is implemented fully and effectively.
Let us -- let me be clear: If Hezbollah or anyone else breaks the deal and poses a direct threat to Israel, then Israel retains the right to self-defense consistent with international law, just like any country when facing a terrorist group pledged to that country's destruction.
At the same time, this deal supports Lebanon's sovereignty. And so, it heralds a new start for Lebanon -- a country that I've seen most of over the years, a country with rich history and culture. If fully implemented, this deal can put Lebanon on a path toward a future that's worthy of its significant past.
And just as the Lebanese people deserve a future of security and prosperity, so do the people of Gaza. They, too, deserve an end to the fighting and displacement.
The people of Gaza have been through hell. Their word -- their world is absolutely shattered. Far too many civilians in Gaza have suffered far too much. And Hamas has refused, for months and months, to negotiate a good-faith ceasefire and a hostage deal.
And so, now Hamas has a choice to make. Their only way out is to release the hostages, including American citizens which they hold, and, in the process, bring an end to the fighting, which would make possible a surge of humanitarian relief.
Over the coming days, the United States will make another push with Turkey, Egypt, Qatar, Israel, and others to achieve a ceasefire in Gaza with the hostages released and the end to the war without Hamas in power -- that it becomes possible.
As for the broader Middle East region, today's announcement brings us closer to realizing the affirmative agenda that I've been pushing forward during my entire presidency -- a vision for the future of the Middle East where it's at peace and prosperous and integrated across borders; a future where Palestinians have a state of their own, one that fulfills its people's legitimate aspirations and one that cannot threaten Israel or harbor terrorist groups with backing from Iran; a future where Israelis and Palestinians enjoy equal measures of security, prosperity, and, yes, dignity.
[15:45:07]
To that end, the United States remains prepared to conclude a set of historic deals with Saudi Arabia to include a security pact and economic assurances together with a credible pathway for establishing a Palestinian state and the full -- the full normalization of relations between Saudi Arabia and Israel -- a desire they both have.
I believe this agenda remains possible. And in my remaining time in office, I will work tirelessly to advance this vision of -- for an integrated, secure, and prosperous region, all of which -- all of which strengthens America's national security.
Getting all this done will require making some hard choices.
Israel has been told on the -- has been bold on the battlefield. Iran and its proxies have paid a very heavy price.
Now Israel must be bold in turning tactical gains against Iran and its proxies into a coherent strategy that secure Israel's long-term -- its long-term safety and advances a broader peace and prosperity in the region.
Today's announcement is a critical step in advancing that vision. And so, I applaud the courageous decision by the leaders of Lebanon and Israel to end the violence.
It reminds us that peace is possible -- say that again: Peace is possible -- as long as that is the case, I will not for a single moment stop working to achieve it.
God bless you all. And sorry to keep you waiting so long. May God protect our troops.
Thank you.
REPORTER: Mr. President, will you get a ceasefire in Gaza before leaving office?
BIDE: You ask me how I get a ceasefire in -- I think so. I'm hoping. I'm praying.
REPORTER: How is this push any different from the previous ones?
BIDEN: If you don't see that, you shouldn't be reporting. It's a lot different.
REPORTER: Mr. President, what have you told the new administration?
SCIUTTO: President Biden there completing statements in the Rose Garden on the announcement of a ceasefire deal between Israel and Lebanon. He said in his closing comments there that peace is still possible. And notably, he made a pitch in the wake of this agreement with Lebanon for a similar agreement with Hamas in Gaza to end the fighting there and release the remaining hostages.
He said, the people of Gaza, they, too, deserve an end to the fighting and displacement they've lived through hell, he says. It's not clear where those negotiations stand.
Arlette Saenz joins us again. She's been standing by with us here.
You also heard someone shout to the president, has he communicated or what has he communicated to the incoming administration? What do you know about conversations between the two? And do we know if the incoming administration is invested not just in negotiations with Lebanon and Israel but between Israel and Hamas.
SAENZ: Well, Jim, we know that President Biden and President-elect Trump in their oval office meeting just a little over two weeks ago, that the two men did talk about this situation in the Middle East, the hostage families that I had spoken to in recent weeks said that they had urged President Biden to really work with Trump to try to secure a deal between Israel and Hamas, to end the conflict in Gaza, to bring those hostages back home. But it's unclear what specifics they have gotten into in the weeks
since those Oval Office meetings. We know that national security advisor Jake Sullivan recently met with the incoming national security advisor, Congressman Mike Waltz, where they talked about Ukraine, likely talked about the Middle East as well.
But certainly, for President-elect Trump, he also wants to see an end to this conflict. Sources have told us that Trump's team had indicated to the Israeli side and to the U.S. side that they wouldn't try to upend any potential deal between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon, which has now taken place.
We will see what kinds of conversations they have in the coming days and weeks before President-elect Trump takes office.
Now, earlier today, Secretary of State Antony Blinken did say that he plans on going through detail by detail with the secretary of state nominee, Marco Rubio, so that could offer some avenue for collaboration.
But for President Biden, he has really made clear that he wants to try to find ends to these conflicts before he takes office. It's unclear whether that can actually happen in the coming 55 days, but as you mentioned in announcing this ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon, the president also made a pitch to try to end that conflict in Gaza.
We know that his Middle East coordinator, Brett McGurk was in Saudi Arabia in recent days to talk about this potential deal in Lebanon, but also with the hope that maybe this could shake loose some of those talks relating to the situation in Gaza, which really so far have been at a standstill.
[15:50:17]
The president indicating that they will be making a push in the coming days. And so we'll see what exactly that looks like, and if it leads to anything of actual fruition here.
SCIUTTO: And the families of those hostages still suffering there. They're waiting for some positive news and progress.
Arlette Saenz, thanks so much.
So for more on this ceasefire agreement and what happens next, I want to bring in Miri Eisin. She is a retired colonel and director of the International Institute for Counterterrorism at Reichman University.
Thanks so much for joining, and thanks very much for being patient. As we waited to hear from the president.
MIRI EISIN, RETIRED IDF COLONEL AND DIRECTOR OF THE INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR COUNTERTERRORISM AT REICHMAN UNIVERSITY: Thank you so much for asking me. I got to hear two speeches tonight. First, Prime Minister Netanyahu and now, President Biden. SCIUTTO: So let me ask you this. What did Israel accomplish in this
war inside Lebanon? And is the damage that it caused to Hezbollah, both its weapons and its leadership, is that lasting or short term?
EISEN: It's not short term, meaning this is something that has an impact for years to come. Having said that, Hezbollah has such a terror army. The numbers are so intense that statistically if we've degraded them 70 percent, 80 percent, and that sounds like a lot. That 20 percent that they still have left is twice as much of what Hamas had before they started the war of October 7th, 2023.
And I say that because, as mentioned before President Biden was talking is that Iran, the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, continue to arm Hezbollah, sending the weapons pretty much have an open route. So that the big issue here is that they won't be able to rearm.
But the achievements are significant it was notable in Netanyahu's comments that he said part -- in part to explain this deal, that more advanced weaponry -- weaponry is coming. It seemed to be a reference to the incoming U.S. administration that might not put or put fewer restrictions.
Let's be frank, because, of course, there's been a lot of criticism in this country of the Biden administration for not putting restrictions on some of the weapons shipments.
But is it your impression that President-elect Trump will give Netanyahu even more leeway to go after well, not just Hezbollah and Lebanon but Hamas and Gaza and perhaps even Iranian targets.
Contrary to what you just asked, Jim, I don't feel here that the United States administration, this one, President Biden, has really put, you know, the possibilities that we won't be able to fight this war. As President Biden stated before and as I was listening to him, I wanted to nod the whole time.
Essentially, I heard different things than what you heard. But he -- they did send in, they did help out. They helped out at that first stage when it wasn't clear, both Hamas and Hezbollah.
SCIUTTO: Sure, no question.
EISEN: And the ground attacks.
SCIUTTO: But you're aware of the pressure -- there's been pressure inside this, even from within President Biden's own party, that there should have been more restrictions put on.
And I just wonder, we've got a new information -- new administration coming in in less than 60 days. Will they be even less inclined to put restrictions? Or phrase differently, will they give Netanyahu even more freedom to carry out this war as he sees fit?
EISEN: Certainly from the Israeli perspective, we think so in the sense that that the people both within the administration, President Trump himself, is harder to assess. I think you know that better than the United States than we understand even here but that in general, it's one that understands both the threat of Iran, certainly the threat of a nuclear Iran.
And Prime Minister Netanyahu put the issue of this ceasefire with Hezbollah as being central to be able to focus on that. And I do think that he expects the new Trump administration to be more supportive of that.
SCIUTTO: Supportive even of strikes potentially on Iranian nuclear sites?
EISEN: It's hard to say. I do know that in Israel, for many years, we have looked and followed -- I, myself, within the intelligence community for many, many years this slow evolution of the Iranian nuclear quest. It is a bad thing for the world, and I don't think that the nuclear issue of Iran turning nuclear should be an Israeli issue. It should be something that the entire free world should be against.
So I want everybody to support the idea of making sure that Iran does not have nuclear capabilities.
SCIUTTO: It's interesting because I wonder if you think it's possible that Trump can surprise on the other side, because Trump has spoken publicly about -- about this. He does not want a war in the Middle East. He does not want oil prices to go up. You know, the economic impacts of that.
And I wonder if you might see a Trump who -- who says no, you know, I don't want you to go.
[15:55:04]
Let me handle the nuclear threat. I'm going to try a negotiation. There's even been some discussion as to whether Trump believes he can make a deal with Iran a better one than the Obama administration did.
EISEN: I don't think you have to strike the nuclear sites. I think that everybody has to be united against the idea that Iran should be nuclear. If you can achieve it without striking the sites themselves, that's great.
But to your question itself, could President-elect Trump be different? Absolutely. One of the only things I'm not willing to assess is what President-elect Trump's next steps will be.
I really don't understand in that sense how you can assess that. He can be this way and he can be that way. We saw that in the first administration.
So taking into account, though, if you can get to a deal, I'm not against it. Let's make sure that Iran does not go nuclear.
SCIUTTO: Final question. As you know, and I'm sure you're in touch with hostage families. And I've been in touch with some as well. You know, the pain they've been going through waiting for just the possibility that their loved ones will come home. Do you see a deal with Hamas? A ceasefire, hostage release deal as it
all realistic in the near term.
EISEN: I want to define near term. First of all, it's realistic. At the end, Hamas is fighting for something they have to stop. And Hamas very much were helped by Hezbollah fighting with them, by the different Iranian proxies fighting with them. They can all have whatever rhetoric they want but Hezbollah today is agreeing to a ceasefire after Israel completely degraded their capabilities.
And that will impact Hamas. I'm going to hope -- I am going to hope like President Biden. I'm going to hope it brings 101 hostages home, because until we close the hostage issue, Israel is just stuck on October 7th, 2023.
SCIUTTO: Yeah, yeah. Well, Miri Eisen, always appreciate hearing your insight. Thanks so much for joining.
EISEN: Thank you so much, Jim.
SCIUTTO: Thanks so much, all of you, for joining me today. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington.
"QUEST MEANS BUSINESS" is up next.
