Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
US Enters Iran-Israel Conflict. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired June 21, 2025 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[21:00:00]
FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: It seemed to have been close to the areas where some of the air defenses might be. There was, especially in the evening hours, a lot of outgoing anti-aircraft fire. There seemed to be a lot of thuds which could have indicated that airstrikes took place.
So there did seem to be a bit of an escalation as far as that is concerned. At the same time, the Iranians, Anderson, had been warning the Trump administration away from going through with strikes, especially on these nuclear sites, saying it would drag the United States into the conflict and saying that there would be retaliation on the part of the Iranians. I spoke to the deputy vice president just yesterday, and he said that all options, as far as Iran is concerned, are on the table, that there are many options on the table.
One of the things that the Iranians had been hinting at, of course, especially is some of the militia that are loyal to Iran, that are close to Iran in the Middle Eastern region. Of course, we know in the past couple of years the Iranians have been saying, look, there's so many American military bases in the greater Middle East. And there's militias that are close to Iran, close to loyal to Iran, near almost every one of these bases. And that could be a big problem for the US.
So clearly now, the Iranians are going to have to calibrate what their response is going to be. Right now I think they're still trying to figure out what exactly is going on. It's still very early here. It's 4:30 in the morning. So we're looking to hear more from them.
And just to give you an idea of how this is playing out. Right now, this is writing on Iranian state TV. So they don't have anchor up talking about this. It clearly is very fresh to them. They clearly are still trying to find out what's going on, probably trying to get into communication with anybody that they might have at those sites, to be in more of a position to say what their side of all of this is, Anderson.
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: All right. Frederik Pleitgen will continue to check in with you. Kylie Atwood is standing by. She has some new information. Kylie, I understand you have some word about communication between President Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu.
KYLIE ATWOOD, CNN REPORTER: Yes, that's right. We have learned that President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu did have a conversation tonight after these strikes occurred also. That's according to senior administration officials. And we have also learned that the United States did give Israel a heads up before these strikes occurred.
That might be stating the obvious. There has been plenty of communication between the US and Israel. We don't know exactly when Israel got that heads up. But this series of strikes against these three nuclear facilities was not a surprise to Israel.
And I also want to note, Anderson, that we have not yet heard from any other members of President Trump's administration. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who was the first one after Israel's stroke, carried out its first strikes against Iran about eight days ago, said the United States was not involved. We haven't heard from him tonight. He has been in meetings with President Trump at the White House today.
And there are questions, as you guys have been discussing, about what this means for the potential diplomatic path forward. President Trump making it clear in the statements that he has put out that he wants to compel diplomacy after these strikes. He said that now is the time for peace. Iran must agree to end this war.
But of course, major questions about what that looks like, because it was Israel who carried out these strikes with the tacit approval of the United States, right before Trump administration officials were supposed to sit down to their last round of talks with Iran. And also just yesterday, there were Iranian officials meeting with Europeans to try and see if there was a pathway forward. There was no breakthrough there, but we're curious about what the administration really thinks in terms of how Iran is going to come back to the table, even potentially now.
COOPER: Yes. Kylie Atwood, thanks very much. Just past the top of the hour now, three minutes. It's 4:00 or 3:00 am here in Tel Aviv. We got word, if you are just joining us, we got word a few minutes before 3:00 am Tel Aviv time that the United States had struck three sites in Iran.
I want to put the President's social media post up, which was the first indication that anything had occurred in the region. We had known that B-2s were in the air, those -- throughout the day, that information was out there. It was unclear exactly why they were on the move. Some said it could be sending a message to the Iranian regime or simply getting in position in case the president made a decision. We now know the president had made a decision. This is the President's announcing the attack.
He said, quote, we have completed our very successful attack on the three nuclear sites in Iran, including Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. All planes are now outside of Iran airspace. A full payload of bombs was dropped on the primary site, Fordow. All planes are safely on their way home. Congratulations to our great American warriors. There's not another military in the world that could have done this. Now is the time for peace. Thank you for your attention to this matter.
[21:05:10]
The idea that a full payload of bombs was dropped on the primary site, obviously very significant. I'm here with Clarissa Ward, with Jeremy Diamond as well. Oren Liebermann is also joining us on the phone.
Oren, you have been covering this from you were on the air when this attack by Israel began eight or nine days ago. Talk about what you're -- are you surprised this occurred tonight and what you've heard so far about it?
OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: I think the most surprising part about tonight is that Trump had opened up this window of two weeks of diplomacy. And I think as Clarissa pointed out earlier, there was some, there were some Israeli officials who believe that was a ruse, that he's already made up his mind. And certainly the strike just a few days into that two week window supports that idea.
Was it possible to imagine this eight days ago? Maybe not immediately, but as it became evident that Israel's strikes on Iran, certainly at the beginning, were going according to plan. And that the headlines were coming out of successful Israeli attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities and Iranian regime facilities. Having spoken to Israeli officials, it was clear that part of the hope was the successes there would entice Trump to join into the campaign.
Fordow, until now by the Israelis, had remained untouched, that a more secure, a more hardened target that effectively required US involvement. You didn't see the Israelis trying to go after that, only saying that if the US got involved, it would shorten it. Of course, it would also give access essentially as part of the campaign, as part of the bombing, to the US's more powerful weapons should they choose to join in.
But the Israelis were very careful in trying not to openly push. They didn't want to be seen as dragging the US into the war. So they were careful about how they phrased it, only trying to frame it as Israeli successes. And the US will make its own decision, a decision we clearly just saw made right now.
It is worth pointing out that one of those who most openly-called for US involvement was the former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant. He was involved in the early stages of the planning of the campaign against Iran. And he is one of the first Israelis to have put out a statement. He said, President Trump took a bold decision for the United States, for Israel, for all of humanity. The world is now a safer place.
Even if you haven't seen that type of statement from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his government, that is absolutely the sentiment that they will be expressing at some point today. And frankly, the sentiment from much of Israel at this point. And now, of course, the question is where does this go from here?
I'll just point out quickly that --
COOPER: Go ahead.
LIEBERMANN: I apologize. Now the question is where does this go from here? When Israel's bombing campaign of Iran started, there was an immediate warning from the home front command to reduce public life to essential activities. We have now seen that warning come out again from home front command to Israel once again preparing for the possibility of Iranian retaliation here, perhaps on a greater scale than we've seen the last few days.
COOPER: I want to go Back to Brett McGurk. Brett, for our viewers who are just joining at the top of the hour, and we are about 53 minutes away from hearing from President Trump directly. If you could just explain to our viewers what you have heard directly from a senior official involved in this, what you know about this operation tonight.
BRETT MCGURK, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: So, Anderson, I did speak with a very senior administration official who said that the mission objective here were the three nuclear sites, which you have on the map there, Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. They believe the operation was successful. There's a lot of diplomacy ongoing right now to send messages to Iran and through other partners in the region, that this is the mission objective and it can stop here.
It's about the nuclear sites. This is not about some broader military campaign. And the hope is that you can contain potential escalation risk by doing that. And they're also, however, Anderson, preparing for counters from Iran. Then that can be missiles. They have short range missiles that cannot reach Israel where you are, but they can reach US personnel in the region.
They have militias in Iraq and in Syria, less so in Syria these days in the past, but they're still there. And terrorism, acts of terrorism, hostage taking. This is what Iran's been doing for 46 years. So that is part of the equation. And thinking about respond to that should have come.
But right now, the mission was against the nuclear facilities. And the message going out is that this can be it. So that is where we are right now, Anderson. But a very serious and very dynamic situation.
[21:10:12]
COOPER: Brett, given that Natanz had been hit by Israel before, not so sure. It seemed like early on they had left much of Isfahan alone. I'm not sure if that was still the case today before this attack. And obviously they did not strike at Fordow, were you surprised that they went after -- that the US went after all three facilities?
MCGURK: No. I think if you're going to do this operation, it's against all three. But I have to say, and I think once we learn more and once we get briefings from the Pentagon, Fordow is the main target. Because that is something had not been really touched and only the US can do, as we've been discussing on air here over the last nine days.
So that really is the focus of the operation with this specific munition that only the US has, on a mission -- on an operation that has been rehearsed and planned across multiple administrations. Going back to President Obama's administration. So that was the main focus.
But for good measure, this is about ensuring the fuel cycle in Iran and enrichment is going to be gone. The hope was you do that through a deal and the objective here was to do it through this military strike. That's the decision the President took.
So, no, I'm not surprised all three were hit. But no doubt the real focus here was Fordow and that underground facility again, built into a mountain, built in secret by the Iranians in the 2000s, revealed through intelligence information. President Obama in 2009 revealed that to the world. And then the JCPOA, Anderson, just some history, really focus on Fordo. This has been a vexing question.
That agreement said no enrichment in Fordow for 15 years through 2030. When the Americans pulled out of that deal in the last Trump administration, the Iranians started to enrich in Fordow. And now the report from the IAEA, International Atomic Energy Committee. Just last week, in Fordow, 10 cascades of highly advanced centrifuges enriching the 60 percent grade just below weapons grade. Iran decided to do that.
I don't know why they did that, but it was a big mistake. And now I suspect when we learn more about the effectiveness of this strike, nothing's guaranteed. But given how well this was rehearsed, that the Fordow facility is no longer available to the Iranians. But we'll see. I suspect that's what we'll learn here in the coming days.
COOPER: We should point out 60 percent is where it was at 90 percent of weapons grade. But it's a little bit confusing because it sounds like, well, the distance from 60 to 90 seems a lot. Everyone I've talked to said if you're at 60 percent, you are 99 percent there to weapons grade. The jump from 60 to 90 is -- is not much of a jump at all, which I think is an important point to make.
MCGURK: Yes.
COOPER: Brett, we're going to check in with you. Sorry, go ahead.
MCGURK: No, no. Look, nobody should overhype the nuclear problem in Iran, but nobody should underhype it to understate. It is a very serious problem. It's something that keep -- anyone who's worked on this, it keeps you up at night.
We had a -- in early 2023, inspectors found uranium enriched to 83 percent, which is effectively just at weapons grade. The Iranians said, oh, that was a mistake. But no, you cannot be enriching uranium to 60 percent. No country in the world without a weapons program does that.
And that's what Iran was doing in this Fordow site. That's why this is such a huge issue. And again, I suspect after tonight, they no longer have the Fordow site.
COOPER: Yes. I want to check in with Kristen Holmes, who's at the White House. Kristen, we are going to be hearing from President Trump in about 45 minutes.
KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Anderson. And just to give you a little bit of a backtrack here on the timeline of how we got here today, a reminder that it was just Thursday that Karoline Leavitt stood in front of reporters and said that the President was giving Iran two weeks to come to the table with a deal. Now, that same day that the Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff sat down at the White House with the foreign minister of the United Kingdom, essentially to prep him for a meeting with the Iranians, which happened on Friday.
That same foreign minister from the United Kingdom flew from Washington to Switzerland to meet with the foreign minister of Iran. Now, I was told that those talks didn't go as well as the United States would have hoped, that Iran was not coming to the table with anything that the United States was willing to agree to. Now, at the same time all of this was happening, it was coming to believed within the White House and the administration as a whole that US forces were necessary to bring Iran to the table.
[21:15:00]
Then on top of that, we've also learned that Iran was doubling down on this idea that they were only going to talk to the United States directly in terms of a negotiation, if President Trump was willing to call Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and ask for a ceasefire. That was not something that President Trump or the White House was willing to do. And that is how this escalated into President Trump believing that these forces need to be needed to be used.
And one thing that is true and is clear, President Trump is still maintaining that he is hopeful that this brings Iranians to the table for some kind of diplomatic deal. One of the things that we had talked about a lot was this idea that President Trump had been asking people behind closed doors, how can we get in and get out? Which is part of what you saw here tonight.
Now, obviously, we don't know if there's going to be retaliation. The United States, they are ready for that. They have been preparing for that for several days. We talked about how they have been moving planes, ships, they had been bringing in extra blood to the region in case of any kind of retaliation or any strikes against US assets in the region. So they were clearly preparing for that.
But President Trump was being told by some people close to him that it would be possible to do this kind of strike and get out without then being part of a long term conflict in the Middle East, which is something that President Trump has stressed to people around him that he does not want to do.
Now, whether or not that is possible, we just don't know right now. We have just had this happen, but that was the belief. And I heard Brett McGurk talking about what happened with Soleimani. And yes, there were repercussions, but the repercussions in President Trump's mind and in this administration's mind were not a grand large, horrible assault on the United States in their mind, that then led to a longer conflict. So that was what they were looking at as kind of a sample of something that they might be able to do, which was, again, get in, make the strike and get out.
Of course, it's just way too early to say whether or not they're going to be successful with this one and done. But I will tell you, I'm still hearing, even at this hour, from administration officials who are saying we're hopeful that Iran is going to come to the table now and make an agreement, get a nuclear agreement out of this.
COOPER: We're going to check back in with you. As I said, the President is going to be speaking about 44 minutes from now. I'm here with Clarissa Ward and Jeremy Diamond.
We're just hearing from Brett McGurk, regardless of this action tonight. Well, because of this action night, this still has to end ultimately in some sort of diplomatic or negotiated understanding. If the regime in Iran stays in place, they are -- in order to make sure that they don't have a program, in order to know where all the enriched uranium is, there has to be some sort of negotiated deal for inspectors to go and inspect.
CLARISSA WARD, CNN: Well, so I guess the question is, what happens to the prospect for that given what's taken place tonight. I think it throws a real question mark around future diplomatic efforts. There will be others who will say, you know what, this is actually going to force Iran to the table. This is going to force them to make some kind of a deal.
At this stage, we just don't know. I've just been looking at some of what Iran's state media has been putting out. It's worth mentioning. They're saying that the three sites that were hit tonight have been emptied, meaning that there weren't personnel there. Though needless to say, that's not really the focus of the strikes tonight.
And also Iran's state media news anchor had a statement. Mr. Trump, you started it and we will end it. Now, obviously, this is the kind of bravado and rhetoric that we're used to hearing from both sides, the Iranians and the Israelis. But in this instance, it really does feel like Iran has been painted into a corner.
I mean, they've been very specific with these threats. Over the course of the last few days, as President Trump has weighed up this decision of whether to intervene militarily. And so now the question becomes, what will the repercussions be? What does this mean for the diplomatic process to the extent that is still feasible?
And also I keep coming back to this idea of like, what is the actual end game here? What is the specific objective? Because regime change may not be on the cards for President Trump or for the US, but there is much more ambiguity about whether that Israel's strategic objective.
COOPER: And also the question is, what happens to does Israel -- how does this affect their operations? Do their operations continue?
JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's exactly right. And that's why we're watching, to see not only what the Iranians do, right? Because as we were talking earlier, there is an enormous potential now for Iranian retaliation, not only here in Israel, but against the tens of thousands of US troops who are stationed in the Middle East, much closer to Iran than we are right now in Bahrain, in the United Arab Emirates, in Iraq as well. But then, of course, the question becomes, what do the Israelis do? Do they continue to carry out these strikes, or do they accept that the United States has now delivered what many Israeli officials have been describing to me as the final blow to the Iranian nuclear program?
[21:20:10]
Do they stop at that? And in particular, when you consider the fact that the Israeli prime minister, the Israeli defense minister, they have not just been talking about destroying the Iranian nuclear program, they have been talking about regime change in recent days. And we've also seen the Israeli military widening its target set to include not only military and nuclear targets, but also the powers of the state in Iran.
Those state broadcasters, for example, that were targeted. This is all aimed at weakening the Iranian regime, hoping to create the conditions for regime change in the medium term, at least. So far we haven't seen any indication that it's actually fomenting the kind of revolution that the Israelis are perhaps hoping to see in -- in Iran. But certainly there is a disconnect here between what the end goal is for President Trump and what the end goal is for Prime Minister Netanyahu.
And so, do the Israelis accept this as the final outcome and things move to negotiations, or do we see more Israeli strikes?
COOPER: I want to bring in Aaron David Miller, who's joining us. Aaron, what stands out to you right now in terms of questions you would like to see answered?
AARON DAVID MILLER, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: You know, I was just thinking this through, Anderson. You know, the Middle East is littered with the remains of great powers who wrongly believe they could impose will on smaller ones, largely because for the smaller ones, the stakes are existential. If this were a one and done exercise, three successful sites, strikes against Fordow and Isfahan, and Natanz. Particularly Isfahan, by the way, people aren't paying attention to the fact that those are where the laboratories are, where the Iranians try to convert uranium into usable material for a weapon.
It's also where the Iranians have stored, although I'm sure they've moved them a lot of their stockpile of fissile material. If this were one and done neatly, cleanly, our guys are home safe and sound. But the reality is, it's not a one and done.
And the Iranians have invested $5 trillion in this nuclear program. They've just seen nine days of abject humiliation on the part of the Israelis, penetrating targets that no one, I'm sure, not even our intel folks, believe that the Israelis could do. Pre-deploying drones, which attack missile bases once the campaign began and leadership targets.
So the enemy, the adversary, and the Iranians were playing with fire by ramping up advanced centrifuges and at least assembling all the elements. They're a threshold nuclear weapons state. They have everything they need to assemble a bomb. Whether or not they were doing it, frankly, is likely irrelevant.
So Brett laid it out pretty well. They have short range missiles against American targets in the Gulf. They've got asymmetrical warfare abroad turning their terror apparatus loose on Israeli, American and probably Jewish interests. And then, of course, you have Americans deployed in Iraq and Syria, which are vulnerable. That was true in the case of the killing of Qassem Soleimani in January 2020. A lot of traumatic brain injuries on the part of US forces and troops when the Iranians launch those missiles.
We're going to have to wait and see. The supreme leader got a decision to make. But it seems almost impossible to imagine straining credulity to the breaking point, to imagine that this 86-year-old leader whose goal essentially is to preserve the revolution, and pass it on to one of his successors, can simply do nothing in response to what has happened over the course of the last.
Well, now it's the 10th day. He may have to calibrate his response. But I suspect we're not done with this. And for President Trump, this was -- I'm thinking this was almost inevitable. It's not like a Nike commercial, "Let's just do it."
I mean, when we put -- we do something like this, the questions have to be asked, can we? And we could. Should we? And what's the impact?
Clarissa points out the end state. That's absolutely the case. You can destroy Fordow. If you don't change the regime and the inquisitive capacity to enrich uranium, and remaining a nuclear weather weapons threshold state, what, in the end, have we really accomplished? You've bought time, probably a lot of time, but the story is far from over.
COOPER: I want to go to Jim Sciuto, who's been looking to measures to protect US forces in the region. Jim?
[21:24:53]
JIM SCIUTTO, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Anderson, I'm told that US forces in the region quite understandably were advised to take shelter until it was clear that there was no immediate Iranian response. They will then remain on high alert for some time because of course, that response could come at any time, even if it's not in the minutes or hours right after the attack.
That's an understandable step to take and one that would have happened in advance of these attacks. And to Brett McGurk's point earlier, when we have seen attacks in the past, for instance, the killing of Soleimani in Trump's first term, there were Iranian responses specifically targeting US forces region. Those US Forces were impacted and there were injuries.
The other point I would make to this, just reflecting on Aaron David Miller's comments, beyond pride or a show of strength or re establishing deterrence, whatever language you learn in terms of how Iran calculates its response, if it's indeed able to, given the depth and breadth of these attacks, is Iran looks at its nuclear program as essential to the regime's survival. Their calculations are not unlike the North Korean leaderships.
They look at it not just as a way to protect power in the region, but also as their insurance policy. That insurance policy has just been deeply damaged by Iranian strikes over the course of the past week and now potentially, you know, catastrophically damaged by these US attacks.
So their survival question becomes, do we have a better chance of survival by negotiating now with the US, or by trying a way to resurrect this program, right. And you could destroy the facilities, the technology you cannot destroy right because Iran can find other partners. One of its partners is Russia.
Russia is not on good terms with the US right now. And Russia and Iran have been getting quite close, given Iran's support for Russia's ongoing war in Ukraine, supply of drones, et cetera. Could Russia make a calculation to come to Iran's rescue over the coming months and years in terms of resurrecting its program? Possibly.
That should just be kept in mind that the program could be deeply damaged today. Does Iran's pursuit of nuclear technology go away? No. No. At least a desire to whether they could carry it out is another question.
The final thing I would just say is that, just a note of caution. Yes. There have been attacks in recent years where Iran has not responded to the degree that many feared, including to the killing of Soleimani. But, Anderson, you and I and others currently on the air now, we remember the thoughts in the wake of the Iraq invasion in March 20, going back to 2003, that looked like it was over in the weeks and months afterwards. And of course, it wasn't. And there are a lot of attempts at regime change in the region or military campaigns that didn't end as quickly as the initial hopes indicated.
COOPER: Yes. Jim Sciutto, thanks. We'll check in with you a little bit later. Again, about 30 minutes now before we hear from President Trump. And here with Jeremy Diamond and Clarissa Ward as well.
I'm curious to know how long it is going to take before, if we talked about this with Brett earlier, how long is it going to before the US knows exactly the impact of what they have just done in terms of these various facilities and a damage assessment for -- particularly for the photo Fordow facility, which must be very difficult to do from the air without actually getting a look on the ground at the facility.
WARD: Well, and this is where potentially the Israelis might come into the picture. I mean, obviously we know that they have assets on the ground. They have been open about that. We have no idea if they are potentially trying to assess from whatever vantage points they have on the ground. But that might be part of the picture. Obviously, satellite imagery will be part of the picture.
I think likely it would be still 24 hours before we would get some kind of an assessment as to the --
DIAMOND: We may also hear from the IAEA, which has been monitoring the damage to these various nuclear sites over the course last week.
WARD: Particularly in terms of whether there's any fallout from this. Because that's the other thing we're not even discussing here. Three nuclear sites were bombed today with huge, powerful, forceful --
COOPER: Never used -- I mean, the bunker bombs never used before. So we have never seen this before. No one has.
WARD: No one seen it, and so we don't have a sense yet of what the fallout will be nor what the strategic success will be. All indications seem to be that the President is feeling very positive about how --
COOPER: Brett McGurk was reporting, based on discussion with the senior administration official, that they seem pleased with the results of what they saw.
DIAMOND: And it very much seems like President Trump, I mean, you saw it in his second tweet, I believe it was, where he is saying it's time to end the war. And so, it very much seems like President Trump now, having carried out these strikes on these three nuclear facilities in Iran, is going to call for some kind of diplomacy, is going to call for Iran to come to the table and resolve this issue completely.
[21:30:06]
I mean, of course, you know, he's saying that after having carried out very significant strikes in Iran. I am also told, according to a source familiar who I've just been texting with now, that the Israelis are going to wait and see what the Iranian reaction will before they decide whether to carry out additional strikes in Iran, or what their reaction will be. Coming to the point that were discussing earlier, about whether they were will accept the destruction of these nuclear facilities, if indeed that is what has taken place, or whether they will seek to go further with this regime change.
WARD: But it's interesting that they have, having two days ago announced this phased reopening of the economy. They have now gone right back to essential activity only. So clearly Israeli officials bracing themselves for the worst in terms of possible retaliatory strikes.
COOPER: I want to bring Brett McGurk back in. Do you have a sense of just the decision making in Iran? I mean, obviously, the supreme leader has remarkable powers. I mean, he has powers over pretty much everything in Iran. For his security, I don't know what his location is. I'm sure he's in some sort of secure facility and probably have difficulty getting communications out or is probably communicating by, you know, individuals as opposed to communications that can be intercepted.
Is everything up to him? I mean, is he calling all the shots here?
MCGURK: Anderson, what we know, the Supreme Leader Khamenei, 85 years old, gives broad guidance. And then his advisers meet, in what equivalent of our National Security Council, called the Supreme Council for National Security, SCNS. They meet to kind of interpret his guidance and operationalize it, put it into plans. That's how their system works.
It's very top down supreme, how many likes to be very broad. And then he has a group of people who put that into planning. What's happened in the last nine days, those -- that group of people, many of them are now no longer alive. And so -- and this gets to my point about what is Iran going to do here.
They might have some counterpunches already ready, but the ability of them to really get together and coordinate a significant counter, it's going to be difficult for them because of what you just mentioned. I've just been reflecting, Anderson, on -- I've been -- this plan that was executed tonight again, we've had -- it would never have to be used. It's been used tonight.
The risks laden in this plan, let me go through them quickly because it's important. The number one risk was air defense, not there. The second risk was to Israel from Hezbollah, which had 150,000, 200,000 missiles. A major deterrent to anything like this was Hezbollah, again, not there. So two of the main risks of this operation --
COOPER: Brett, I'm sorry, I just got to jump in. I just got to jump in because we had Frederik Pleitgen on the phone from Tehran. I want to come right back to you, but it's hard getting communications with him.
So, Fred, while this communication lasts, I'm wondering, are you seeing anything? Are you hearing anything new on the ground there in Tehran?
PLEITGEN: Hi there, Anderson. Yes, I'm outside right now here in Tehran. The skies here are actually pretty quiet. But as we've been saying before, there was a lot of air defense activity going over -- going on here in Tehran over the course of the night. And there are, of course now several Iranian regional officials who are now confirming that strikes seem to have taken place on the area of at least two of these nuclear facilities that we've been talking about, specifically in the Qom region.
The Qom region is south of Tehran. It's where the Fordow nuclear site is located. And a regional official there was saying that a few hours ago. Obviously that was in the middle of the night here in Iran. It's 5am now here in Tehran, saying that following the detection of aviation in that area, that air defense systems were identified, were put into action after hostile targets were identified, and that there seemed to then be an attack on the Fordow nuclear site by what they call enemy air forces. So that's what a regional official there is saying.
But when they talk about air defenses being activated, some of them are sort of short range air defenses. You know, one of the things that we've been seeing here, especially over Tehran, as the night's been going on, but also in the past couple of nights, a lot of those were anti-aircraft guns that were being activated. I've seen less anti- aircraft missiles being fired into the air, even though Iran certainly still does have that capability. Also in the Isfahan region. The Isfahan region is in central Iran, and that's actual where the Isfahan nuclear facility is located, but also where the Natanz nuclear facility is located as well. And there also a regional official is saying that they witnessed what they call intrusions near those nuclear facilities, obviously meaning intrusions into the airspace there.
[21:35:10]
That then air defenses were also activated to confront hostile targets, as they put it, but that several explosions were heard in that facility -- in those facilities as well. So the Iranians now having local officials confirming that explosions took place at those nuclear facilities here in Iran. But again, still trying to come to terms with what is going on there. Still very little information coming out, but certainly it does seem as though regional officials --
COOPER: Looks like we lost that communication. We had a video actually from Frederik Pleitgen before, earlier this evening that were going to show. I don't know if we have it ready right now, but let's get that. Because it does show what he's talking about. It was video, I believe he shot or screw shot from Tehran earlier in the evening.
I'm not sure. I think it was around in the 9:00 o' clock or 9:30 time frame PM in Tehran. And you hear, you see some bursts in the air. You also just hear anti-aircraft fire, but it gives you a sense of sort of it's just anti aircraft fire. It doesn't seem like it's a lot of interceptors, the type of which we see here in Tel Aviv and other cities in Israel, giving a sense of the level of air defenses that they still have left Israel.
The IDF has said in prior days they've taken out, they've destroyed as many as half of the launchers for missiles that Iran had. I want to go back to Brett. Brett, I'm sorry for interrupting you before. Just if -- you can, just continue with where were.
MCGURK: Yes, just on Iranian decision making. It's going to be difficult for them to figure out what to do given the -- that SCNS, that coordinating body that interprets the supreme leader's broad guidance, so many of them have been killed in the last nine days. But the American assumptions to this operation, many of the risks had been removed over the last 18 months. Hezbollah, the air defense.
I have to say I never imagined an assumption underlying an operation. Not only does Iran really have no air defense, but also Israel is effectively controlling the skies of Iran and flying at will. It's a totally different situation. So if the battle damage assessment comes back and says actually we missed one area, we might have to go back and do another strike. I don't think that would be inconsistent with what the American messaging is tonight that this is only about the nuclear sites.
Look, these are in remote areas. The risk of civilian casualties very low. Anderson, I could say one thing. I think Jeremy made a very important point, and it's something you and I have been discussing the last nine nights or so. I have said that if President Trump made this decision, very important for him to get on the same page with the Israelis and Netanyahu on what comes next. And I hope they had that conversation, because this is a big issue.
Is Israel now going to pull back a little bit, and say our military campaign has culminated. We think we've done about what we have to do and give that diplomacy a chance, which the President seems to be asking for, or Israel going to continue to push the military campaign? I would really recommend, again, try to stay focused on the objectives. The objective stated from the Israeli prime minister and their cabinet.
Other officials are saying very different things, is the nuclear program and missiles and try to avoid mission creep here. That's one way to contain the escalation risk over the coming days, which will be a very dynamic and risky period.
COOPER: Well, Brett, to that point, if you are Israel, do you say to Iran, we're going to continue to own your skies? We're going to continue to police your, you know, your skies and not allow you to rebuild missile launchers?
MCGURK: Yes. Anderson, I have to say two different things. One is do they continue to do 50 to 100 airstrikes a day as they've been doing? But when it comes to Israel patrolling Iranian skies, just knowing Israel's strategic culture, you're there -- you're talking to them. Particularly after October 7th.
I think for the foreseeable future, Israel will make sure that Iran cannot replenish air defense. They cannot rebuild these facilities. If they see it happening, they'll likely strike it. That would be my assumption. So, no, it's a new normal for Iran.
And it also means their options are limited because they are defenseless in a counter to their counter. If you start going up that escalation ladder. They can act asymmetrically, as we said, with terrorism, militias, hostage taking, it's what they do. But it is unprecedented that word is being overused, but it is unprecedented.
[21:40:00]
This, that Israel is basically controlling the skies of Iran. And that limits how they can respond to your question, Anderson, how they make a decision, that's going to be difficult. And then just their options are so much more limited than they might have been had this happened, say two years ago.
COOPER: It is -- I mean, again, you just said it, but it's worth repeating because I mean as, I mean all of us here who are reporting, we have all spent decades of our lives in and out of this region. It's extraordinary to me how weakened Iran is. I mean, Hamas decimated Hezbollah, the regime change in Syria, the aircraft, anti-aircraft batteries in Syria taken out. It's -- it is just -- it's incredible to me.
And the potential of a, you know, of a recognition someday from Saudi Arabia. I mean the potential realignment of this region, long talked about, long discussed, planned for, dreamed of. I don't know if it's closer tonight or not, but it's -- things are changing. It's extraordinary.
COOPER: This is not the situation Iran hoped to have when it made the decision to effectively join in that campaign against Israel after October 7th. We've talked about this. They actively supported Hezbollah at a launch from the north after October 7th. They supported the militias in Iraq and Syria, they supported the Houthis and they directly attacked Israel twice.
And, you know, one lesson of this is just don't start a war against Israel. It's just not going to work out very well for you. And that is what, I mean, we've been talking a lot about American decision making and the risks and there. And again, this is as serious as it can be. We have to be prepared for the worst.
But Iran has made a series of fateful decisions over the last 18 months and they lost Hezbollah. There's a new government in Lebanon that's working against Hezbollah. They lost the Assad regime, made ally of Iran for decades. The militias in Iraq had largely stood down. You got to keep an eye on that. But they lost all their air defense.
And Israel now basically owns their skies. Extraordinary turn of events, but this is the Middle East and there's no linear course. I think we need to stay deeply engaged, diplomatically, a sustainable military basis to try to work those. What you just said, Anderson, there is a real potential for realignment here and I suspect Iran will counter. That'll have to be contained.
But eventually there will be diplomacy. There will be diplomacy with regional partners. They'll be talking to the Iranians and there can be a new equilibrium.
But what Israel's done the last 10 days -- when you were talking about it, when it was breaking, I would not have predicted this is where we are, but this is where we are. It is quite something.
COOPER: And we're about 18 minutes away from the president speaking. But, Brett, to the point of diplomacy there -- and we were talking about this earlier with Clarissa, there has to ultimately be some form of diplomacy in order to, I mean, even if it's with to get the IAEA in there, whatever happens. There has to be some negotiation about access to sites, things like that.
MCGURK: Yes, ultimately. If Iran announces tomorrow, you know what, we're leaving the NPT, that's the Non-Proliferation Treaty, meaning they're prepared to perhaps go for a weapon. I mean, the question is how? And Israel has shown they have complete intelligence dominance and penetration, and now they have complete air superiority. And that's not going to change anytime soon.
So I think Iran is in a real quandary. Again, I want to state, I don't want to underestimate their asymmetrical means to respond, but this is not the Iran that so many assumed we had say two years ago, even 18 months ago. It's a complete turn of events against their interests and what they had assumed they would be able to effectuate with those decisions since October 7th.
And, you know, I will -- you're in Israel, Anderson. The Gaza has to come to an end. This is an opportunity also for Israel maybe to bring that to an end, try to get that ceasefire moving because that remains a horrible situation. And this might open space for that because all of those Iranian officials who are so close to Hamas are no longer alive. And the Hamas military leader, Mohammed Sinwar, was killed in Gaza about a month ago.
So even there might be an opportunity, contain escalation (CROSSTALK) try to get a cease from Gaza. And you have some, you have a chance.
[21:45:05]
COOPER: I want to go quickly to Barak Ravid, who's on the phone. Barak, I understand you spoke to President Trump after the strikes.
BARAK RAVID, CNN ANALYST: Yes. I spoke briefly to President Trump. I called him. He was in the Oval Office. He sounded very happy and satisfied with what happened. And he told me we had, and I quote, Trump told me we had great success tonight and your Israel is much safer now, end quote.
And now I think we all, we're all waiting to see what President Trump will say in his speech and how he will explain his decision and if he is going to say where he's going to take next the current situation.
COOPER: Barak, what -- I mean, there's so much to ask you about, but what are you hearing from -- you're incredibly well-sourced. What are you hearing from the Israeli side? What are your thoughts about what just occurred?
RAVID: Well, that's definitely, you know, a significant, you know, to say that this is a significant development is the understatement of the century. I think if you ask Donald Trump two months ago whether he's going to conduct a military strike in Iran, I'm not sure he would tell you yes. If you ask Donald Trump the same question a week ago or 10 days ago, before Israel conducted its strike, I'm not sure he would tell you that he would do it.
But I think that what we saw in the last 10 days I think convinced Trump that, a, the risks of taking such a step are less significant than he thought initially. And on the other hand, that there's really no diplomatic path with Iran, especially after the Iranians rejected several proposals. He gave them just in the last 10 days to meet.
President Trump was ready to go to Turkey last Monday himself, and meet the Iranian president. But the Iranian president couldn't get the green light for this from his supreme leader, Ali Khamenei. And I think when at the end of the day, the White House saw that there's no diplomatic path and therefore the only thing left is to conduct a strike.
In terms of what Israel does next. And I'm not sure how long it will take for bomb assessment, you know, to take place. I don't know if that requires daylight. What do you expect to see from Israel now? RAVID: I think the Israelis are also waiting to see the results of the
strike because it's one thing that the bombs hit where they needed to hit. It's a whole different thing to see what were the results of the strike inside Fordow and inside the other nuclear facilities, and whether it really destroyed them or it just caused a lot of damage.
And there's always, you know, here the details are very important. And I think that it will another few hours, maybe days, to know for sure whether those strikes really destroy those nuclear facilities in a way that it will take Iran several years to try and reconstruct them if it decides to do that.
COOPER: From your understanding, is that something that Israel will be able to determine from satellite imagery or from, you know, over flights? Is that something that requires actually examining these, you know, with boots on the ground people examining these facilities first?
RAVID: I think, you know, both Israeli and US intelligence have the capability to know what happened in the next few hours and days. But I think one big question is about the nuclear material. Iran has hundreds of kilograms of enriched uranium, 400 kilogram of 60 percent enriched uranium, several hundred kilograms of 20 percent enriched uranium. It is not completely clear to the International Atomic Energy Agency and to US and Israeli intelligence where this material is.
And this is now, I think, one of the big challenges to see where this material is. Because the Iranians can still take this material to a hidden location and try to rebuild their nuclear program and enrich it to 90 percent, and try and dash forward for a nuclear weapon in some sort of a secret location. So now the big question is, where is the material?
[21:50:05]
COOPER: The Israeli government never said that regime change was a stated objective, but they certainly came closer. Some folks came close to saying that or indicating that or suggesting, you heard from the prime minister, suggesting Iranians should -- could rise up. Does that -- do you believe that remains of interest to Israel?
RAVID: I think, you know, we heard Prime Minister Netanyahu saying that regime change could be the result of the war. And I think that was his understated or sophisticated or polite way to say that he hopes that this is what's going to happen. For now, I have to say we see no indications that the Iranians are uprising against the regime.
We actually see a different phenomena for now, that there is growing anger at Israel for its strikes in Iran. There's at least a initial rallying around the flag in the last few days. I think that the US strike -- there's a chance that the US strikes will increase this momentum of rallying around the flag, and growing support for the regime because of the external military intervention.
So I think that -- the question will be what the Iranian regime is going to do next. Whether it is going to implement its threats to retaliate militarily against US bases, US forces, US interests in the region. There are thousands of US troops in close range of Iran. The Iranians can also close the Strait of Hormuz, which is something that they threaten to do, which could dramatically influence commercial shipping, international commercial shipping.
It could influence oil prices. We are now in a very dangerous stage that could lead to significant instability for a very long time in the whole region.
COOPER: In terms of Israel's operations, though, in the skies over Iran, I assume you don't see any let up in Israel's air dominance. I mean, Israel's -- do they continue offensive operations, do you think?
RAVID: You know, I think they could if they wanted. To be honest, I think most of what they planned to strike, they already did. There are always. You can always find new targets. But I think most of what they wanted to do, they did.
The question now is, whether Iran is going to say, OK, let's conduct some sort of retaliation and then stop the war. Or the Iranians will say, we are now going to escalate and continue firing missiles at Israel. The Iranians have enough launchers and missiles to do it for a very, very long time. And Israel does not have enough interceptors to defeat those missile strikes for much longer.
And therefore, if the Iranians choose to continue this war for another two, three, four weeks. Israel can find itself in a very dangerous situation where it cannot intercept Iranian missiles with warheads of close to 2,000 pounds of explosive. This is a very dangerous situation.
COOPER: Barak Ravid, I hope we continue to talk to you. I hope we can talk to you on the other side of President Trump's comments, which should take place in about seven minutes. Barak, thanks very much.
Jeremy Diamond actually have some news on Benjamin Netanyahu's remark.
DIAMOND: Yes. We've just gotten a video from the Israeli prime minister where he is speaking in English talking about this US operation. He is talking about this notion of peace through strength. He says first comes strength, then comes peace.
But the most significant comments come where he says that tonight America has been unsurpassed. He says it has done what no other country on earth can do, saying history will record that President Trump acted to deny the world's most dangerous regime, the world's most dangerous weapons. And he talks once again about the unshakable alliance between the United States and Israel
[21:54:46]
You know, make no mistake, even though the Israeli prime minister did not, I'm told, explicitly urge President Trump to carry out these strikes, was very cautious not to corner him into that position. This was exactly the scenario that Israeli officials had expected, had hoped for before they even launched this operation. This entire Israeli operation that we have seen unfold over the course of the last week, according to Israeli officials I spoken to, was premised on the idea that the United States would eventually join in and deliver that final blow. And indeed, that has happened tonight. And of course, the Israeli prime minister is very happy about it.
I'm also told that the prime minister will address the Israeli public after President Trump delivers his remarks tonight.
COOPER: And those remarks should be six minutes from now. It is interesting, Clarissa. I mean, just to think, ten days ago, the first initial response by the Trump administration was not from President Trump. It was Secretary of State Marco Rubio, also National Security Adviser Marco Rubio, and several other things.
WARD: He said it wasn't us.
COOPER: Right.
WARD: We have nothing to do with it. Immediate instinct was to create some daylight to make it clear the US was not involved. We know that President Trump ran on a platform of no more Middle Eastern wars.
And I think it's interesting, you know, you talk with Brett McGurk about this idea of Syria and the fall of the Assad regime. And I think in some ways that has emboldened particularly Israel because it seems so easy. A few strategic things happened. Russia mired in Ukraine, Hezbollah weakened, and suddenly Assad vanishes after 40 plus, a decade --
COOPER: His entire regime crumbled.
WARD: His entire regime crumbled. And so now, instead of thinking of the history of regime change in the Middle East vis-a-vis the American perspective as being Iraq, Afghanistan, things that we think of as being disastrous with hindsight. You have this new potential model whereby you weaken from the inside, you infiltrate intelligence, and suddenly you get lucky potentially, and a regime magically crumbles away.
And when I've spoken to Israeli strategists, they say regime change is not necessarily the strategic objective, but it is the desired outcome. And we've also heard the former head of Mossad warning Israel's leaders that there is a delta sometimes between what you're able to achieve in those early days when you have the momentum on your side, and what you get mired into when you get greedy and keep going for more.
So it'll be very interesting to see on the back of this where Israel stands now. Is this drawing a line under this once and for all? Or is this the beginning, as the chief of staff of the IDF have warned, of a protracted conflict --
COOPER: And what would regime change look like in Iran if, in fact, it was. I just -- in the minutes we have before President Trump speak. Natasha Bertrand, I understand, has some new reporting. Natasha, what are you learning?
NATASHA BERTRAND, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Anderson. So we're told by multiple sources familiar with the matter that the US did convey to Iran through back channel discussions that the strikes President Trump ordered on the country's nuclear facilities this evening would be continuing contained, and that no further strikes were going to be planned moving forward. And that's according to two people familiar with the discussions.
Now, it's not immediately clear how this message was actually conveyed to the Iranians. We know that the conversations between the US and Iran have been somewhat halting over the last week, but the White House did confirm just last week that there was still some kind of communication between the governments.
But still, very important point here that the US did convey to the Iranians. We're told that this was going to be limited, as much as limited as this can be to these three nuclear facilities, and that there were not going to be additional strikes. Now, we're also learning more about the kind of ordinance that was used in these explosions, and that was these massive bunker buster bombs that the US has that can only be dropped from those B-2 bombers.
And this is the first time that those massive ordinance penetrators, those bunker busters, have actually been used operationally. They have been tested many times before. There have been questions about how significantly they could actually damage these nuclear facilities given how buried underground they are. But we are told that these bunker busters were used here for the first time as part of a conflict, Anderson.
COOPER: Natasha Bertrand, thanks very much. We're going to be hearing from President Trump in about three minutes from now. Brett McGurk is also standing by.
Brett, you had, when you and I talked immediately as soon as we got on air, you had already talked to a senior official who had talked about these back channel communications sending that message to Iran that this is it or the US would like this to be it. What are you going to be listening to hear from President Trump tonight, Brett?
MCGURK: Well, Anderson, I assume he'll help reaffirm that in his voice to the world. And make clear that this was a limited contained operation, that he's sending in a direct channel to Iran. We heard just from Natasha, I heard that earlier tonight.
But also I think his projection forward for what he wants to see in the Middle East a little bit what you were just talking about, Anderson. Where does he see this going? His theme is peace through strength. He's done this unprecedented operation, and then where does he see it going?
