Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

U.S. Assessing Damage To Iran's Nuclear Sites After Strikes; Satellite Images Show Damage At Iranian Nuclear Sites; Trump Sunday: "Why Wouldn't There Be A Regime Chance". Aired 11p-12a ET

Aired June 22, 2025 - 23:00   ET

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

[23:00:21]

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN HOST: Hello and welcome to our viewers in the United States and around the world. I'm Kaitlan Collins in Washington, where we're covering the breaking news out of the Middle East tonight, as the United States is still assessing the impact of last night's strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities.

Here in Washington, the president has clearly been closely tracking the coverage, I'm told. And he's also been openly floating regime change in Iran on Truth Social, contradicting officials of his who just hours ago said that's something that the United States was not looking to do.

The big question tonight is how much damage the United States strikes did to Iran's nuclear program, and what that means going forward?

The White House says the B-2 bombers that carried out those strikes are, as you can see here, are now back in the United States. And the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff says it is way too early to determine if Iran still has its nuclear capabilities.

We do know what we can see from the sky, new satellite images that show some damage. A CNN analysis of these images found that the attack on Fordow left behind at least six large craters, as you can see here on the left side of your screen, from the United States' bunker buster bombs. Those are designed to go deep underground before detonating.

And it also comes as we're seeing dramatic difference in the before and after images from Isfahan. This is Iran's largest nuclear complex. It was hit by more than a dozen cruise missiles.

As I noted, the president has clearly been watching coverage, and a short time ago he posted this saying, quote, monumental damage was done to all nuclear sites in Iran, as shown by satellite images. Obliteration is an accurate term. The biggest damage took place far below ground level. Bulls eye.

That comes as a senior U.S. lawmaker says it's important to learn if Iran moved any of its highly enriched uranium stockpiles before the strikes and if they did, where it is now.

The president said Saturday night that the goal of the mission was to end Iran's nuclear program. And Vice President J.D. Vance said earlier today, the United States is not at war with Iran. The U.S. is at war with Iran's nuclear program.

President Trump appeared to have a bit of a different position today. As one, he's leaving out the possibility of more strikes and also posted this on Truth Social, saying if the current Iranian regime is unable to make a run great again, why wouldn't there be regime change?

Anderson Cooper is live on the ground for CNN in Tel Aviv.

Anderson, what's the latest so far over there?

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, "AC360": Yeah, certainly the status of Iran's nuclear facilities is the big question in the region. Also, obviously, for the United States, the bomb damage assessments will take some time.

Not just analyzing satellite imagery, getting satellite imagery at different times of the day, but also any kind of signals communication, any kind of human intelligence that the U.S. or Israel or any of the European partners may be able to glean from inside Iran or for outside about exactly the status not only of the three facilities hit, but also, as you mentioned, the possibility of that enriched uranium having been moved to some other secret locations. That's a very real possibility according to a folks, we are talking to.

As for Israel's part, the fighting still continues. They continue to hit targets in Iran in the overnight hours. It's now 6:00 a.m. here in in Tel Aviv. One missile was fired toward Israel by Iran a couple of hours ago. People got warnings all across Israel to go into bunkers, but it was just one missile. No reports of any casualties there.

So, another day beginning, a lot of questions remain about the exact status of the facilities in Iran and also how Iran may respond to Israeli targets, but also to U.S. targets all throughout the region. U.S. personnel, military personnel and bases, obviously, there's a lot of concern about that. A lot of a lot of places have been put on alert, and those short-range missiles that that Iran can use has not been a prime focus for Israel. That's been the ballistic missiles.

The IDF says they've eliminated as many as half of the launchers for ballistic missiles, but there's still the short range missiles, some of which have been taken out. But many apparently still remain, Kaitlan.

COLLINS: Yeah, and questions about how Iran's going to respond to this, ultimately.

Anderson Cooper live on the ground in Tel Aviv, thank you for that reporting.

I want to take another look at the satellite images showing Iran's nuclear sites. This is before and after the strikes. This is for the Fordow facility that we've been talking about for over a week now.

It is built and embedded deep into a mountain and has seen in analysis of these images found on the left, these at least six large craters from the bunker buster bombs.

[23:05:06]

They burrow into the ground before exploding. They've never been used before in combat. They have been tested but not used until now.

This is the Isfahan complex. It's Iran's largest nuclear site, and we are told it was hit by more than a dozen cruise missiles. As you can see, the before and after.

Joining me now is retired General Wesley Clark, a former NATO supreme allied commander, and joining me from Little Rock, Arkansas.

And it's great to have you here, sir, because there are so many questions about what is happening next here and also what this means on the Fordow facility, specifically, which is the damage the president is pointing to, tonight.

I was listening to the vice president earlier say that they had a limited window to strike that facility. He said that he didn't know if in six months they would still have this ability to have the chance to do this. I wonder what you make of that statement and if that is the case, why that would be the case.

GEN. WESLEY CLARK, U.S. ARMY (RET.): I think that's probably an accurate statement. And but here's the thing, Kaitlan, we've been talking about Fordow nonstop for over a week. As soon as the Israeli campaign started, everybody identified Fordow. Everybody said, this is deep underground Israel. Israel doesn't have the means to take it out. Only the B-2 can.

And then what we find out is a couple of days before the strike, there's convoys of trucks going in there and bulldozers and trucks maybe taking stuff out. We don't know that, the bulldozers may have been bulldozing a lot of earth up there to protect the entrances from bombs, but it's there.

They're definitely watching what we're saying on the media. They're listening to what Americans say as best they can abroad. And on classified channels if they can get in there, they're getting word from Russia and China, no doubt about what's being said.

So, it wouldn't be surprising if we missed a substantial portion of the enriched and highly enriched uranium.

COLLINS: If Iran did move that enriched uranium, where would they -- where would they put it? Where could they store it? I mean, if they're moving quickly and Israel and the United States are now wondering where it is, what would your suggestion for that be?

CLARK: Well, I think we always have a tendency to sort of focus on what we know, but we have to also think about what we don't know. So, Iran's a big country. It's two and a half times the size of Texas. And even with the best overhead imagery and Israeli intelligence, look, the bombs have only we're only really scratching the surface of Iran, and on the western half. We don't know what's really there in the eastern half.

There were earlier rumors that they had prepared the weaponization systems in the eastern part, that they knew how to take uranium and pack it in such a way they could put it in a ballistic missile that apparently is in eastern Iran. There may be a lot of other sites there that we don't know about.

The IAEA believes it inspects everything. But, you know, this is a cat and mouse game. And once President Trump came into office, and once the pressure started from Israel, really maybe even after October 7th, I think the Iranians recognized as they lost the protection of Hezbollah, Israel was coming after them. And they better do something quick.

I think they did. The negotiations with President Trump as a way of stalling while they continue to enrich the uranium. They're smart. They're wily people. They're just as smart as we are.

We wouldn't have left it in Fordow when everybody's talking about it. We would have taken out, got to believe they did, too. And you got to believe they prepared secret hiding places for it.

COLLINS: And that raises the question of what happens next here and what is the ultimate goal by the administration, because they want to destroy the nuclear program. And if that's not destroyed, that raises questions.

And the president has been leaving open the possibility of striking further targets. If the Iranians don't relent here. And so, when you hear, you know, the vice president, as he's saying earlier, we're not at war with Iran. We're at war with the Iranian nuclear program.

Do you think Iran sees it that way, that the United States is not at war with them? After dropping 12 bombs last night?

CLARK: Well, Iran has been at war with us really since 1979. They just haven't had the means to really do that much to us. And they've been saying they were going to destroy Israel from the very beginning. So. the fact that whether or not they think, whether or not we say were at war with them, they're -- they believe they're at war with us.

Now, we don't hear much from Russia and China except the latest I heard about Russia is they said, hey, there'll be a lot of nations that would give nuclear weapons to Iran. Pakistan's condemned what we've done. But they said so far, Iran has not asked them for nuclear weapons.

[21:10:03]

But this could spin out of control pretty quickly. And it seems to me, Kaitlan, what we really need to do right now is get some mediation in there and not the administration trying to talk directly to Iran, but outside people that can bridge the gap.

In 1999, when we did this in Kosovo, we used escalation dominance. We persuaded, took three weeks of bombing to get the negotiations with Slobodan Milosevic started. It took four weeks of negotiation to persuade him. As we ramped up the strikes and we hit his house and we took out Serb radio and television, and we really put the pressure on him, and we planned for a ground invasion.

And finally, he looked at this and like, okay, I guess I'm going to lose worse if I stay in it. So, it's escalation dominance. If we play the escalation dominance game, we still have to play the diplomatic game and we can't do both simultaneously. We need mediators.

Who are they? The Europeans, the Omanis, the Qataris. Somebody's got to go in there and talk sense to the Iranians and what we really want them to do. We don't want this as an argument about nuclear enrichment. That's a silly argument.

What we really want is to have a live and let live agreement, get them to renounce the effort to destroy Israel. And once they live in harmony in the region, they can have all the enrichment they need for nuclear energy. There's no issue with that.

The issue is they want to destroy another state in the region. So, someone's got to go in and talk sense to them while Israel keeps the pressure on militarily.

COLLINS: Yeah, we'll see what happens next.

General Wesley Clark, thank you for your time tonight.

CLARK: Thank you. Kaitlan.

COLLINS: Still to come here on CNN, the divide that is playing out in the president's own supporters over his decision to strike Iran. What we're hearing from some of the most ardent supporters of his who say they disagree with this, and they're saying so publicly, and the president responding tonight.

Our breaking news coverage continues right after a quick break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:15:33]

COLLINS: President Trump's decision to strike Iranian nuclear sites has been condemned by many Democrats. As expected, praised by Republican leadership. But there are some people in the president's party that have been criticizing this move to get involved as well. Some of them have had a tepid reaction at best, as were seeing this divide play out within the MAGA movement with some of the president's most loyal supporters accusing him of abandoning his anti-war stance and his America first platform.

Republican Congressman Thomas Massie of Kentucky is working with Democrats, including Representative Ro Khanna, on a resolution that would reassert that Congress has the sole authority to declare war. As is stated in the Constitution, the White House is saying that the legal authority to move here, because the president is the commander in chief and Vice President J.D. Vance is arguing that the U.S. is not at war with Iran, just its nuclear program.

Our senior White House correspondent, Kristen Holmes, is joining me now with the reaction here.

And, Kristen, obviously, this is something the White House has been watching closely, but largely has been dismissive of any negative reaction from the president's own supporters.

What are you hearing from officials tonight?

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. That's right, Kaitlan. I think there's a lot of understanding that things might change in the coming days. And with the understanding that we don't know what that's going to look like. So, one of the things that I've heard from a number of Trump supporters who didn't support the fact that we struck Iran, essentially, were saying that they believe that Trump was an anti-interventionist, that they thought that he was not going to get involved in any kind of long-term entanglement in the Middle East.

And that's really why you're hearing vice president J.D. Vance say things like, this is not a war with Iran. This is a war with their nuclear program. Thats language that they're purposely coding there to sound as though they are not entering into a long term conflict in the Middle East, because that is what president Trump does not want. Thats what he said he would not do.

And one of the things we have to remind our viewers that we know that President Trump was contemplating in the run up to approving these strikes, was the idea, if it was going to be possible to do these strikes and then be done with this, to make sure that they didn't get involved into this kind of long, drawn out conflict that we've seen in the past in the Middle East.

Now, we really don't know the answer as to what exactly this is going to look like, particularly because of the fact that we haven't seen how Iran is going to retaliate. Make no mistake, there is very little doubt in anyone's mind. The White House, the administration as a whole, that Iran is not going to retaliate for those strikes.

But it depends on what exactly that's going to look like. Is this going to be something that then we in turn have to react to, or is this going to be something that we can then move forward from?

Remember, really, at the end of the day, President Trump's team believes that if they can get out of this without some kind of long- term embroilment into a conflict that they will get their supporters eventually on their side to show that we just did this to get rid of the nuclear program. But of course, we can't really answer those questions yet because there are still so many unknowns, even just looking at a full assessment of the damage. That's one of the things that they're waiting to see, so that they can learn how to or pick how to spin that as they move forward and try to get everyone on board, or at least as many people as possible.

COLLINS: Kristen Holmes at the White House, thank you for that report. Also joining us tonight, CNN's chief U.S. security analyst, Jim

Sciutto.

As we're following all the developments here in Washington, Jim, and obviously seeing what's playing out with the president's supporters here. And I think part of this to a point that Jeff Zeleny made earlier is it depends on what happens next here, how supportive they are of this and where this goes from here, because there are questions about how Iran is going to respond.

There are 40,000 U.S. troops in the region and essentially the bet the president is making here is that the United States can repel whatever strikes or attacks a weakened Iran may try to use as retaliation here.

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN CHIEF U.S. SECURITY ANALYST: No question. I mean, you have the risk now of does Iran strike back? Where does it strike back? What is the risk to U.S. forces in the region?

Now, this is an issue that the administration considered prior. I was told that U.S. forces were, prior to the attack, instructed to move into shelters for the possibility of an immediate Iranian retaliation. We haven't seen that.

So, now, you can consider them on high alert for just that possibility if and when it were to come. And there are other possibilities about where Iran might strike. And you've heard the public discussion of concerns about sleeper cells in this country and around the world to use a terror attack as a potential response. We don't know how Iran will respond.

The other issue is this that if the Trump administration is sincere in calling this a one off, that they want just one instance of U.S. military action here, and they want to then wind down the broader conflict between Israel and Iran. That certainly hasn't happened yet, because we've seen the strikes continue to go back and forth. Israel struck further targets inside Iran today, and Iran has fired missiles back at Israel. Multiple missiles in the last 24 to 48 hours.

So that objective has certainly not been met. And then the big question, Kaitlan, really is what is the degree of damage to Iranian nuclear sites here? The president used the word obliterated. Thats not typically a word you see in a intelligence bomb damage assessment or BDA.

He appears to be basing his own description purely on satellite photos. But I've been told by an Israeli intelligence source that even from their perspective, it will take days to get an accurate BDA and that will be based must be based on more than just satellite imagery. It needs things such as signals intelligence, intercepts of communications, Iranian officials talking to each other about how much damage was done.

And we just don't -- we just don't have that yet. I mean, the president may have it, but he certainly hasn't shared it in terms of justifying his own description of those targets having been obliterated. And the final thing I'll say, Kaitlan, is that you have Trump

administration officials acknowledging that they don't know about the status of Iran's highly enriched uranium, the 400 kilograms, that's close to 1,000 pounds of highly enriched uranium, which is the basis of the Israeli prime minister's concern about Iran's ability to build a bomb.

They just don't know. They don't know where it is. They don't know how much Iran was able to move of it. And without knowing that, you truly don't have an assessment of the success of these strikes.

COLLINS: Yeah, it is a massive question going forward here. Jim Sciutto, excellent reporting. Thank you for that. Obviously, we'll continue to check in with you.

And as we're still tracking this, the United Nations is calling an emergency meeting after the U.S. airstrikes in Iran. We'll bring you the latest reactions from the world as allies are calling for diplomacy while the president is floating regime change.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:25:49]

COLLINS: We're continuing to follow developments out of the Middle East tonight, where Iran has now activated its air defenses over the capital of Tehran. Shortly after, Israel said Iran had launched a missile toward Israel that was intercepted, ultimately.

All of this is playing out as the United States is assessing the damage to Iran's nuclear sites following the weekend strikes. So far, we just have satellite images that we are looking at. The president himself is posting about. You can see the attack on Fordow that left behind at least six large craters. They showed the damage also at Isfahan, which is Iran's largest nuclear complex. An assessment by the institute for science and international security says the complex there was, quote, heavily damaged.

Weve been hearing from Iranians speaking out after the U.S. strikes happened there. CNN's Fred Pleitgen is on the ground and spoke with some of them as he was out on the streets to see what life looks like now for those in Tehran.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Iran's leadership has absolutely blasted the Trump administration for bombing several Iranian nuclear sites. In fact, the country's foreign minister has come out and said that the United States has begun what he calls a dangerous war and that there would be, as he also says, everlasting consequences.

Now we are in the Iranian capital, in Tehran, and we've spoken to a lot of folks here on the street, and a lot of them say they are very angry at the United States. They voiced that anger to us and also absolutely ripped into President Trump. (voice-over): "They attacked us," she says. "We were living our normal

lives and they attacked us. If someone strikes the United States, would they not answer? Of course, they would. We're not doing anything but defending ourselves."

"Iranian people are people of honor, and we will definitely give a strong response," this man says. We will stand strongly like we have been for the past 40 years."

"There is no one dirtier than Trump," he says. "First, he gives us two weeks' time, but then after two days strikes us. We do not have nuclear weapons, so why does he strike us? Such a guy only thinks about his own benefit."

"I support the supreme leader with my life," he says. "I approve of him, really, because he's moving forward for the sake of our land.

So, as you can see, a lot of people saying that if anything, this has strengthened their support for their leadership. All this, by the way, comes as a lot of folks are coming back to Tehran. A lot of shops are opening again after many people had left fearing that there could be a big bombing campaign by the Israelis and by the Trump administration, Iran's leadership has warned the U.S. that Iran has many things at its disposal with which it could resist, as it puts it, the United States.

One of the things, of course, that they keep talking about is the militias in the Middle Eastern region that are loyal to Iran. There's Iranian commanders who have said, look next to almost every American military base in the region. There is a militia that is loyal to Iran, and that could cause trouble for the U.S.

At the same time, Iran's leadership says it understands that right now, it has entered into a phase of serious conflict with the United States.

Fred Pleitgen, CNN, Tehran.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COLLINS: Our thanks to Fred Pleitgen for that report.

And after those U.S. airstrikes in Iran, we heard from the United Nations Security Council in New York calling an emergency meeting today where China's envoy condemned the attack and claimed it violated international law.

Beijing, along with Russia and Pakistan, have been proposing a draft resolution calling for an immediate and unconditional ceasefire.

Meanwhile, key Gulf Arab states like Qatar, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia have issued statements calling for de-escalation and peace in the region.

For more on this international reaction, I'm joined by CNN's Paula Hancocks, who is live in Abu Dhabi with the latest reactions. And I know the presidents been speaking with some world leaders today.

He was on the phone with the British prime minister earlier today. What else are we hearing from world leaders in response to what the president did last night in Iran?

PAULA HANCOCKS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Kaitlan, certainly, when it comes to the European leaders, we are hearing some tacit support for what the U.S. has done, reiterating that Iran cannot be allowed to have a nuclear weapon. But when you come here in the region, in the Middle East, obviously the stakes are far higher, and we are hearing more critical messages.

[23:30:08]

For example, Saudi Arabia did say that they believed that these strikes violated Iran's sovereignty. Now there's no love lost between Iran and Saudi Arabia, for sure. There was only diplomatic relations started again just a couple of years ago. But the fact is, the region here does not want any escalation of tensions. In fact, de-escalation was the word that was used by pretty much every leader.

And certainly when you look at the geographical realities, there is concern that this could spill over into this area. The area of the gulf, for example, has many U.S. bases dotted around the place. Some 40,000 troops expected to be here at this point.

And also, you have the concerns about environmental contamination. While these nuclear sites are being targeted by the U.S. and also by Israel, there are serious concerns in this region that that could spill over into contamination, into the Persian Gulf, for example, an area where some 60 million people in this region rely on for drinking water. Desalination is the way that people in this region have their drinking water.

So, the concerns here are significant. And remember that all of these leaders in the Middle East, in the gulf were calling the U.S. president before he decided to go ahead with these strikes, asking him not to do it. Now, of course, that did fall on deaf ears, but it was only a month ago. Remember when the U.S. president was here in the UAE and Qatar, in Saudi Arabia, talking about business, talking about billions of dollars of deals being signed?

That is a very different message that these leaders are hearing now, as they are very concerned that this will escalate -- Kaitlan.

COLLINS: Yeah. And unanswered questions about what comes next.

Paula Hancocks in Abu Dhabi, thank you for that reporting.

Also joining me this hour is Trita Parsi, the executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, also the author of "Losing An Enemy: Obama, Iran and the Triumph of Diplomacy". And he joins me now from Washington.

And thank you so much for being here. As we're kind of assessing still what the aftermath of this is. And I

don't think it's an overstatement to say what an unprecedented move the president made last night by striking Iran and the real questions of what it does mean for -- for the Middle East generally and what this looks like going forward.

TRITA PARSI, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, THE QUINCY INSTITUTE FOR RESPONSIBLE STATECRAFT: Unprecedented. And deeply impactful. Of course, I think the right words here. I think one thing we should not forget in all of this is that this is the case of two nuclear equipped countries, the United States and Israel, attacking and non-nuclear equipped state has a nuclear program, but not nuclear weapons. Not even a nuclear weapons program, and did so without being attacked first in the middle of negotiations.

This is sending shockwaves throughout the entire international community. The difference between Iran and North Korea is that North Korea had nuclear weapons and as a result, did not get attacked. Thats the conclusion that most people are drawing right now.

And I fear that not only will this not -- will fail, stopping any Iranian nuclear weapon, I think, actually has dramatically increased the chances of Iran going nuclear. But also, it will probably fuel proliferation throughout the world because the sense of a need for a nuclear deterrence against nuclear-equipped countries is just going to grow as a result of this.

COLLINS: Yeah, that has been a big question in terms of nonproliferation and those efforts that we've seen presidents make and including President Trump, obviously, with North Korea's program itself in his last term and what that means now, because you mentioned the negotiations, the White House essentially felt like they were being strung along by Iran, that there wasn't real progress being made because obviously, the president did try to go that route. And very quickly shifted from pursuing diplomacy here to having Israel strike to the President himself, joining Israel's military campaign.

PARSI: I think that there's a couple of holes in the White House's narrative on this, to be frank, Trump actually started off these negotiations really well. He had a very reasonable and workable red line. It was no weaponization. Thats something we know could have worked because it did work when Obama tried it as well. It meant restricting Iran's nuclear program. They would still be able to do civil -- produce civil fuel for their civil reactors, but nothing that could be weaponized.

Halfway through the negotiations, he adopted the Israeli red line, which was no enrichment, zero enrichment. That we know has never worked. And that is where this whole thing began. That's where the trajectory changed and things went in the wrong direction.

[23:35:00]

I think Trump may have been tricked into thinking that the Iranians would quickly cave, and then he got very frustrated when they didn't. But if he had studied his issue, he would have been quite easily made aware that there was no way that the Iranians were going to go and agree to this. It's not procrastination of time, it's just that the U.S. changed the goalpost on this and adopted something that was simply not workable.

And unnecessary. You can still prevent a nuclear weapon without going down to zero.

COLLINS: Well, and on that point of what does Iran do here? Does this force them underground? Do they try to accelerate to -- toward weaponization as you mentioned there? I think the question that some people have looking at this is how long until we know the full result of what happened, and what it does drive the Iranian regime to do if they don't act immediately?

PARSI: Well, we may never know the full picture of this because it's not clear whether the IAEA will be able to get access to that site going forward. After this attack. Iran actually can invoke article ten of the nonproliferation treaty and walk out of the treaty altogether and kick out all inspectors. It would still take 90 days. But bottom line is this is something that they could do as a result of having been attacked. I fear that there is a significant risk that the program will completely go underground and go into the dark.

And incidentally, it's important to understand, I hear some people saying that this was a secret site. This was not a secret site. The IAEA was inspecting it fully. This was under complete safeguards by the IAEA.

There may become secret sites now, however, because if you want to produce a nuclear weapon, you don't need to have a major installation. A large industrial scale type of enrichment program. You need to have something much, much smaller. Iran is a vast country.

So, I think this is really set us off in the wrong direction. Theres still a chance of being able to reverse this, but it requires some significant diplomatic activity and greater flexibility on all sides. Rather than insisting on the other side surrendering, which is what Trump has said that he wants them to do. They're not going to do that.

COLLINS: What do you think the likelihood is for a diplomatic outcome here that the president is saying that is the option they should take now?

PARSI: I think if Trump shifts back to his original American red line of no weaponization, then there definitely is a deal that can be made. It's going to still be very tricky to get back to the negotiating table after having bombed the country, but I'm absolutely convinced that had he never shifted to zero enrichment in the first place, he would probably have had a deal by now.

COLLINS: Trita Parsi, obviously, will be following this incredibly closely. Great to have your expertise tonight. Thank you so much.

PARSI: Thank you so much.

COLLINS: And still ahead here on CNN, what we're hearing from the Department of Homeland Security tonight about the threat environment here in the United States following that attack in Iran.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:41:44]

COLLINS: Tonight, the department of homeland security is warning Americans that there is a threatened, heightened threat environment following the U.S. strikes on Iran, with officials saying that that threat includes possible low level cyberattacks and also continued potential lone wolf attacks.

The State Department has been issuing a worldwide security alert warning of potential demonstrations against U.S. citizens and interests abroad.

For more on what this means for people in the United States, I want to bring in Juliette Kayyem, who is CNN's senior national security analyst and also a Harvard professor who formerly served as President Obama's assistant secretary for intergovernmental affairs at the Department of Homeland Security.

And, Juliette, when you look at this, I think that is the question that people have automatically is what does this mean for me in the United States? And what is the threat level for Americans right now?

JULIETTE KAYYEM, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: I think -- I think it's an important question for Americans to ask. It's complicated as of tonight, because of the changing statements by the White House. Last night I was on air and saying maybe the limited nature of this and the decisiveness of the blow, at least what we thought last, last night in terms of the U.S. strikes would put, would make Iranian capabilities and motivation more limited.

We have a different atmosphere, even 24 hours later with the president talking about regime change and with a less determinative or conclusive strikes against Iranian capabilities. It means that Iran is likely to try something. And now the question is what?

It is less likely they will try something in the homeland. Their reach has never been great here. Hezbollah is eviscerated.

So we worry about two things. One is, of course, sleeper cells. People who had been organizing were sort of, you know, in the dark and now going to be activated. Or the second, as you said, is the lone wolf, the people who are animated by this, who get radicalized by this and then just go out.

Both of those are possibilities, but they are not, as I would say, not as high of a probability as the concern is that of, say, our troops or American interests abroad.

COLLINS: So, what do officials here in the United States do to monitor for that from the Department of Homeland Security? There were warnings from CPB earlier today about Iranian nationals who entered the country illegally, and concerns there. I mean, what does that look like if you're in a law enforcement position tonight? KAYYEM: So, there's going to be two big pieces of it. The first is, of

course, the FBI, which is going to be running through their Joint Terrorism Task Forces. You know, prior cases that that may have gone cold, concerns about people with ties to Hezbollah. Hezbollah has never had a successful terrorist attack in the United States. So, its reach isn't as strong. Hezbollah being the sort of, you know, terrorist wing of the Iranian regime.

So, they will go back and assess those -- anyone who may have been triggered by searches on travel behavior, meetings, signal intelligence, wiretaps, and drill down on where those people are, and even bring them in for questioning, if relevant.

[23:45:03]

So that will be the sort of specific investigation side. The larger sort of homeland side is going to be, of course, border issues related to not -- I wouldn't be as concerned about unlawful border crossings, but presumably lawful border crossings.

We do have a travel ban now on various parts of the country. So people won't be able to travel easily and that will be more that focus. I do have to say the Department of Homeland Security under this president has eviscerated. I mean, that's the best word I have for it.

The two areas that you would want to have ready now, the cybersecurity agency division within the Department of Homeland Security, and of course, its traditional foreign counterterrorism aspects. Both of those are either, you know, sort of skeletons of what they -- what they once were or also run by people who do not have the qualifications that you would want in a heightened threat environment right now because of that's because of the focus on the ICE and the ICE deportations.

So, DHS is going to have to reorient itself quickly if it can.

COLLINS: Juliette Kayyem, thank you for joining us tonight.

Up next here, a lot more as were continuing to follow the latest, including whether or not these strikes deter Iran from developing a nuclear weapon or whether it strengthens their resolve.

Stay with CNN. We'll be right back after a quick break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COLLINS: Back to our breaking news coverage this hour.

The aftermath of the United States unprecedented strike on Iran's nuclear facilities overnight. As were hearing from President Trump, who says its accurate, as he's quoting himself from last night, to say that those sites have been obliterated as a result of the strikes. Military experts say right now, it's still too early to tell just how much damage has been done and what the true aftermath of this is.

And as CNN's Matthew Chance explains, it may not change Iran's willingness to develop a nuclear weapon.

[23:50:03]

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MATTHEW CHANCE, CNN CHIEF GLOBAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): In the distance, a plume of black smoke billows into the sky.

The Iranian driver says it's above the Fordow nuclear site. This a first video from the aftermath of the U.S. attack, where latest satellite images show six large craters pointing to the use of powerful bunker busting bombs.

Same at Natanz, where two similar craters can be seen directly above parts of the underground uranium enrichment facility.

While at Isfahan, Iran's biggest nuclear site, at least 18 destroyed or partially destroyed buildings are visible. Western military sources say it's still too early for a full assessment.

But just minutes after the strikes, President Trump declared them a triumph.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success. Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated.

CHANCE: Even if that's true, it may not end the Iranian nuclear threat. Hardliners in Iran have long called for a nuclear weapon as a deterrent. Those voices have now been bolstered.

Iranian officials are already hinting at pulling out of a key nuclear treaty, the NPT, designed to prevent the global spread of nuclear weapons.

ABBAS ARAGHCHI, IRANIAN FOREIGN MINISTER: NPT is not able to protect us. So why a country like Iran or other countries who are interested to have a peaceful nuclear energy should rely on NPT?

CHANCE: One concern is the whereabouts of the nuclear material already enriched, some of it to 60 percent purity, close to weapons grade. Iranian state media says its nuclear sites and potentially the uranium inside were evacuated before the U.S. struck.

So, for now, Iran's enrichment facilities are smoldering and battered, but its capacity to go nuclear if it chooses, may still be intact.

Matthew Chance, CNN, London.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COLLINS: I want to get more now from Yaakov Katz. He is the senior columnist at "The Jerusalem Post" and a senior fellow at the Jewish People Policy Institute, and is joining me live now from Jerusalem. And it's great to have you here, just as were still assessing the

aftermath of this and a move that, you know, two weeks ago was not an active discussion inside the White House, whether or not the United States was going to strike Iran here, they were still very much pursuing a diplomatic path.

What's your sense of what this means for what Iran, a very weakened Iran does going forward here.

YAAKOV KATZ, SENIOR COLUMNIST, THE JERUSALEM POST: Well, Kaitlan, I mean, that's the big question, right? Iran does have the ability, as we just heard, if they really decide to, let's say, build the bomb in the basement, take some of that nuclear fuel, which, according to all reports, Israel and the United States don't exactly know what might have happened to some components or some parts of the already refined uranium. There was that satellite footage that showed trucks lining up outside the facility of Fordow that was destroyed by America early this morning -- early yesterday morning, Israel time.

But it could have been that some of that fuel was taken away and could be taken to some secret site that maybe none of us know about, and therefore that possibility of a country that really is determined and hard bent and resolved to obtain a nuclear weapon, it's going to be hard to stop them, even with the delay.

We only have two cases, really, in history of countries that have willingly dismantled their nuclear program. Libya, South Africa, but otherwise countries that really want it, they can plow forward. And therefore, there has to be some sort of other piece to this puzzle, the off ramp, either for definitely for Iran, maybe with the political resolution or some sort of new nuclear deal.

But I think that that's the big question that the Iranians are going to have to answer right now. They have witnessed history yesterday, a day that they probably never thought would happen when the U.S. got actively involved kinetically inside this war, they probably thought it was not going to happen. But it did happen.

And therefore, they now know that there is swift retaliation and fierce retaliation. If they were to maybe proceed even more.

COLLINS: We've been covering here in Washington the divide and the president's party over, over this decision to strike some critics saying it doesn't align with his America first platform and that essentially the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, convinced him to come along and join Israel's military campaign in Iran.

What's the sense in Israel tonight of that dynamic between the prime minister there and the U.S. president?

KATZ: Well, I think there's a lot of credit that's been given to the prime minister here for his ability to essentially convince the president and his national security team that this was the right move, not for Israel, Kaitlan. This was the right move for America.

[23:55:01] I think we really have to remember when the Iranians would walk down the streets and march and chant, "death to Israel" in the same breath, they would chant "death to America". But just as the president himself said, when American servicemen were fighting in Iraq, a thousand were killed, excuse me, because of the IEDs and the explosives and the weapons that were provided by Iran to the militias in Iraq. They were behind the 1983 bombings of the marine barracks in Beirut, the Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, and so much more.

And therefore, this is first and foremost a U.S. interest to stop a regime like this from getting its hands on the most lethal and deadly weapon known to man and while Israel definitely can enjoy the benefits of a weakened Iran and obliterated Iranian nuclear infrastructure, this makes the entire world, I think, safer.

But definitely a lot of credit to Prime Minister Netanyahu, to his strategic affairs minister, the former Israeli ambassador to the United States, Ron Dermer, who really worked hard to bring Trump and his team into the understanding that they had to do something.

COLLINS: And we saw Trump thanking Netanyahu last night. Netanyahu thanking the president today, which was remarkable to see as well.

Yaakov Katz in Jerusalem, great to have your insight into this. Thank you for joining.

KATZ: Thank you.

COLLINS: And I'm Kaitlan Collins. Thank you so much for joining us for our breaking news coverage this evening.

Much more. Stay with CNN. Much more of our coverage is coming up right after this.