Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

U.S. Assessing Damage to Iran's Three Nuclear Sites; President Trump Raise Regime Change on Iran; U.S. Attacks Will have Everlasting Consequences Says Iran; UNSC Calls for Restraint After U.S. Strikes on Iran, World Leaders Divided. President Trump Warns Iran Against Retaliation; Israel Launches Strikes On Iranian Military Infrastructure; U.S. Assessing Damage To Iran's Nuclear Sites After Strikes; Trump Suggests "Regime Change" Is Possible Iran. Aired 2-3a ET

Aired June 23, 2025 - 02:00   ET

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

[02:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECKY ANDERSON, CNN HOST: Well, hello and welcome to our viewers joining us from the United States and around the world. I'm Becky Anderson live from our Middle East programming headquarters here in Abu Dhabi. It is 10:00 a.m. here. It is 09:30 in Tehran, and it is 9:00 a.m. in Tel Aviv, Monday, the 23rd June. Here's what we know this hour. The Pentagon is trying to learn the extent of the damage to Iran's nuclear program after weekend U.S. strikes. The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff says it is way too early to determine if Iran still has nuclear capabilities.

But president Donald Trump wrote on Truth Social on Sunday that, quote, "monumental damage was done to all nuclear sites in Iran as shown by satellite images." Let's take a look at the new satellite images then. A CNN analysis found that the attack on Fordow left behind at least six large craters. They are likely from the US bunker buster bombs, which are designed to go deep underground before detonating.

And there is a dramatic difference in the before and after images from Isfahan, Iran's largest nuclear complex. That was hit by more than a dozen cruise missiles in the operation over the weekend. Well, CNN's Paula Hancock's with me here in Abu Dhabi. First, let's get you to Brian Todd in Washington. And, Brian, is it clear how long it'll take for this assessment and whether or not it will be ever clear, just, yeah, how much damage was done?

BRIAN TODD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Becky, it's going to take a little bit longer to assess the real damage done by these air strikes. That is what U.S. officials are projecting this morning. And what we can tell you, though, the messaging from the White House early this morning is one of pure confidence, and that confidence coming from the president himself, President Trump on Truth Social on Sunday evening posting this message, quote, "monumental damage was done to all nuclear sites in Iran as shown by satellite images. Obliteration is an accurate term," the president says.

He says, the white structure shown is deeply embedded in the rock with even its roof well below ground level and completely shielded from flame. The biggest damage took place far below ground level, then the president says, quote, "bull's eye," end quote. That imagery that the president refers to is on screen there, that what we've been showing the impact craters from the U.S. bombs and that white structure in the Fordow nuclear enrichment facility there in Iran.

We do have to say, though, that according to our colleague, Katie Bo Lillis, her reporting early this morning is that U.S. officials are saying that it is way too early, at least right now, to have a complete clear -- completely clear picture of the damage done to these three facilities as we've been mentioning, the Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan nuclear facilities in Iran.

The president also on Sunday night reflecting on the idea of regime change in Iran. President Trump posting on Truth Social this, quote, "It's not politically correct to use the term regime change, but if the current Iranian regime is unable to make Iran great again, why wouldn't there be a regime change?" And then he posted the phrase, MIGA for Make Iran Great Again.

Now, President Trump, we have to say, did not specifically say that the U.S. would enact regime change in Iran, and we should say that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told reporters on Sunday, quote, "This mission was not and has not been about regime change." Also, Vice President J.D. Vance said to NBC News, quote, "We don't want regime change." So that messaging, a little bit mixed there coming from President Trump and his top aides.

We can also tell you this morning that we have some new reporting on President Trump's misdirection with all of this. Our colleague, Kaitlan Collins, reporting that President Trump on Thursday issued a directive to his top aides to tell the media that he would make a decision on whether to strike Iran within two weeks. Now he's told -- he said to his aides on Thursday to tell the media that that he would make a decision in two weeks.

But according to sources familiar with what happened and our Kaitlan Collins reporting, this was a way to obscure the president's true thinking on the matter. Sources say that Trump's thinking was a two- week timeline that he would've put out there, could throw the Iranians off and conceal his plans.

But when the final call came on Saturday, according to Kaitlan Collins' reporting, and the bombers were already in the air, those around the president had had said that his mind, they believe that his mind had largely been made up for several days by that time. So, a little bit of misdirection there from the president according to our Kaitlan Collins. Becky?

[02:05:03]

ANDERSON: This is fascinating. Good to have you, sir. Thank you. Paula, all eyes then now on Iran's next move. Iran's foreign minister said Sunday, his country has a variety of options. One of those is possibly closing the Strait of Hormuz. Just explain where that is and why that threat could be significant.

PAULA HANCOCKS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: So, Becky, this is a fairly small body of water, which is crucial to the global trade routes, specifically for crude oil, for gas to be transported, between one area to the other. The estimate at the moment is that some 20 percent of crude oil passes through these waters. Its most narrow point is about 20 miles wide. This is not a large body of water.

To the north, you have Iran, which has territorial control over half of those waters. You have Oman, to the south as well. And this is something that Iran has threatened a few times in the past when there have been geopolitical, issues. They've never actually closed it completely. It would be very extreme for them to do that given the fact that it would have such a massive impact on the global economies, on the fact that the Brent crude oil price is significantly rising for fear of this happening.

And at the same time, it would actually hurt Iran because Iran wants its own crude oil to be transported around the world. More than 80 percent of what passes through the Strait Of Hormuz goes to Asian markets, specifically China, which is a key market. So it would be a significant move by Iran.

ANDERSON: And a significant impact for these Gulf countries exporting their LNG and oil as well, of course. So there is that damage to countries who have in the large, certainly the UAE and Saudi, of course, in the large been recalibrating their approach towards Iran of late and slightly closer. And it will be a real concern to those who use that straight. Good to have you.

Well, Iran then likely mulling its next move, of course. There are differences of opinion meantime about the outcome of the strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities. Even within the Trump administration itself, some top U.S. officials calling it a complete success, while others are more cautious in their assessment. Have a listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated.

PETE HEGSETH, U.S. DEFENSE SECRETARY: Iran's nuclear ambitions have been obliterated.

DAN CAINE, CHAIRMAN, JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF: Final battle damage will take some time, but initial battle damage assessments indicate that all three sites sustained extremely severe damage and destruction.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ANDERSON: Right. Let's get more from Jennifer Kavanagh, a senior fellow and director of military analysis at Defense Priorities. She joins me now live from Washington. You just heard Brian Todd reporting on Trump's assessment and we're starting to see the satellite images. Based on what we are seeing and hearing, what do you think the impact has been, and when will we get that full picture?

JENNIFER KAVANAGH, SENIOR FELLOW & DIRECTOR OF MILITARY ANALYSIS, DEFENSE PRIORITIES: Well, it will be sometime before we know for sure how much those underground facilities were damaged and what remains usable and accessible and what has been fully destroyed, as the president has indicated. But I think the bigger concern here is not the facilities themselves, but Iran stockpiles of highly enriched uranium, which the administration has admitted they do not know where those are.

They've likely been moved and scattered around the country, as well as, components for centrifuges, which the United States and the international community does not have full transparency on. So the building blocks of Iran's nuclear program remain intact regardless of what happens to the facilities in the U.S. strikes over the weekend.

ANDERSON: Got an animation of how this all unfolded. The B-2s flight was around the world. And we heard more from the Joint Chiefs of Staff like yesterday. Can you just explain how this military operation unfolded as we understand it?

KAVANAGH: Well, as we understand that there were a large number of U.S. aircraft that were involved, some of the B-2 bombers took off directly from the United States and flew to the Middle East. Others flew towards the Pacific. The ones that flew towards the Pacific were telegraphed. Observers were aware that these were on their way. The ones flying to the Middle East were undetected.

[02:09:58]

So the aircraft flying to the Pacific were a distraction, intended to suggest that the U.S. was moving aircraft into the position but was not ready to strike.

Meanwhile, the actual strike that was occurring was already well underway. According to the Department of Defense, the U.S. aircraft that dropped these bombs did not experience any sort of fire from Iranian sources, so they were also undetected by Iran. And some of the missiles, the cruise missiles were launched by submarine, and those were also -- so that's another piece of that -- this attack.

So there were lots of moving pieces that came together successfully for the operation to proceed as planned. Again, the tactical success of the operation, though, doesn't necessarily translate into strategic success of achieving President Trump's real goal here, which is to end Iran's pathway to a nuclear weapon.

ANDERSON: People here in this region of the Gulf, where I am, the Gulf region are, you know, have raised concerns about radiation and environmental impact that could really impact everyday life here. Should these facilities be very badly hit? In terms of Fordow, here's how the head of the IE described it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) RAFAEL GROSSI, DIRECTOR GENERAL, INTERNATIONAL ACTOMIC ENERGY AGENCY: Craters are visible at the Fordow site, Iran's main location for enriching uranium at 60 percent indicating the use by the United States Of America of ground penetrating munitions. This is consistent with statements from the United States. At this time, at this time, no one including the IAEA is in a position to assess the underground damage at Fordow.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ANDERSON: He said radiation levels, though, are normal for now. That is what they assess above ground. I just wonder, how do military strategists approach this risk?

KAVANAGH: Well, anytime you're striking targets where there could be nuclear material, there's the risk of radioactive spill that affects the environment, surrounding water, the air, et cetera. In this case, it has been assessed that there is no increase in radiation levels. I mean, that's really consistent with this suspicion that Iran has moved those stockpiles of highly enriched uranium out of these facilities, and has now hidden them elsewhere.

If that radioactive material is no longer there, then strikes on these targets, would have a much lower risk of causing any sort of radioactive spill. But it's certainly something to keep an eye on. If the leakage is underground, it could take some time to be detected.

ANDERSON: And very briefly, Jennifer, there are three targets that the U.S. has been after and the Israelis have mostly been after. That is Fordow, of course, and Natanz and Isfahan. There is a nuclear reactor on the West Coast, which is opposite the Gulf Region at Bushehr. Now as we understand it from the IDF, there have been strikes on the city of Bushehr. No indication as of yet that the nuclear facility there has been struck. How big a deal would that be?

KAVANAGH: That would be a much bigger deal because that is above ground and there would be a significant risk of radioactive spill, especially into nearby waters. So, that is something definitely to watch. The United States did not strike that target. There was never any discussion about striking that target. But, you know, Israel so far has operated -- has been willing to take on a significant amount of risk. And so I think if any actor were to strike that target, it would be the IDF and not The United States.

ANDERSON: Jennifer, good to have you. Thank you. Iranian (inaudible) speaking out following the U.S. strikes. CNN's Fred Pleitgen heard from some of them as he took to the streets to see what life looks like now for those in Tehran. Have a look at this.

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.

[02:15:04]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UKNONWN (through translation): 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.

UNKNOWN (through translation): 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.

UNKNOWN (through translation): 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.

UNKNOWN (through translation): 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.

PLEITGEN: 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.

ANDERSON: Well, much more to come in our breaking news coverage for you here on CNN, including reaction from members of the U.N. Security Council at an emergency meeting Sunday in the wake of those strikes. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[02:20:00]

ANDERSON: Welcome back. You're watching CNN and our breaking news. U.N. Security Council met Sunday to discuss the U.S. strikes on Iran. Three council members, Russia, China, and Pakistan have proposed a resolution calling for an immediate end to the conflict. The council also heard from the ambassadors of both Iran and Israel. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

AMIR-SAEID IRAVANI, IRANIAN AMBASSADOR TO THE U.N.: The timing, nature, and the scale of Iran's proportionate response will be decided by its armed forces. Through our history, the resilient and united Iranian nation has withstood deeper wounded and faced more vicious enemies, and this time too. It will show its dignity, strength, and greatness to the world.

DANNU DANON, ISRAELI AMBASSADOR TO THE U.N.: To those who now fake concern and cry escalation, we say, this is what the last line of defense looks like, with every other line has failed. Make no mistake, the cost of inaction would have been catastrophic. A nuclear Iran would have been a death sentence just as much for you as it would have been for us.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ANDERSON: While the U.N. chief told the Security Council that the U.S. bombing of the sites marks a, quote, "perilous turn" and the, quote, "diplomacy must prevail." Well, Gershon Baskin joins me now from Jerusalem. He's a former hostage negotiator and Middle East director for the International Communities Organization. And Antonio Guterres went on to say the region cannot endure another cycle of destruction. Do you think that criticism in the Security Council will impact Israel's next steps at all?

GERSHON BASKIN, FORMER HOSTAGE NEGOTIATOR: I don't think it will impact Israel's next steps, although I think that Israel now needs to find a diplomatic way to end the war. There must be some kind of agreement reached negotiated with the participation of the direct lead of the United States. This war could become a war of ongoing, unending bombing between Israel and Iran, and that's not going to serve the interest of either side here.

And this war needs to end, the war in Gaza needs to end. We need to have diplomatic solutions because there are no military solutions here. This conflict needs to be brought to an end, and it has to be done through diplomacy.

ANDERSON: Any evidence you see to date that suggests that there is a short term conclusion to this and that we aren't faced with a war of attrition at this point that many fear in this region?

BASKIN: Well, it looks like a war of attrition, but President Trump did say that now we need to move to peace. We need to move to negotiations. Last night, Iran only sent one missile over to Israel that hit somewhere in the north. It was shut down by Israel. There could have been a massive barrage of missiles by Iran in retaliation for the American strike. It might be entering into a period of what the Israelis call quiet, will get quiet. We don't really know to what extent. Israel has been continuing its bombing in Iran this morning.

That might be a be a way of winding down if it is a quiet -- (inaudible) quiet and enabling the diplomats to get to work to find out some kind of solution that would put an end to the war. ANDERSON: Iran expert, Trita Parsi, pointing out that Israel pushing

the U.S. administration closer to its views. This is certainly his perspective saying, Trump allowed the Israelis to push him into zero enrichment, then Israeli strikes, then American strikes, and now regime change. The view of Trita Parsi, you know, all about sensitive negotiations.

[02:24:54]

If regime change did become a firmer goal, how much more difficult would that make a return to the negotiating table, which the U.S., certainly, the U.S. president, his defense secretary has said is still the goal?

BASKIN: Right. Well, the Israelis have not stated that that's the goal, and it's good that they haven't stated it outwardly even though if many Israelis are thinking about regime change. If regime change is on the agenda and it's explicit by Israel, there is no path to negotiations. Why should the Iranian regime negotiate at a time when Israel is trying to bring about a regime change?

It should be noted that, Yossi Cohen, the former head of the Mossad, someone who's deeply involved in the Iranian issue, did say on Israeli television last night that he believes that Israel needs to push for regime change together with the United States. But so far, that has not been the steady policy, not of The United States nor of Israel. And that's probably the only way we could move forward toward renegotiated end to this war.

ANDERSON: The special adviser to the UAE president who I spoke to last week said this to me, quote, "the region cannot live with a war that will just go on and the sort of blow by blow actions that we see every day." He said geostrategic shift has already taken place and, quote, "I think any extended confrontation of war between Israel and Iran will only bring very difficult aftermath." Your thoughts on --

BASKIN: I think here's the (inaudible) --

ANDERSON: -- a mark-up (ph) actions words there.

BASKIN: A 100 percent correct. We have the danger of this war continues to escalation that would bring in other players in the region, Russia, China, perhaps others. From an Israeli perspective, this war is costing the economy about $300 million a day. It's certainly something that Israel cannot afford.

It will increase in the risks to investors in Israel, which will shy investors from coming to Israel, investing in new companies. The credit rating of Israel will worsen, which will make taking loans more difficult for Israel. We are bankrupting the company -- the country right now and forcing our grandchildren to be -- to pay the debt for this war right now.

So, for a lot of reasons, it needs to come to an end. There is no benefit to continuing the war right now. If in fact, the United States took out the major nuclear threat from Iran, then what we need to do is move forward to ending the war and finding some way of reaching normalization in the region, which also has to focus again on the Palestinian issue.

ANDERSON: It's good to have you, Gershon. Thank you. That assessment, then on damage wrought to that nuclear program by these U.S. strikes is ongoing.

Well, Israel continues to target sites in Iran after the U.S. launched those strikes over the weekend. A closer look at what all this could mean for the region is just ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[02:31:20]

ANDERSON: Welcome back. I'm Becky Anderson, live from our Middle East headquarters here in Abu Dhabi.

Israel says it has launched new airstrikes targeting military infrastructure in western Iran. Iranian state media says a military complex southeast of Tehran was also targeted.

Now, this comes after Iran launched its own strikes on Monday, firing a missile that was intercepted by Israel's air defenses. All this, of course, playing out as the U.S. assesses damage to Iran's nuclear sites following its weekend strikes.

CNN analysis of these images found that the attack on Fordow left behind at least six large craters, and these show damage at Isfahan, Iran's largest nuclear complex, and an assessment by the Institute for Science and International Security says that the complex was heavily damaged.

Well, President Trump now appears to be changing his stance on a possible regime change in Iran, suggesting a social media post on Sunday that it might help, quote, make Iran great again.

Our senior White House correspondent, Kristen Holmes, has more.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: President Donald Trump now talking about a potential regime change in Iran. Now, this was something that most members of his administration had shied away from.

President Trump posting this on Truth Social, saying it is not politically correct to use the term regime change. But if the current Iranian regime is unable to make Iran great again, why wouldn't there be a regime change? And then he wrote MIGA, a play on MAGA, "Make Iran Great Again".

The important point to look at here is the fact that we have been talking to the administration a lot about whether or not they supported a regime change. On Thursday, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt was asked directly about this. She sidestepped the question, saying there was no focus on a regime change at this time. This was all about not letting Iran develop a nuclear weapon.

Now, even earlier in the day before President Trump posted this, Vice President J.D. Vance was asked about the same topic and he said there was no consideration of this. Take a listen.

J.D. VANCE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Our view has been very clear that we don't want a regime change. We do not want to protract this or build this out any more than it's already been built out.

HOLMES: And he was again one of a number of officials who said that that was the current Trump administrations stance. Obviously, now we have President Trump throwing a wrench into that, stating that he might be supportive of an Iranian regime change.

Now, one thing to keep in mind here is that President Trump is still looking for some kind of diplomatic solution, and whether or not he believes saying that he would support a regime change is something he thinks could bring the Iranians to the table. That, of course, remains to be seen.

But the really interesting part of all of this is that the reason we have been asking so much about this to the Trump administration was because we had learned from Israeli officials that while it might not be the direct hope for the war, it was certainly an indirect hope for the Israelis that they would come out of this with a regime change in Iran. And now the question is whether or not Trump truly agrees with that.

Kristen Holmes, CNN, the White House.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ANDERSON: Well, joining us now from Cairo is H.A. Hellyer, senior associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute for Defense and Security Studies.

Excuse me, sir. It's good to have you.

You're quoted in a "Washington Post" piece, H.A., entitled "Arab states fear they'll pay a price if strikes on Iran prompt a wider war". And you say, I think the overwhelming feeling is one of there's a pyromaniac in the room, and we want the firemen to come and put out the fire, and instead they're just adding more fire.

[02:35:04]

Just explain your assessment of the U.S. role here.

H.A. HELLYER, SENIOR ASSOCIATE FELLOW, ROYAL UNITED SERVICES INSTITUTE: Well, thank you for having me on, Becky. Always a pleasure to be on the program.

So, the -- I think the overwhelming feeling towards Iran within the region is one of cynicism. There's one of suspicion, but there's also one of we have to figure out a way to incorporate Iran into a wider sort of regional architecture. So, if you remember when the JCPOA was signed, there were quite loud voices from at least two governments in the region, particularly in the GCC, that were not particularly impressed with it. And were keen for it to be canceled.

This time around, it's extremely different. I think this time around, you saw a pretty much the entirety of the region be quite enthusiastic about the pursuing of negotiations, getting into a nuclear deal because they saw that as a way to deescalate things in the region, more generally and there wasn't any of this sort of activity trying to get the U.S. to back away.

The exception in this regard was the state of Israel. Everybody else was completely, I think, on the same page with more or less cynicism about the Iranian regime, but certainly not wanting conflict or escalation, where the last 20 months of war against Gaza, including another set of invasions with regards to Lebanon and Syria and occupation of Syrian and Lebanese territory, they really cemented the image of Israel being the main destabilizing force in the region, which is extraordinary when you consider where some of these other countries were in comparison to where they are now.

And when Iran went, went and bombed -- sorry, when Israel went and bombed Iran. I think what you had was the hope that the U.S. would finally sort of step in to hold back the Israelis. Remember, the Israelis never would have gone into Iran if there had been a red light from the United States. I'm not saying there was necessarily a green light from the first day, but there was definitely no red light, and there should have been a red light as far as these states are concerned.

And when they saw the United States drop this massive piece of ordnance on Iran a couple of days ago, I think there was this overwhelming feeling of, you know, there is no check on this escalation. On the contrary, where we thought where we hoped that the check might come from has actually contributed to the escalation itself.

ANDERSON: I mean, there's -- as Iran mulls its options at this point, the country's army commander in a video just released warning that there will be a strong response. And this mirrors what were hearing from other officials from the country, not least the foreign minister who spoke in -- in Turkey yesterday.

And while we wait to see what that looks like, there is much talk about what Iran's options are at this point. And that talk very much sort of consuming many in these Gulf Arab states as they consider what they can try to do to control the situation.

What are the options at this point?

HELLYER: So, the Iranians don't have many options, and these Gulf states don't have many options. So, on the gulf state side, I think they've tried to reassure Tehran multiple times that they want the deal, that they wanted the deal that they didn't want escalation, that they don't want a part in this war, that they're opposed to this war. And they've been pretty public about that as well as in private. So I think that they've done everything they can do in that regard.

The Iranians are also on a tactical level and a strategic level in a very poor position. If they attack any American assets that are in these Gulf states, then two things are very likely. One, the stance of these Gulf states could change and become more anti-Iranian, as opposed to what they are right now. And I don't think that's going to help the Iranian position, which is already extremely isolated.

When the Assad regime fell, that was the main sort of state ally in the region. Hezbollah has been tremendously weakened. Really, all that's left are the Houthis in Yemen and Iraqi militias that are aligned with Iran.

[02:40:05]

But that's it. You know, there aren't states and there aren't powerful actors in this regard that they can count on. The other thing that I think has to be kept in mind is that if the Iranians don't respond in some way and there are other things that they can do other than target American assets in these gulf states. But that's obviously the thing that people are most worried about.

But if they don't do something, then I think that they stand the risk of facing challenges from within the regime itself, where you'll have these even more hard line sort of figures argue, you know, what's the point of the of the Iranian revolution if we do not respond to this sort of wanton aggression, et cetera.

And I don't think that they can be underestimated in this regard. They prioritize regime continuity and survival, I think, above all else. So doing nothing carries risks. Doing something carries risks as well.

They have very narrow sets of options here, but we -- I think we will see what they're going to do pretty soon. I think we're going to see a mixture of things that will happen quite quickly, and then other things that will go forward over many years, frankly.

And I think about what happened after the killing of Qasem Soleimani of the IRGC some years ago during Trump one. There was an immediate reaction, but it wasn't all that much. And then there was a much more extended one.

I don't think it will be the same this time around in terms of the immediate reaction not being something we can really, really notice. But certainly, I don't expect this -- this reprisal, as it were, to be something that we measure on the in the space of days.

ANDERSON: No, I think -- I think you're making some very, very good points here.

H.A., always good to have you here. H.A. Hellyer, thank you.

Well, still ahead a look at what protesters in the U.S. are saying about the U.S. strikes on Iran. These demonstrations, up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [02:45:24]

ANDERSON: We're seeing from anti-war protests that have been organized across the U.S. following President Donald Trump's strikes on Iran, demonstrators from New York to L.A. hit the streets, urging the White House to stay out of the conflict. Protesters also called out the growing concerns over a possible global war.

And demonstrations, too, around the globe, protesting the U.S. involvement in the Israel-Iran conflict, as world leaders look to try and defuse rising tensions.

CNN's Larry Meadow brings us the very latest.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

LARRY MADOWO, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Protesters burn a joint effigy of U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the eastern Indian city of Kolkata as the world reacted to the U.S. military strikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities that the U.N. secretary general called a dangerous escalation that could get out of control.

(CHANTING)

MADOWO: In Tokyo, pro-Palestinian demonstrators branded the attacks a war crime. Japan's prime minister called for a de-escalation but said that Iran's nuclear weapons development must be stopped.

It's not enough for some protesters.

MYOKO HIDAKA, PROTESTER: The Japanese government should be criticizing the U.S. and Israel much more strongly. Japan is, after all, the only country in the world to have suffered atomic bombings. So, we really need to understand the horror of nuclear weapons more deeply and to make the world aware of it.

MADOWO: Pope Leo XIV appealed for peace in his Sunday angelus prayer.

POPE LEO XIV, CATHOLIC CHURCH: Every member of the international community has a moral responsibility to stop the tragedy of war before it becomes an irreparable abyss. There are no distant conflicts when human dignity is at stake.

MADOWO: Many European leaders did not explicitly condemn the U.S. strikes on Saturday, but asked Iran to return to the negotiating table.

KEIR STARMER, BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: Well, we've long had concerns about the Iranian nuclear program and been very clear that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. The U.S. has now taken action to alleviate that threat. It is important that we now de-escalate the situation, stabilize the region and get the parties back around the table to negotiate.

MADOWO: The Iranian foreign minister said he was heading to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin on Monday, describing Russia as a friend of Iran. Russia had condemned the U.S. strikes, calling them irresponsible and a violation of international law, and that echoed comments we saw from several Arab states that castigated the U.S. for violating the sovereignty of Iran. Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Oman and the United Arab Emirates all called for de-escalation, warning of serious consequences if war broke out in the region.

Larry Madowo, CNN, London.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ANDERSON: Well, still to come, a check on oil prices, as we continue to assess what is going on and what might happen next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[02:52:34]

ANDERSON: Well, oil prices are on the rise as investors react to these U.S. airstrikes on Iran. U.S. oil futures have jumped almost 2 percent, trading near $75 on the barrel, and the global benchmark, Brent crude, seeing a similar spike now around $78, just above at this point, as we speak.

Economists are concerned that Iran could close the Strait of Hormuz in retaliation for these strikes, potentially disrupting a significant chunk of the oil and gas that flows through that very strategic waterway from these Gulf nations, including, of course, Iran. Well, as tensions escalate between Israel and Iran, the situation has made life hazardous for residents caught in the crossfire.

Here's the moment when our CNN crew, for example, in Tel Aviv, had to evacuate to a nearby shelter during a live report amid warnings of potential Iranian strikes in the area.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, "AC360": All right. I think we're going to head down to the shelters. Chuck, do we have capabilities as we go down?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Just checking your microphones. Be ready in a second. Okay. Here we go.

COOPER: All right.

Let's see if we can switch over. So, is this actually working? Okay.

I'm not sure. Oh, good. Here.

CLARISSA WARD, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: What's your microphone?

COOPER: Okay, I think its good.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Bring your IFB box. Bring your IFB box. Just unplug it.

(INAUDIBLE)

WARD: Should we all go?

COOPER: Yeah, I think we should all go down.

So, the -- again, you can hear the sirens going off. This is from the hotel. They're warning all the hotel guests to go down.

ANNOUNCER: -- we expect that over the next ten minutes. Please prepare to stay --

COOPER: This is the first time today that we have had an alarm like this. It's obviously something that many here in Tel Aviv have gotten used to over the last 10 or 11 days since this began. We saw one -- there was one alarm shortly after, several hours after the first strike. The strikes on Iran by the United States.

[02:55:02]

This is the first one we've had this morning. Hey. So, I'm just going to go down here. So and. Here with Jeremy Diamond.

So, the -- in terms of the -- this is the first one today, isn't it?

WARD: It's the first one -- not today. Because 7:00 in the morning was the last one. I think we're all a little bit upside down. Oh, we're at 3:00 a.m., yes.

So, it is the first one of the day. But what we've noticed, I think, is fewer barrages but quite high intensity, particularly this morning.

I mean, Jeremy, you were there on the scene. The damage was --

JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN JERUSALEM CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. I mean, there's also been reports that the Iranians have been using different types of ballistic missiles. Some reports of cluster munition use as well. And we've seen the kind of impact that that can have on the scene today. I was at a site in the north of Tel Aviv, in Ramat Aviv, where you saw a residential block that was almost completely obliterated by the power of that -- of that blast.

COOPER: Guys got to press down in the basement, please.

DIAMOND: You know, the damage is enormous. More of these ballistic missiles that are indeed getting through those air defense systems. But, you know, quite incredibly, we haven't seen any fatalities in, I believe, a week now. Right?

The last Monday morning was the last time we saw fatality. That's, of course, a credit to the aerial defense systems. But more importantly, perhaps to the early warnings that are getting us into bomb shelters and getting millions of other Israelis.

(END VIDEO CLIP) ANDERSON: Right. My colleagues there in Tel Aviv.

All right. I'm Becky Anderson in Abu Dhabi. Our breaking news coverage continues after this break right here on CNN. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)