Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Sources: About Half Of Iran's Missile Launchers Left Intact, Thousands Of Attack Drones Remain, According To U.S. Intel; U.K. Hosts Virtual Meeting On Reopening Strait Of Hormuz; New Troops Of Expanded Foreign Force In Haiti To Fight Gangs; Trump Presses Ahead With Conflict With No Clear Endgame; Loyalist-Stacked Commission Approves Trump's Ballroom; Artemis II Leaves Earth's Orbit On Journey To Moon. Aired 2-3a ET

Aired April 03, 2026 - 02:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[02:00:57]

KIM BRUNHUBER, CNN ANCHOR: Welcome to all of you watching us around the world. I'm Kim Brunhuber. This is CNN Newsroom.

New U.S. intelligence reveals Iran still has plenty of missile- launching capabilities more than a month into the war as more than 40 countries gather to press Tehran to open the Strait of Hormuz.

The U.N. deploys its first foreign troops to Haiti as gangs control parts of the island. We'll speak to an independent journalist in Haiti about the escalating violence.

And as four astronauts embark on a historic trip around the Moon, the latest on the first of its kind mission.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Live from Atlanta, this is CNN Newsroom with Kim Brunhuber.

BRUNHUBER: We begin with exclusive CNN reporting about the extent of the damage to Iran's military capability. Three sources tell CNN that roughly half of Iran's missile launchers are still intact despite the daily attacks by the U.S. and Israeli military. That's according to recent U.S. intelligence assessments.

Thousands of one-way attack drones also remain in Iran's arsenal. One source says Iran is still very much poised to wreak absolute havoc throughout the entire region. A Pentagon spokesperson calls CNN's reporting completely wrong.

Meanwhile, Iran is reporting at least eight people are dead and 95 injured in a U.S.-Israeli strike on a bridge west of Tehran. President Trump on social media says the U.S. military hasn't even started destroying what's left in Iran.

And the U.N. Security Council is set to vote in the coming hours on a proposal from Bahrain that would authorize countries to use all defensive means necessary to secure transit through the Strait of Hormuz.

CNN's Eleni Giokos is live this hour in Dubai, but I want to begin with Paula Hancocks in Abu Dhabi. Paula, what's the latest?

PAULA HANCOCKS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Kim, we'll start off with the U.S. intelligence assessments. This is coming to us from three different sources and it paints a different picture to what we're hearing from the Trump administration as to how degraded Iran's capability is at this point.

Now, according to these sources, they say that roughly half of Iran's missile launchers are still intact, also saying that about 50 percent of the drones, the one-way drones, are also still in their arsenal. They also pointed out that a large percentage of the coastal defense ballistic missiles are also, excuse me, cruise missiles, are also still intact.

Now, this is different to what we've been hearing from President Trump, for example, on Wednesday, talking about how degraded the military capability of Iran was, saying weapons factories and rocket launchers had been blown to pieces and there are very few of them left.

Now, we've also heard from the White House. We took this reporting to them, and they reiterated what we've been hearing from the Secretary of Defense, that the number of drone and missile attacks are down 90 percent since the first days of the war, which does raise the question as to whether Iran is holding back a certain arsenal in it's -- that it has as a capability at this point.

We also heard from a Pentagon spokesperson saying the report is completely wrong. But it is a U.S. intelligence assessment, according to these sources, that was compiled in recent days. Now, also we heard from the U.S. Central Command about what they have achieved up until this point militarily. They say that the U.S. has struck more than 12,300 targets inside Iran. That is as of Wednesday.

Now, we also saw that a bridge just about 25 miles, 40 kilometers west of Tehran was targeted, that has been struck. Now, this is an incident in which eight people were killed, according to state media, and some 95 were injured. It's a bridge that was in the process of being built to connect Tehran to the city of Karaj. And it's an image as well that the U.S. President posted on his social media saying much more to follow.

[02:05:18]

Now, when it comes to Iran's retaliation around the region overnight, we have seen Kuwait being struck once more. This is the oil facility, the Mina al-Ahmadi refinery, again being targeted by Iran. We understand from officials there that it has sparked fires, no casualties.

But it just shows that the capability of Iran to be able to fire back at its neighboring countries is still very much intact, and, of course, interesting when coupled and considered with the context of the U.S. intelligence assessments. Kim?

BRUNHUBER: Thank you Paula. I want to turn to Eleni now. You've been monitoring the effects from all of this on the oil markets. What are you seeing?

ELENI GIOKOS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Brent crude is sitting at $109 a barrel. That's the international benchmark for oil. And then the U.S. benchmark is sitting at $112 a barrel. That's WTI. You don't normally see WTI trading above Brent crude, but it's indicative of a couple of things. But most importantly, it's the tightness in the oil markets at a global level, Kim.

And, of course, it really just has to do with the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. I want to talk about Bahrain and this resolution at the U.N. Security Council. There will be a vote today. And what it will include is that countries will be allowed to use all defensive means necessary to secure transit through the Strait.

This is going to be very important to the extent that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has spoken with Vladimir Putin to ensure Russia doesn't block this resolution. And we're also hearing that there will be a conversation with Chinese officials so that China doesn't block this either.

It will last for around six months. They'll do a quarterly check-in. And what it includes is basically countries can act individually or through voluntary multinational naval partnerships. And they will be notifying the U.N. Security Council as well. So this is really important. But I also want to bring you, you know, a little bit of information in terms of the overall scenarios that could be playing out.

According to Oxford Economics, the base case scenario is that Brent crude prices are going to hit around $113 a barrel, that the Strait of Hormuz is going to continue to remain closed until the end of April. And then it will slowly start ticking up to 50 percent capacity over the next two months. It will take six months to get to full capacity.

And then you've got a prolonged war scenario that they've activated. And they say that means Brent crude prices at $150 a barrel and global inflation will hit 7.7 percent. So really this pertains to the opening up of the Strait of Hormuz that's causing this economic pain, Kim.

And a lot of talk now, it seems, on the diplomatic fronts to find some kind of way forward. It's also alleged, and we heard from an Iranian official that spoke to CNN, there could be some kind of Iranian-Omani partnership mechanism to try and secure the Strait of Hormuz. But remembering that Iran, for now, has de facto control.

BRUNHUBER: All right. I want to thank both of you, Paula Hancocks in Abu Dhabi and Eleni Giokos in Dubai. Thanks so much.

More than 40 countries are vowing to use every possible measure to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. The British foreign secretary hosted a virtual meeting about the vital shipping route, which has been effectively shut down by Iran since the start of the war. She says options include sanctions on Tehran and diplomatic pressure issues.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

YVETTE COOPER, BRITISH FOREIGN SECRETARY: But now that we are facing these reckless Iranian attacks on international shipping affecting countries from across the globe who played no part in this conflict, and more than 40 countries coming together for these discussions today, we're clear that we need the diplomatic pressure, the economic pressure, and also the work that's being done separately by military planners on how to keep shipping safe for the long term when the conflict concludes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BRUNHUBER: As we heard, about 20 percent of the world's oil passes through the Strait and currently about 2,000 vessels are trapped inside the Persian Gulf.

I want to bring in European Affairs commentator Dominic Thomas, who joins us now from Los Angeles. Good to see you again. Appreciate it. So we've got all these countries coming together for this meeting on the Strait of Hormuz. The U.S. isn't at the table. I mean, what does it tell you that Europe is organizing this kind of coalition without Washington?

DOMINIC THOMAS, EUROPEAN AFFAIRS COMMENTATOR: Well, as we've been following in recent weeks, Kim, they've come under constant threats, attack, and so on from the Trump administration, whether it had to do with tariffs or whether it had to do with NATO involvement and so on. I think what's really indicative of this coming together here, the fact that there are so many gathered around the table, is that no single nation wants to be picked out by President Trump and no one wants to get embroiled alone in a long-standing conflict in the Middle East.

[02:10:20]

So the fact that they're coming together here as a strategic partnership allows them, with a much stronger voice and much larger group of people to ultimately stand up to President Trump and ultimately get him to try and listen to some of their advice, rather than him proceeding unilaterally, as he has been doing, Kim.

BRUNHUBER: Yes, might be a tough road to try and change that. Given what you said, I mean, do you see any scenario where the U.S. and this European-led coalition actually end up working together on Hormuz?

THOMAS: Well, they've been trying to, as time goes on. The problem is that President Trump, not just at home politically, but in the international sphere, expects alignment and compliance. And for these leaders who are, first of all, were not consulted in the first place, but ultimately that is secondary in this situation, is they are not interested in regime change.

They're not interested in being embroiled in the conflict in the Middle East. And their own electorates are not supporting this, particularly in the European context, where after several years of war between Russia and Ukraine has proved extraordinarily disruptive. So they've been trying to participate.

They've increased spending and contributions to NATO. The problem is that nobody really can fully understand the justification for this conflict, the motivations of President Trump, or for that matter, what ultimately he sees as the end game in a situation that is unfolding and that is bringing in further and more stakeholders in this particular conflict. So there's so much uncertainty and unpredictability here.

And I think that by consulting extensively, they're trying to influence President Trump and have him ultimately listen to them, which is something he's been unwilling to do thus far.

BRUNHUBER: Yes, exactly right. And you mentioned President Trump's attacks on NATO. I mean, he keeps threatening to pull out Macron. French President Emmanuel Macron responded pretty directly that creating doubt about the U.S. commitment hollows the alliance out. So how much damage do these threats do, even if Trump never actually follows through?

THOMAS: Every single time he undermines the NATO alliance, whether it's threatening members, including, let's not forget, the country of Denmark, and of course, Greenland, NATO members under military protection of NATO and of course, Denmark. This undermines, it weakens the NATO coalition and the ultimate beneficiary of that is, of course, Russia.

And this is what is so problematic for these particular leaders, particularly on the heels of this long-standing conflict between Ukraine and Russia. This is further distraction.

Ultimately, as we know, safeguards have been put in place to try and block a kind of unilateral decision by the U.S. President to withdraw from NATO. But at the end of the day, whether it requires congressional approval or not, these individuals that held a majority now, the Republicans in Congress and so on, have been enabling him as time has gone on.

So they know that the threat is credible, but it would be absolutely extraordinary that in this World War II multilateral environment, that this President would continue to undermine those particular goals and to move ultimately towards this kind of unilateral -- this unilateral role that is President Trump's foreign policy fantasy.

But as we can see here with the situation that he single-handedly has created with Iran here, it is bringing into the fold a kind of global coalition, but it's also a coalition that is impacted by this economically, politically, and of course, militarily, Kim.

BRUNHUBER: Yes. We'll leave it there, but always appreciate your analysis, Dominic Thomas. Thank you so much.

THOMAS: Thank you. BRUNHUBER: U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has told the Army's Chief of Staff to retire immediately. General Randy George held the position since September of 2023. He previously served as the senior military assistant to former Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin. Experts say General George's ties to the Biden administration didn't sit well with Hegseth, who has already positioned one of his top deputies to fill the role.

[02:15:06]

And another shakeup in Donald Trump's cabinet. Pam Bondi is out as U.S. Attorney General. The U.S. President posted that his loyal friend did a tremendous job overseeing the massive crackdown on crime and will be transitioning to a much-needed and important new job in the private sector. Now, he didn't reveal what that was. Bondi's deputy and President Trump's former personal attorney Todd Blanche will lead the Justice Department for now.

Bondi issued her own upbeat response, saying she'll continue fighting for the Trump administration and her service as Attorney General was the honor of a lifetime. It's believed President Trump soured on Bondi for failing to go after enough of his political enemies and over her handling of the Epstein files.

Once the crisis in Haiti escalates, new multinational troops have arrived in the capital to help fight violent gangs and get the latest from an independent journalist who's there covering the story. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[02:20:30]

BRUNHUBER: Hundreds of Cubans have been gathering in the capital Havana to protest the energy crisis and the U.S. embargo. The bikers, roller skaters, and rickshaws rolled past the U.S. Embassy. This anti- imperialist rally earned applause from the Cuban president. Cuba's struggling with rolling blackouts and even collapses of the power grid after the U.S. imposed a fuel blockade several months ago. President Trump has demanded the Cuban government open its economy and institute reforms.

First troops of an expanded multinational force known as the Gang Suppression Force arrived in Haiti this week. They're backed by the U.S. and the U.N. They're expected to combat violent gangs which have terrorized the Caribbean nation for decades. In the days ahead of the troops arrival, the gangs have stepped up their attacks. Right groups say dozens of people have been killed and thousands have been forced to flee their homes. A new U.N. report says at least 26 gangs control vital supply routes and have brought the Haitian capital of Port-au- Prince to a standstill. The new force replaces the Kenyan-led multinational security support mission which ended last year.

I want to bring in Harold Isaac, an independent journalist in Haiti. Appreciate you joining us here early this morning there in Haiti. This past weekend we saw what human rights groups are calling a massacre, around 70 people killed. Can you walk us through what happened?

HAROLD ISAAC, INDEPENDENT JOURNALIST IN HAITI: Well, it's a turf war really between rival gangs in the breadbasket of Haiti in the Artibonite region, especially in two villages, Jean-Denis and Pont- Sonde, where essentially these rival gangs have been clashing against each other and waging terror against the civilian population.

BRUNHUBER: Yes, I mean you've been reporting from Haiti for years and you've seen all the violence happening in the capital of Port-au- Prince, but one thing that's striking about these latest attacks, as you said, they're in the breadbasket in Haiti's main farming region. I mean, what does it tell us that the violence is now spreading into areas like that?

ISAAC: Well, the crisis, the gang crisis here in Haiti is really complex and has been so for the past few years. What we're seeing right now is pretty much kind of the exit road or ramp of the gangs fleeing the capital where they've been really challenged in the past few months and as such they are going for softer targets if we could say in the heartland of Haiti.

BRUNHUBER: We've seen reports of communities forming their own self- defense brigades because they can't necessarily rely on the police. I mean, how's that playing out for ordinary Haitians who are caught in the middle of all this violence?

ISAAC: Well, these are desperate measures really by the population, especially when they're not getting the proper support from the state and from the international community and as such these brigades despite trying to challenge the gangs have a hard time because they are not well organized or they're not well armed, but really it has been a problem within Haiti.

This dynamic and the arrival of both the multinational security support mission, which was a couple years ago and now the GSF, the Gang Suppression Force, was in an attempt to boost the police here and the armed forces and also trying and not having civilians mobilized as militias to try and challenge the gangs.

BRUNHUBER: All right. So let's talk about that new U.N.-backed Gang Suppression Force. I mean, we've seen U.N. troops come and go for years. I've been on ride-alongs with some of them. It doesn't seem as though it really helps. It hasn't really got to grips with the problem here. How are Haitians reacting to this latest one?

ISAAC: Well, the reactions towards the arrival of that new force has been, could we say, a little discreet, you know, or -- because the issue really with the force is that it has yet to show or demonstrate concrete results in that struggle against the gangs.

[02:25:10]

We've seen the Kenyans for the last year or so going in and out of the capital in the surrounding areas of the metropolitan area of Port-au- Prince. They are there, but their results are not necessarily really visible. And this new Chadian troops are like arriving, their results are expected, but you know, it remains to be seen really on the ground how that's going to materialize with the latest massacres that we've just seen in the Artibonite. So it's big challenges that are coming for it.

BRUNHUBER: Yes, certainly a huge challenge. I mean, more than some 800,000 Haitians are displaced right now. I think the number is even up to a million now. I mean, you've been there for years. I'm curious with our last minute here for your assessment and what needs to happen differently this time to actually make a difference, do you think?

ISAAC: Well, one of the biggest challenges here really will be restoring institutions. We haven't had any elections in Haiti for the past 10 years and this as per both, you know, the civil society here in Haiti and also the international community would be a path, you know, towards restoring the authority of legitimate bodies in the country to challenge the gangs in -- because, you know, in the daily lives of folks, they really have Regalian powers, you know, where they are ruling people's lives.

So in order to restore, you know, normalcy in people's lives in Haiti, inevitably, it will go through institutions, but having elections in this country in this context will be very, very challenging.

BRUNHUBER: Yes, absolutely. I'll have to leave there. Appreciate this. Harold Isaac in Petion-Ville, Haiti. Thank you so much.

ISAAC: Thanks for having me.

BRUNHUBER: Well still ahead, a former top White House officials making the case for a different approach in Iran. He argues that military action can accomplish some but not all goals. His interview with CNN's Christiane Amanpour after the break. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[02:32:05]

KIM BRUNHUBER, CNN ANCHOR: Welcome back to all of you watching us around the world. I'm Kim Brunhuber. This is CNN NEWSROOM.

U.S. President Donald Trump's latest threats are adding to the confusion amid his prediction that the war with Iran will end soon. On social media late Thursday, he said the U.S. military hasn't even started destroying what's left in Iran. Bridge is next, then electric power plants. Iran's new leadership knows what has to be done and fast, he said.

Iranian media report eight people were killed, 85 injured in a U.S.- Israeli strike on a major bridge west of Tehran, a local news agency says. The bridge was the tallest in the Middle East and a point of pride for Iranian engineers.

Now this is happening after President Trump tried to sell the war to the American public in his primetime address on Wednesday. He didn't spell out a clear timeline to end the conflict or an exit strategy.

Earlier, a former top U.S. national security official talked about that with CNN's Christiane Amanpour.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: When you listen to Donald Trump, were you actually expecting him to come up with some kind of a more refined plan delivering, you know, concrete end game and actually what the end would look like instead of just finish the job?

REAR ADM. JOHN KIRBY (RET.), FORMER U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY COMMUNICATIONS ADVISER: That's what I was hoping I would hear when I heard that he the announcement that he was going to give a set of remarks here, you know, more than a month in to this conflict, I thought, that's great. You know, you should talk to the American people and to people around the world and explain what we're doing, why we're doing it, and what were actually trying to achieve. And regrettably, we didn't hear that in the remarks. It was really there was nothing more in there than what he has said in his social media postings, really more than that.

I was stunned by two things I didn't hear, Christiane. One was I didn't hear any mention of NATO, and I was glad for that. And I suspect European capitals were glad to hear that he didn't have a major announcement on NATO or diminished U.S. leadership or even membership in NATO.

The other thing I didn't hear was any mention at all of the Iranian people, and that that kind of surprised me, because if you remember when this whole thing started, you know, his message was, hey, were going to topple the regime and it's up to you. This is your moment to take it and to run, to run your own country. But no mention at all of the Iranian people what they're going through. And any idea of what post-conflict governance can or should look like.

AMANPOUR: I felt the same things. I was focused, of course, on the Iranian people, but also on what actually they have achieved that they, you know, planned and what they want to achieve. So, when he says we have to finish the job and he uses honesty, very offensive language about bombing back to Stone Age, as you know, that is Vietnam era talk, and that didn't end up so well for the United States.

The, you know, the -- I don't know the emotions of the diaspora and other Iranians are shifting because at first they thought Trump was coming to save them, and now they're not.

[02:35:02]

KIRBY: Yeah.

AMANPOUR: Now, what does that mean for the U.S.? Okay, we know what it means for the Iranian people. But what does essentially not winning hearts and minds mean for the United States?

KIRBY: It means that the -- that this war is not going to end anytime soon. I mean, now you had the Iranian people behind you when the bombs first started falling, and now we're losing that, not only the diaspora, but certainly there in Iran proper, which means that the regime will get new life and will get perhaps support from the public that they didn't have before. This is a regime they hate, but now they're beginning to hate the United States even more.

And I think that that just stiffens the spine of the regime, a very radical regime still, and may give them the resolve to continue to fight. One of the things that we need to remember here, Christiane, is that Donald Trump in the United States doesn't get to determine on its own when this war ends. We can certainly determine when we stop military operations, but the Israelis get a vote, and there's no indication that they're willing to stop. And the Iranians absolutely get a vote on how much more fighting they're willing to do.

And when you talk about bombing them into the Stone Age, and you make it more about now the Iranian people, not just the regime, that makes it -- that makes it more likely that they're going to stiffen their spines and continue to fight.

AMANPOUR: So you mentioned the Israelis, as you know, they have a policy of assassination. They call it decapitation, whatever it is. And they know where people are.

So, the latest is that Kamal Kharrazi who used to be in the reform era of Mohammad Khatami, foreign minister, and allegedly has been one of the, you know, speakers with Pakistan and others who've put themselves forward to try to bring both sides, America and Iran together.

There doesn't seem to be any negotiations going on. Can you tell whether there's anything happening? There doesn't seem to be.

KIRBY: It's hard to discern. I agree with you. It's very difficult to see where there's any real diplomatic progress here. And as you well know, Christiane, I mean, communicating and dealing with the government, the official government of Iran is not the same as dealing with the IRGC and the supreme leader and his offices. You know, the elected leadership of Iran don't actually determine the course of Iran, certainly in domestic or foreign affairs, in order to make any ground. And you have to speak with somebody that has authority and accountability, and that's going to be the IRGC and the new supreme leader.

So, speaking to a member of parliament, while that certainly scratches the official itch, I'm afraid that even if that even if those negotiations were going on, they probably wouldn't get much traction in terms of actual results.

AMANPOUR: Okay. So, if there's none of that and there doesn't seem to at the moment be a military solution to ending this, let us talk about what goals look like and were enunciated that seem to have been pushed off. Like last night. I was actually stunned by the reference by President Trump to the highly enriched uranium, basically saying, you know, the nuclear dust is wherever he called it, nuclear dust. And he said that it's not accessible and that if anything starts happening, they would continue to -- they would -- they would bomb again, which is an Israeli policy of so-called mowing the lawn and endless war footing. How did you read just leaving the highly enriched uranium to take care

of itself?

KIRBY: I saw that very much the same way that it was an attempt by the president to pull back a little bit from the threats of actually going after it with ground forces. Now, that could that be a feint, and he was, you know, sowing some disinformation to mask his intentions? Perhaps.

But the way I took it was it was him walking a little bit back from the idea of putting ground forces to go get it, and reasserting that, as the Israelis have, that it is buried so deep that it would be very, very difficult for the Iranians to recover it anyway.

And the president's not wrong. Should they make an effort to try to recover that material, we would know. We would have all kinds of ways to be able to surveil that and, and to appreciate what they were trying to get done. He's not wrong on that.

But I took it a little bit of a walk back and he came back. If you remember in that speech, really to the four core military objectives, the same objectives limited they are that Hegseth and the chairman of the joint chiefs have been putting forward -- no navy, no ballistic missile capability, no defense industrial base and no exporting of terrorism. Those are very clearly defined and more limited military objectives that I think the president was trying to draw back last night.

AMANPOUR: And are those achievable or have they been achieved? And if they have been achieved, what's the next two to three weeks needed to heavily bomb? In other words, what is he saying? Do you think as a military person yourself needs to happen to make sure that they've finished the job, as they keep saying?

[02:40:02]

KIRBY: Well, it depends on what you mean by finish the job, right? I mean, if your goal is to eliminate every offensive capability that Iran has, every missile, every drone, every ship and every boat -- I mean, that's a tall order. And I don't think even the U.S. military would say that that's possible.

But if you're -- if your job is to degrade their capabilities so that they no longer pose a threat to our interests in the region and our allies and partners, that is an achievable goal. And the U.S. military and the Israeli military have been working very hard at doing that. They have had immense military success, there's no doubt about that.

But the one goal, the goal that I think is much more difficult. And this gets back to your issue about hearts and minds is, you know, eliminating Iran's ability to export terrorism in the region. As you know, they work through proxies, Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis, and these militias in Iraq and Syria that are not in Iran proper. They still have a measure of control and influence over those groups, and eliminating that as a threat. The terrorism threat is a much more difficult thing, and it can't be done just through military means alone.

So, some of these goals are achievable. I think if you're talking about degradation of naval and air capabilities and ballistic missile and defense industrial base, but the exporting of terrorism, the eliminating their nuclear ambitions, I mean, that's very, very difficult to do from a military perspective, which is why President Obama got the Iran deal secured in the first place, because he knew that diplomatically and negotiations were the way to eliminate those nuclear ambitions.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BRUNHUBER: We'll have even more of Christiane Amanpour interview with John Kirby. Next, you'll hear why he thinks negotiations with Tehran could have done more than military might.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[02:46:25]

BRUNHUBER: John Kirby, a former U.S. national security official in the Biden administration, says President Trump had an option b before starting the war in Iran. Here's the second part of his interview with CNN's Christiane Amanpour.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

AMANPOUR: You used to be in the military, Admiral John Kirby now, you worked for the chairman of the joint chiefs when we first started interviewing, and you worked very extensively on the Iran file as well, because that was a big deal at that time and remains so.

Do you think that given the fact that the nuclear file has been such a major issue for so many years, that what's happening now is potentially leaving the United States worse off than had it continued the negotiations, which the mediator said was leading to very, very serious concessions on nuclear by the Iranians.

KIRBY: That's a really difficult question to answer. I'll say it this way. First of all, Iran is certainly not the threat to the region in the world that it used to be, based on all the bombing and the strikes. There's no doubt about that. The regime's military capabilities have been severely degraded, and that's a good thing for the region and for -- and for the world.

I also believe that their nuclear capabilities in their ambitions have certainly been severely curtailed, starting with the strikes back in June. There's no doubt about that. But you can't bomb away knowledge and you can't necessarily bomb away in tension.

And if at the end of all this, when it's all over, the regime is still left in power. And if that material is still somewhat accessible and there's an argument about whether it is or it isn't, then I still think it's going to be a little bit more like the Israeli strategy of having to mow the grass here. I don't know that you're going to completely eliminate that capability, which is why I go back to and I recognize I worked for the Obama administration during the Iran deal. So I'm not impartial, I get that.

But that's what -- that's why the wisdom of the Iran deal was, was so important that that you were taking away diplomatically and through negotiations, this ambition allowing Iran to have a civilian nuclear program that could be well-monitored and inspected, and they couldn't cheat. That was a way to do this in a sustainable way.

AMANPOUR: The word sustainable is important there, because mowing the lawn is different.

KIRBY: Yes.

AMANPOUR: It's the opposite of that.

You're a navy person. Just can you tell us what you read from Trump and the Strait of Hormuz issue, essentially, after dissing the allies, said, well, actually, you know, it'll just open by itself because Iran needs to sell oil.

What does that all say to you? And how could somebody force it open? What are the risks even if they landed a, you know, a ground force on any of the islands or whatever?

KIRBY: Look, it's not about forcing it open, Christiane. And people have to understand the geography here. You can't just force the strait open.

What you can do is try to secure it as best you can. You can do that through constant eye in the sky, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance over the strait. You can do it through the escorting of merchant shipping with U.S. naval or other naval assets, which I did back in 1988 when President Reagan ordered over to do that. That can be done.

Certainly. You can degrade the Iranians capabilities to threaten the strait, not just with mines, but with drones. Both surface and air drones. You can degrade those capabilities.

But forcing it open and sustaining it is a task that cannot be done just militarily alone.

[02:50:01]

That's why, again, I think you've got to work with allies and partners in the region. You've got to -- you got to find a diplomatic way forward here. It's an immense task.

It's -- and it's not just going to -- with all due respect to the president, I don't think it's going to -- it's not going to happen naturally.

The Iranians were able to close the strait, quite frankly, in the first few days of this war without firing a single shot. Just the fear alone will make sure that insurance companies and shipping companies are not willing to go through that very narrow strait, 21 miles wide.

And that fear is still there. And eliminating that fear is going to require an awful lot of resources, an awful lot of time. And even then, Christiane, it's not going to be 100 percent foolproof. It just takes one drone or one mind to get through to shut the strait down for an immense amount of time.

AMANPOUR: So, that goes to the, you know, real crisis, the energy crisis the world is in right now. What do you see as the possible outcome inside Iran? You've got, you know, the Iranians maybe degraded, but they're still, you know, using missiles and drones.

You've got the Gulf Arab states very angry at Iran now. You've got -- you know, who knows again where this is going to end. What might happen? What's your worst-case scenario for what happens inside Iran and might spill out?

KIRBY: My worst-case scenario, and we kind of already alluded to it, is that the administration, for whatever reason, pulls the plug on this. Look,

I mean, we could all argue about the wisdom of launching these strikes at the time and the way that they were done.

But now that we're in it, it's really important that the U.S. military be allowed to finish obliterating and degrading -- I shouldn't say obliterating, degrading these military capabilities as best they can. So, what I worry about is pulling the plug early, leaving the regime still in power, and it is still the same regime. There has not been regime change. Leaving them in power to continue to persecute their own population and to be able to propagate terrorism and a threat to the region, and then where we are. We're simply back to, again, mowing the grass. So, I worry about pulling the plug early and not letting the military finish its job.

AMANPOUR: And how do you see, in our remaining minute, the relationship between the Gulf Arab states, which are American allies, have American bases, and Iran going forward, given what's been happening? And also, the relationship of America with those Gulf States. Will they keep having American bases there, do you think?

KIRBY: All of this depends on what's left when it's all said and done. And if the regime is left in power, if that's the way this ends, then we are definitely going to have to rethink our footprint in the Middle East, and so will our allies and partners who have hosted us in bases throughout the region.

Because clearly, even a degraded, greatly diminished Iran, and there's no doubt about it they have been greatly diminished, can still lash out and strike at civilian and military targets throughout the region. So, I think if the regime is left in power, if that's where this ends up, then we're going to have to completely review our footprint in the Middle East and what that security posture looks like, and perhaps even our arrangements and agreements with our allies and partners in the Gulf in terms of what sort of facilities the U.S. occupies and to what extent and at what scale. One of the things that they did before they launched the strike was disperse American military power around the region. It's going to be interesting to see when this is over, does that disbursement stay in place or do we re-aggregate where we once were? I don't see if the regime is in power. I don't see how we do that.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BRUNHUBER; More news just ahead. Please stay with CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BRUNHUBER: U.S. President Donald Trump's sprawling White House ballroom project is on another green light to move forward, a board that oversees planning for federal buildings gave its approval to the plans. The National Capital Planning Commission is stacked with Trump loyalists. They overruled more than 32,000 public comments, overwhelmingly opposed to the project.

Now, the approval comes days after a federal judge ordered construction of the ballroom be halted until it was approved by congress. Trump insists the privately funded ballroom isn't subject to any oversight and should move forward with no serious scrutiny.

The four astronauts aboard the Orion spacecraft have finally left Earth's orbit on their journey around the moon. The historic mission is the first in over 50 years in which astronauts will come within the moon's vicinity. The crew is expected to travel farther than any other mission, reaching over 250,000 miles from earth. On the closest approach to the moon, they'll be just over 4,100 miles from the surface.

On Thursday, some of the crew reflected on how smooth the launch was the day before. They weren't expecting it to happen on the first try, but it did, and now they're on their long trek to the dark side of the moon.

All right. That wraps this hour of CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Kim Brunhuber. I'll be back in just a moment with more news.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)