Return to Transcripts main page

Connect the World

War Escalates with Attacks on Energy Infrastructure; Secretary Hegseth, General Caine Give Update on War with Iran; Trump Rebuke Over Israeli Attack on Iran Gas Facilities; Iran Strikes Key Energy Sites in Gulf States; Gabbard Asked About Strikes on Iranian Infrastructure. Aired 9-10a ET

Aired March 19, 2026 - 09:00   ET

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

[09:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECKY ANDERSON, CNN HOST, CONNECT THE WORLD: Well EU leaders and the U.N. Secretary General are meeting today in Brussels as the war in Iran

reverberates around the world. What will Europe do next as their Gulf allies are pushed further to the brink by Iran's strikes.

It is 05:00 p.m. in Abu Dhabi, where key players in this region assess that the war has escalated to a new level as attacks on energy infrastructure

intensified. I'm Becky Anderson from our Middle East programming headquarters. You're watching "Connect the World".

Well on day 20 of what is an escalating U.S.-Israeli war with Iran, the U.S. Defense Secretary says that the U.S. will carry out its largest

strikes against Iran so far, but is not giving a timeline on when the war will end. At a pentagon briefing last hour, Pete Hegseth also praising

America's Gulf partners, which have endured repeated Iranian attacks. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PETE HEGSETH, U.S. DEFENSE SECRETARY: The Gulf states have stepped up incredibly. In fact, Iran's sort of reckless attempt to strike civilian

infrastructure and other things has brought countries who maybe would have not been as all in as they are today, squarely into our orbit.

And we're proud to be defending with them, standing with them, you name it, UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and others who have been right

there. And we're grateful for that kind of support.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ANDERSON: Well, Hegseth, speaking as Iran targets more Gulf energy facilities, Saudi Arabia intercepting missiles as regional foreign

ministers met there for security talks in Riyadh. This video shows an explosion near a Saudi oil facility. And Qatar reports extensive damage

from an Iranian attack on a major oil hub.

These continued attacks eliciting anger and new threats in the region. Well, the Saudi government says it reserves the right to take military

action against Iran. Qatar says it is expelling Iranian diplomats. This all follows an Israeli attack on the South Pars natural gas field that Iran

shares with Qatar.

That attack angered Qatar and drew a rare rebuke from U.S. President Donald Trump, who says the U.S. was not informed in advance of the Israeli action,

though CNN reporting now contradicts that. He also says the U.S. will blow up South Pars if the Iranian attacks don't stop, all this causing oil

prices to surge to levels not seen in almost four years.

And the death toll Iran and in Lebanon is rising, with more than 1000 people reported killed in Lebanon since the start of the war. Let's take a

closer look at what U.S. Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, was saying at the Pentagon just a few minutes ago. He told reporters, the U.S. continues

to dominate on the battlefield and is still on plan to achieve its military objectives. Hegseth says the U.S. has hit 7000 targets to date.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HEGSETH: What they wanted in this context, and what President Trump would not tolerate is a regime of that nature being closer and closer to nuclear

capabilities. A capability they would have said they would want to use, and we ought to believe what our enemies say they would do if they got the most

dangerous weapon in the world. So, it's been across every theater that Iran has been a threat to America.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ANDERSON: Well, those remarks come as Reuters reports that the Trump Administration is now considering deploying thousands of U.S. troops to the

Middle East in preparation for its next steps in this war with Iran. Let's bring in Nate Swanson, the Director of the Iran Strategy Project at the

Atlantic Council, also joining us is CNN Politics Senior Reporter Stephen Collinson, good to have you both today.

Thank you so much. Stephen, let's start with you. What is your reaction to what we have just heard from Pete Hegseth?

STEPHEN COLLINSON, CNN POLITICS SENIOR REPORTER: Well, when you take away the propaganda and the bomb blast and the praising of Donald Trump and the

attacks on the media, there wasn't really that much new in that briefing. He did talk about an apparent request from the administration for $200

billion to fight this war.

[09:05:00]

That is going to be a big headline number, and it's going to cause some controversy, I think on Capitol Hill, especially after we saw senior

intelligence officials yesterday fell, to really come up with a real rationale for the war, and their comments seem to contradict a lot of what

President Trump has said about the reasons he went into this war, on the key question over this exchange of fire on the gas field and the oil fields

and President Trump's insistence, as you mentioned, that he didn't know about the Israeli attack.

There was almost nothing in that briefing. Obviously, that's something that Pete Hegseth doesn't really want to talk about. And you've got this

selected group of conservative journalists now in the Pentagon briefing. And that makes getting information that is useful out of these televised

briefings quite difficult.

ANDERSON: Let me bring you in Nate. CNN reporting contradicting President Trump when he says that he knew nothing of these Israeli strikes on the

South Pars gas field. What's your sense?

NATE SWANSON, DIRECTOR OF IRAN STRATEGY PROJECT AT THE ATLANTIC COUNCIL: I mean, that's almost certainly not accurate. You know the Israelis are

coordinating this campaign was -- and as you said, there are multiple sources who have you know, said the opposite. So, I think there's really 0

percent chance that U.S. didn't know about this.

ANDERSON: In one of your latest pieces you write, I want to quote you here, Iran would rather fight a protracted war with the United States now than

repeated wars with Israel in the coming years. And that Iran does not need to score major military successes every day.

The regime only needs to inflict enough periodic damage to keep regional partners markets and the American public jittery. If there's no good ending

here, what does that mean for U.S. strategy right now?

SWANSON: I mean, who knows? Right at the same time, Pete Hegseth just said these comments. You know, the secretary of treasury also said we're going

to unsanctioned Iranian oil on the water. So, I'm not quite sure how these two things go together, where we're doing an unprecedented bombing campaign

and unsanctioned Iranian oil, apparently, on the same day.

So, I don't know. Like, I think it goes to the bigger question is, I don't think we have a clue what our objective is at this point, it seems to

change by the day. And you know, it was just not foreseen that this was going to be a protracted war, when really it should have been.

ANDERSON: And Donald Trump himself accepting that he had no idea how this region where I am would be affected. It is under daily attack from Iran.

Iran will call these retaliatory attacks, the region, of course, calls them reckless a number of vote and they have that enshrined in international law

now through the U.N. Security Council.

Stephen we've repeatedly heard Donald Trump say that no one could have predicted these attacks on Gulf countries. 12 Arab Muslim countries have

issued a joint statement now calling on Iran to immediately halt its attacks after a meeting in Riyadh. I wonder at this point what is the sense

where you are on whether this signals a real shift in regional pressure on Tehran?

Or are these countries, frankly, still trying to avoid being pulled deeper into this war?

COLLINSON: I mean, I think it could be both. It was interesting during the Hegseth briefing that he took time to praise the Gulf allies. I think there

is a growing awareness in Washington about some of their frustrations in being thrust into this war by the United States, that most of them

apparently did not want.

The idea, of course, that it was a surprise that Iran would go after Gulf allies is rather absurd, because anybody that's even culturally read about

this in the last 30 years would be able to draw that conclusion for themselves, not least because there are U.S. military installations all

around the Gulf, in allied countries.

One thing I've been interested in talking to people in that region in recent weeks, and you'll know this more than me, is that while there is

some frustration at being sent into this war. There are solidarity and determination that this war will not alter the ways of life of people

living in the Gulf and the progress that they believe they've made in recent years.

And I think what is going to be very interesting is if we get to an end game at some point in this war, what sort of security guarantees those

states going to want from Iran? Are there going to be attempts to get Iran to pay for some of this damage that's been caused? What does the Gulf look

like after this war?

[09:10:00]

And I think a lot of that depends on what the Iranian regime and the country looks like and how it emerges, whether it's a, you know, a

contiguous state still, whether it starts to fall apart, whether there's a hard line IGRC government there. So, a lot of big unanswered questions, I

think, for the Gulf that you know are kind of relying on what happens and the U.S., as Nate said, trying to get its story straight, and what this is

all about.

ANDERSON: Nate, Oman's Foreign Minister, wrote in "The Economist". I want to quote him here, the national interests of both Iran and America lie in

the earliest possible end to these hostilities. This is an uncomfortable truth to tell, because it involves indicating the extent to which America

has lost control of its own foreign policy. But it must be told.

I wonder whether this op ed appears to a degree, to be a split between Oman, on the one hand, a GCC member, and those like Saudi for example, like

the UAE, who are taking an increasingly more robust line when it comes to Iran. I mean the Omani Foreign Minister really pointing out that there had

been a de-escalation ramp, a diplomatic ramp that America simply ignored in his writings for "The Economist". Your thoughts?

SWANSON: Yeah, look, I can't speak confidently on whether there's a shit or a difference in Gulf opinions on this. I mean, I don't know. I think all of

them have been unfairly targeted. And, you know, as just said, it was predictable, but this is not any of their faults, you know, I mean, you

know, they are strong American allies, every single one of them, and they put in the crosshairs of a terrible situation, and it's their fault, and

there's no easy way out.

You know, the U.S. is going to have to pick up the pieces with our Gulf allies, and that is going to be difficult. But this, as you said, like the

same time, the Gulf is also going to have to figure out a new arrangement with Iran that works. And it's really hard to see how that is going to

work, because on one hand, you know, Iran has just taken these incredibly aggressive, de escalatory, or, sorry, aggressive, you know, escalatory

actions and the Gulf did nothing wrong.

They spent the last seven years trying to de-escalate the situation. So, I don't know exactly where they go from here. And I think to the money

foreign ministers' comments. I mean, there were a lot of off ramps. This was a war of choice. You know, I think the main motivation for the U.S.

doing this is we thought it would be easy.

And that was just a major miscalculation of how Iran was approaching this war, and then that's no one's fault, but the U.S., you know, we just

completely misread how Iran was going to react to this.

ANDERSON: Well, it's good to have you both. Thank you very much indeed for your analysis. Really important to us. I want to get a look for our viewers

at the stock futures. The stock markets in New York, of course, open less than 30 minutes from now, and about 20 minutes or so.

Look futures are down, oil, specifically, WTI prices surging. I mean, the global benchmark significantly higher as well. This will be putting

investors on edge. But to Nate's point, and he made this point at the beginning of that last discussion. In the past few minutes, U.S. Treasury

Secretary Scott Bessent has told Fox Business that the U.S. could, and I quote him here, unsanctioned Iranian oil on the water to bring down oil

prices now.

Iranian oil has been under sanctions on and off for the past five decades, with President Donald Trump imposing full sanctions in 2018, but

unsanctioning would effectively mean allowing restricted crude shipments to be sold openly to Europe and other regions and Iran could get the proceeds.

So, whatever the impact of this move that is being suggested by Bessent, whatever sort of impact it may have on these markets. And indeed, it could

have a deflationary impact, it would be a surprising move by the United States. And if you want to know more about that South Pars gas field and

why Israel's attack on that is considered an escalation in the war, you can head to our digital platforms.

Now the foreign ministers of 12 Arab and Islamic States then calling on Iran to immediately halt its attacks and respect international law. That

joint statement comes as Tehran targets energy infrastructure across this Gulf region. In Qatar, officials say one of the country's main energy hubs

suffered extensive damage after it was hit twice in two hours in the past 24 hours by Iranian air strikes.

[09:15:00]

In Kuwait, a drone attack earlier today caused a fire at an oil refinery. And here in the UAE, gas operations at crucial energy sites were

temporarily suspended after missile debris fell on facilities. Want to get the latest from CNN's Paula Hancocks. She is reporting on the region from

here in Abu Dhabi.

Saudi Arabia's frustration clearly growing a hardening tone and position, with the foreign minister saying, Tehran does not talk to its neighbors.

Does not get to talk to its neighbors. What got us to this point?

PAULA HANCOCKS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Becky, that hardening tone and position is really being felt across the entire Gulf region. If you think

back for to almost three weeks ago when Iran started to attack its neighbors, there was shock. It was in some ways expected that it could be

one of the repercussions of military action.

But then the extent to which Tehran was carrying out these attacks, really did shock the nation and shock the region. And that shock turned to anger

quite quickly, and that has really been building. The longer this goes on, the more the economic, the civilian damage that is being done to these Gulf

nations that is simply going to grow.

And now, of course, and we have been seeing this for many days, it has to be said, but now this increasing Tehran focus on the energy infrastructure

is really infuriating these leaders. So, we did see Saudi Arabia hosting foreign minister leaders on Wednesday evening.

As you say, they did have this joint statement about condemning what Iran was doing, pointing out just how it is against international law. And

within this statement, I just want to read you this, and it really sums up exactly what has been targeted over the past few weeks.

It was talking about residential areas, civilian infrastructure, including oil facilities, desalination plants, airports, residential buildings and

diplomatic premises. So really laying out the extent of Tehran's damage. Now we did hear from the Saudi Foreign Minister, who is sounding

increasingly frustrated. Let's listen to him.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FAISAL BIN FARHAN AL-SAUD, SAUDI FOREIGN MINISTER: The targeting of Riyadh while a number of diplomats are meeting. I cannot see as coincidental, and

I think that's the clearest signal of how Iran feels about diplomacy. It doesn't believe in talking to its neighbors, certainly, as we have stated

quite clearly, we have reserved the right to take military actions if deemed necessary.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANCOCKS: So, as those leaders were actually meeting in Riyadh, there was a missile and drone attack intercepted overhead, which CNN witnessed as well.

As he said he did not believe that, that was coincidental, but there is still a call for de-escalation. There's a call for diplomacy to take over.

We have heard from a number of Gulf nations, just after Israel carried out that attack on the South Pars gas field, the UAE, for example, called it a

serious escalation. Also speaking about Qatar, we heard Qatar saying it's a dangerous and irresponsible step when they came under attack from Tehran.

But they are calling for restraint and de-escalation, there's a more of a united front here, really, among the Gulf nations, a realization that they

had from day one, that, that the military option is not the way to end this, Becky.

ANDERSON: It's good to have you. Thank you. Well, new satellite imagery is giving us stark evidence of the dangers facing ships in the Strait of

Hormuz. A Maltese-flagged cargo vessel, the Safeen Prestige, is seen drifting off the Coast of Oman with smoke pouring out of it.

The U.S. maritime Watch Dog says the ship was hit by a projectile in the first week of this war. Earlier, I spoke with Hasan Alhasan, he's a Senior

Fellow at the International Institute of Strategic Studies. He said, based in Bahrain, we discuss the risks to navigation in these incredibly

important waters.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HASAN ALHASAN, SENIOR FELLOW AT THE INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR STRATEGIC STUDIES: The Gulf state cannot live in a situation where they are under

constant Iranian blackmail, where Iran and the IRGC get to choose which ships to transit through the Strait of Hormuz and which don't get to do so,

or which refinery or gas facility in the Gulf gets to operate.

Now, how will this translate exactly into a coalition? We don't yet know.

[09:20:00]

There's been a lot of reticence by Asian, European partners to join a coalition that I think is seen as the outcome of a largely unnecessary and

unpopular war. So that's creating a lot of hesitation. But from the Gulf states perspective, it's in their vital economic interest for this waterway

to be open again and to be safe for navigation.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ANDERSON: Simon Kelly is a retired British Royal Navy Commodore and Defense Consultant at Fozzie Miller group joining us from Suffolk in Virginia. And

just listening there to Hasan Alhasan, I wonder what this all suggests about the further risk of escalation at sea.

SIMON KELLY, BRITISH ROYAL NAVY COMMODORE (RET.): You know, absolutely. I think he makes a really powerful point about the Iranian lever that they

can pull on the straits for most and what that means for Gulf partners. I think there's something, I think we've become quite fixed on the concept of

escorting and opening up the Straits of Hormuz from a military perspective.

And we're fixed on that, as opposed to what we're really looking at here, which is reopening a vital sea line of communication. That's not

necessarily in the military gift, but it will undoubtedly form a factor. So, if we focus on the priority, which is opening up the pathway for the

ships to come in and out freely.

Owners and operators will have a different risk appetite, depending on the situation, but what they will be looking for is they'll be looking for an

absence of attack. There are options to do that. There's a military option to do that. Or there is the potential of taking off ramps with Iran.

They'll be some of them will be looking for escorts. That's an incredibly complicated undertaking. And some of them will wish to avoid the escort

altogether, because that actually puts together U.S. or coalition assets, in a target rich environment, in a narrow stretch of water where the

Iranians can bring to bear fire. And so, all of this has to play into how we reopen that vital seaway.

ANDERSON: I just want to just concentrate on this for a moment, because the Strait of Hormuz, as I understand it, from a key Gulf official familiar

with discussions, the strait was a focal point for those regional ministers in Riyadh yesterday, as momentum grows and we can see this behind the

scenes, for what would be a U.S. led international coalition in those waters.

Whether or not the Europeans, others around the Gulf Asians agreed with the legality of Trump's war on Iran. There is definitely a growing

understanding, is there not. That this is now everybody's problem. We've seen, and we continue to see, the price of oil surge and the potential

impact on energy, food stuff, prices and the light. This is everybody's problem, now, correct?

KELLY: Yeah, know, I completely agree with that. I think if we describe the response to President Trump's call for some kind of coalition as muted, if

not fairly negative from some quarters, there's a reality here, which is, as you say, this is a critical water way, and also there are relations with

Gulf partners we have to consider here.

So, in the immediate NATO allies will say, this isn't NATO's problem. But there's also a reality here. The real challenge, though, is it's one thing

to say that we will form a coalition to do this, and it's, you know, it's really important to say that European partners have operated in the Red Sea

in response to the Houthis.

The Royal Navy has been present in that region and has conducted patrols under operation sentinel through the Straits of Hormuz at the same time.

But we're talking about a completely different kind of conflict here, and the idea that you could easily integrate partners into straight transits to

provide that kind of escorting without a really deep and long integration period before they even get there, you're underestimating the challenge.

And then there's the challenge of actually getting them there in the first place, making sure that they're all ready to go and fit enough to face that

fight. It's a really multi-faceted challenge.

ANDERSON: Yeah, and I think it's really important that you pointed out, you know, any sort of coalition or agreement might be in, the alarms are going

off, but we are safe in the building that I'm in, any agreement would probably need to be both military and some sort of negotiated position with

the Iranians.

And to that end, I just want to get your response to news just coming in. Scott Bessent, the Treasury Secretary, speaking to Fox Business in the last

half hour or so, talking about the potential for unsanctioning Iranian oil that is already in those waters.

[09:25:00]

I wonder what you make of that, is that the sort of initiative you're talking about when you say this isn't just a sort of military kind of story

here.

KELLY: Yeah, I think all options are on the table here. I think what they're seeking is a solution to increasing oil fuel prices. You know, that

is hitting us all at the pump, and so I think they're reaching for something here. I suggest that's not a lifting of sanctions that's perhaps

taking advantage of what is available in the region.

But there's the sort of second order consequence of this, whether its Russian sanctions being raised, or whether it's talk about Iranian

sanctions, the sort of the broader ramifications of this are absolutely huge.

ANDERSON: It's good to have you, sir. Thank you very much indeed.

KELLY: Thank you.

ANDERSON: It's good to speak to you. Right. OK, we are broadcasting from our Middle East programming headquarters here in Abu Dhabi. The alerts have

now stopped for the moment, but giving you a clear indication there of what is going on around this region that is not unfamiliar.

At present, Iranian attacks, unprovoked and reckless, according now to international law, continue. Next up, a rare rebuke from Donald Trump over

Israel's attack on key Iranian gas facilities. We'll have reaction on that from Tel Aviv.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ANDERSON: Right. You're watching "Connect the World" with me Becky Anderson from our Middle East programming headquarters here in Abu Dhabi. These are

the futures markets just a couple of minutes before the open on Wall Street. And as you can see, the markets expected to open lower.

Noureldeen Al Hammoury is the Chief Global Market Strategist at Equiti Group. Joining us today live from Dubai. It's good to have you. If oil

holds around the sort of levels that we have seen of late, we've got WTI trading just below 100 bucks on the barrel. The global benchmark

significantly above that.

What's the significance for the broader economy and its impact on these prices, these equity prices?

NOURELDEEN AL HAMMOURY, CHIEF GLOBAL MARKET STRATEGIST AT EQUITI GROUP: I mean, at least for the time being, is not a geopolitical noise anymore.

That is actually a fear. And the strike that we saw over the past couple of days on the South Pars and the risk around the Strait of Hormoz is not just

basically, it is here.

And this is no longer about just the deliveries. At the beginning of the war, if you remember, we talked about, the issue is not with the

production, it's with the delivery. Now, production is at risk, and delivery is already stopped -- for a longer period of time.

[09:30:00]

So, if the disruption continues, intensifies, especially around the Strait of Hormoz, move towards 130, 150 it's still within reach, and the market is

already reacting to it, to something we call the stagflation, which is something were or very rare, to happen. This is when you have basically

higher yields or higher inflation.

On the other hand, you will have lower growth and higher unemployment. The 10-year yields, which is something very important, I think, for the

audience to understand, is that today, we reached 4.3 percent. This is the highest this year. And the stock market is getting crushed, while gold and

silver are also going down.

This is the ultimate warning the bond market is basically is giving us, because that stagflation is coming. And this will have an extremely, as I

said, it's extremely rare.

ANDERSON: Yeah.

HAMMOURY: But at the same time, the economic outcome of it would be -- I would not -- I would like, don't like to say disastrous, but it is going to

hit hard. It's going to get everybody, if it continues.

ANDERSON: Yeah. I'm really pleased you explain what is that the gold and silver price is actually going lower. Because, you know, the kind of

received wisdom is when we see the sort of instability around at the moment, the hedge is a flight to safety, of course, into something like

gold.

But you are pointing out why we are not seeing that at present, and that is very worrying.

HAMMOURY: Yeah.

ANDERSON: Scott Bessent, and you'll have heard this just about a half hour or so ago, and again, the alerts are going off here for our viewers sake.

HAMMOURY: Yeah.

ANDERSON: It's just an indication of what both Noureldeen and my teams here in Abu Dhabi are going through this is, you know, this is not constant.

It's not every single hour of every single day. It's the first time over the past hours we've heard it here, specifically in Abu Dhabi.

But you can see this is -- these alerts are going off as this place is attacked by Iran, both with missiles and with drones, and it continues. So,

my point was, at this stage, what are investors telling you? What are they asking you, and what are they telling you about how they feel at this

point?

HAMMOURY: I mean, especially after today's move and after yesterday's the Federal Reserve decision. Because, again, most of the administration, we

have something that is inconsistency in the messaging, which is conflicting everybody. And this is the last thing that -- wants to hear, an

inconsistent messaging from the administration.

The Federal Reserve remains was well balanced yesterday, kept rates unchanged. But at the same time, the dot plot showed you that there is only

a possibility of one rate cut this year, instead of two rate cuts. In addition to that, to the warning about inflation, we haven't done any kind

of progress over the past couple of years.

We're still far away from the 2 percent target. Now, clients are worried because everything is going down. You have gold, silver going down today,

DOW JONES and S&P and NASDAQ going down. We have funds are going down. Yields are going up. And the only one thing that is going up currently is

basically the dollar, which is a very typical setup during when you talk about the war from one side, the risk of inflation, risk of --

ANDERSON: Noureldeen, I was -- I got thrown when I was asking a question, because these alerts went off. One of the questions I did want to ask you

is Scott Bessent speaking to Fox Business just about a half hour, an hour or so ago, and he raised the idea that the U.S. may look at de sanctioning,

taking the sanctions off Iranian oil that is currently sort of sitting in open water, as it were.

HAMMOURY: Yeah --

ANDERSON: Now, what do you make of that with your sort of, you know, economists hat on when it comes to the impact that could have on the oil

price.

HAMMOURY: I think Brent reaching 120 early this morning, leading them to say that. Because, first of all, I think if we want to stop this war, and I

think this is what might actually happen is to push oil prices even higher for longer. Because everybody knows that the global economy cannot handle.

We barely were able to handle the $60 before the war. How are we going to handle 120 now after the war. It's another verbal intervention from this

administration to try to control the oil prices. Will it work? It might work on the short term, how much, or how many barrels of oil is on the

water from Iran, and how this is going to play out.

So, I think this is another conflicting messaging is basically, if you are going to unsanction the Iranian oil now, why didn't you do it from the

beginning?

[09:35:00]

ANDERSON: Noureldeen, it's great to have you. Particularly as your base as I am here in the UAE, I think it's really important our viewers around the

world get a sense of what the thinking is here, as this region, of course, has been drawn into this sort of escalation that we see at present,

significantly drawn in with the attacks that we've seen on energy facilities and infrastructure overnight.

It's good to have you. Thank you, sir, and we will be right back with more. Before we do that, I want to take you to a hearing on Capitol Hill. It's

the second day of this hearing. It's hearing where we will hear from the Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard. This is about global

threats to the U.S. Have a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

REP. JOAQUIN CASTRO (D-TX): -- Israel's goals in this war to be. And are those goals aligned with the goals of the United States?

TULSI GABBARD, UNITED STATES DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE: Yes, that have been laid out by the Israeli government?

CASTRO: And how do they differ?

GABBARD: We can see through the operations that the Israeli government has been focused on disabling the Iranian leadership and taking out several

members, obviously beginning with the Ayatollah, the Supreme Leader. And they continue to focus on that effort.

CASTRO: How does that differ from our goals?

GABBARD: The president has stated that his objectives are to destroy Iran's ballistic missile launching capability, their ballistic missile production

capability, and their navy, the IRGC Navy and mine laying capability.

CASTRO: So, the death and destruction continue the economic cost the United States, to Israel, to the Gulf States and to the world continues to

increase. So, I want to ask you, to the best of your knowledge, do you know whether Israel is supportive of the president's call to make a deal with

Iran?

GABBARD: I don't know the answer to that. I don't know Israel's position on that.

CASTRO: And to what do you attribute Israel's decision to strike Iranian energy infrastructure despite President Trump's call to keep those

facilities off limits?

GABBARD: I don't have an answer for that.

CASTRO: Yes, so they ignored the president. Do you agree with that?

GABBARD: I'm not privy to any of their deliberations or what went into their calculus and launching this or other attacks. I'm not -- we are not

involved with the and the operational element of this. We're providing continuously, on a daily basis, the intelligence assessments of the events

that are occurring. And --

CASTRO: I guess I know the FBI can't because they're domestic. But can anybody else at the table provide any insight into that?

JOHN RATCLIFFE, CIA DIRECTOR: I guess, I'm not sure what the question you're asking Congressman Castro, I guess a couple things. The goals that

the president set out are clearly defined. The DNI related those. What was not included is a goal of the U.S.

CASTRO: Well, director -- let me -- with this question --

RATCLIFFE: U.S. campaign will not engage --

CASTRO: -- let me reclaim my time, director, come on. Do you know why Israel decided to strike that infrastructure despite the fact that the

president said it should be off limits?

RATCLIFFE: I wouldn't speak for Israel. And --

CASTRO: What do you guys know? We're at war. What do you guys know?

RATCLIFFE: Love to take that for the record.

CASTRO: Yes, let's take it for the record.

REP. DARIN LAHOOD (R-IL): Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I want to welcome the panelists here today. Today is March 19th, on April 19th, FISA goes dark.

702 goes dark. And it's been talked about many times, but --

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ANDERSON: We've been listening to a second day of the hearing being held on Capitol Hill about global threats to the United States. See U.S.

intelligent -- U.S. National Intelligence Director back there today. Tulsi Gabbard, very specifically asked whether she understood what the U.S. goals

were, whether they were clear, whether the Israeli goals were clear, and whether there was effectively a sort of divide between the two.

She didn't really have an answer to the questions, why did Israel strike Iran's energy infrastructure? She said, I do not have an answer to that.

They ignored the president, she was told. She provided no insight. Is the U.S. supportive of the president's call to make a deal with sorry, is

Israel supportive of the president's call to make a deal with Iran?

[09:40:00]

She didn't have an answer to that. Now she says that that's not her purview. Her purview is about assessing threats to the United States.

Meantime, Donald Trump is threatening to blow up the world's largest gas fields if Iran keeps up attacks on Qatar in a significant escalation.

Israel and let me get be very clear about this, because it can be complicated for those who don't live in the region. Israel, overnight

struck the South Pars natural gas field. That is a gas field one of the largest, if not the largest in the world, which Iran shares with Qatar.

Qatar condemned the move, and President Trump says the U.S. wasn't informed in advance about Israel's plans. Let's try and get some perspective on this

from the Israeli point of view, and for that, I want to get you to Oren Liebermann, who is talking to his sources both in Tel Aviv and in

Jerusalem.

Oren, a rare rebuke from President Trump over his coalition partner Israel's attack on this massive gas field. What's been the response there

in Israel?

OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN JERUSALEM BUREAU CHIEF: Well, we haven't seen a stated response from Israel trying to change the narrative here, it's rare,

especially in wartime, that you see any Israeli official openly contradict President Donald Trump, because Israel needs to be on the same page as

Trump.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu needs to be on the same page as Trump, and that's because Netanyahu wants this war to continue, and angering Trump

endangers that now what is clear at this point, and this is from both American and Israeli officials, is that the U.S. knew in advance before

Israel struck the South Pars gas field.

And we almost certainly knew that beforehand, and that's because of the levels of coordination at the military and political levels that we've seen

from the very beginning and that are required to carry out this type of operation. But now we know it from officials on both the American and

Israeli sides.

The U.S. knew in advance, despite Trump trying to claim or trying to feign ignorance here, that somehow the U.S. didn't know what Israel was about to

strike. It seems more likely that Trump is just trying to create some distance between himself and the strikes that have led to a major

escalation on your screen there, that not only has Israel struck Iran's major natural gas facility, but Iran now lashing out, striking back at

Qatar, Saudi Arabia and others.

And that has had worldwide impacts, and crucially for Trump, from the domestic perspective, impacts on the domestic gas prices there. So that

might be why Trump is trying to create some distance here. But as I said, Becky, the level of coordination means it was obvious from the beginning.

And now we know from our sources that the U.S. knew Israel was going to carry out this strike. There was awareness.

ANDERSON: Oren, it's good to have you there. We're going to pick this up in 15 minutes time with the second hour of the show, but that is it for this

first part. "World Sport", though, is up after this short break. We'll be back in 15 minutes with more "Connect the World".

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:45:00]

(WORLD SPORT)

[10:00:00]

END