Return to Transcripts main page

Fareed Zakaria GPS

Israel and Iran Unleash Deadly Strikes on Each Other; Interview with Israel's Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar; Trump Holds Military Parade In Washington. Aired 10-11a ET

Aired June 15, 2025 - 10:00   ET

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

[10:00:30]

BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN ANCHOR: This is GPS, the GLOBAL PUBLIC SQUARE. Welcome to all of you in the United States and around the world. I'm Bianna Golodryga filling in for Fareed today.

Today on the program, Iran and Israel are at war. The two nations are trading salvos of missiles and drones back and forth with death and destruction in their wake on both sides. I will speak exclusively to Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar. We should note the Iranian foreign minister was scheduled to be on the show, but just canceled moments before air.

We'll also bring you incisive analysis on the conflict from a series of top experts. "The New Yorker's" Susan Glasser, Vali Nasr from Johns Hopkins, David Sanger of "The New York Times," and CNN military analyst General Spider Marks.

Israel and Iran have been bombarding each other with airstrikes this weekend in some of the fiercest fighting between the two nations in their decades of hostilities. The strikes come after Israel launched a massive offensive early Friday, targeting several sites in Iran, including its nuclear infrastructure. Neither side has heeded calls for de-escalation.

CNN's international editor Nic Robertson joins me now from Bat Yam, Israel.

And we know there are several casualties, Nic, from the salvos that Iran sent over the weekend. What's the latest?

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: Yes, the very latest is the rescue and recovery effort with heavy lifting equipment and lots of rescue teams on the ground in Bat Yam are still pulling their way through the heavy concrete and rebar that's twisted and piled up next to this 11-story apartment building that's literally ripped open like a tin can.

Six people we understand may be dead there. We were told that three other people were under the rubble, that rescuers were trying to get them out. They were aware of those three. There were four others, they said, who were still missing, the whereabouts are unknown, and almost 100 other people injured in that one explosion. And we just left that site in the last hour. But while we were there,

the devastation, the scale of the devastation, this is much bigger, much more intense explosives, much, much greater amounts of explosives and missiles that Iran is using here than Israel has experienced in over three decades. You have to go back to the First Gulf War. Saddam Hussein firing scud missiles into Israel then.

For people here, to have a sense of that scale of destruction, it is very big. The destruction rings and ripples out and rip through the community there, hundreds of yards, houses that were 100 yards away. Door frames inside the houses, concrete houses, steel door frames ripped off, window frames everywhere ripped out. The glass shredded nowhere to be seen. So it was a site of intense devastation.

Thirteen people killed so far, according to Israeli officials. Since these strikes began two days ago, 380 people more than now have been injured. Some of those seriously. 200 missiles fired by Iran at Israel, 22 of them, according to Israeli officials, getting through. That's more than 1 in 10 missiles getting through. And we heard from the defense minister and the prime minister, who all came down to the site of that explosion today, and the defense minister, using very, very strong language about taking the fight to Iran. The residents of that neighborhood in shock about what had happened to them.

GOLODRYGA: And we know among those victims are an 8-year-old boy, also a 10-year-old girl. An Arab family had been killed as well over the weekend, as well as elderly.

Nic, we know that Iran has promised to continue these attacks for days and weeks to come, as has Israel. How is Israel responding and Israelis that you're speaking with? We know the prime minister toured Bat Yam today, and both he and the defense minister have been defiant that their response will be fierce, specifically given that it appears Iran is striking civilians.

ROBERTSON: Yes. And I think what the sense that you get from people here is that this was some ways felt that the attack against Iran by Israel would come. That it was necessary. I spoke to a man today who has said, you know, we're strong. Israel has always been in this situation. We're strong. But we do wonder how long that this is going to last. So I think that question is in people's minds there.

[10:05:03]

But I get the sense that, you know, people are ready for more of this to come. Even if they don't know what's going to happen there's a resilience here towards it. But look at the streets. Normal life is affected. The schools are closed today. There are very few people out and about. But in the neighborhood of Bat Yam, you know, the focus there clearly on the rescue and recovery effort.

But I have to say, you know, when people see the scale of the damage there, it really comes home to them that this is a war on a scale or a conflict on a scale and scope, that they're not really used to. There is this deep resilience, but at the same time, this is a fight at the moment that doesn't have -- appear to have an end. There is, as far as we know, no diplomatic off-ramp in sight. And both sides speak political leadership, speaking metaphorically very strongly, but speaking through military means, not diplomatic means at the moment.

GOLODRYGA: All right. Nic Robertson, thank you so much.

Let's go to David Sanger from "The New York Times."

And, David, you have been watching this unfold as we all have. Some of the fiercest fighting between these two countries in years. Tehran experiencing more attacks than it has had to go back decades to the Iran-Iraq war to see what Israel has been able to do. Israel says it has achieved air superiority over the past 60 hours. Its fighter jets have been flying over the skies of Iran, taking out some of its top IRGC leaders, military leaders, nuclear scientists, and as well trying to get at those nuclear facilities.

What are you focused on right now as we are about 48 hours into this war?

DAVID SANGER, WHITE HOUSE AND NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT, NEW YORK TIMES: Well, Bianna, it's been a remarkable 48 hours. Iran hasn't seen an attack like this since the Iranian Revolution in 1979. I think we may be just at the opening moments of this.

I'm focused on a few things. The first is the question of what Israel's objectives are here. If its main objective is to truly wipe out the nuclear program, then it's made some dents, but it's got a long way to go. We think that the main fuel deposits, nuclear fuel that they had enriched to 60 percent purity, that's the near bomb grade material you hear so often about, has still been untouched, and may have to remain that way because if you bomb it, you can create a radiological incident that's mostly in the ancient city of Isfahan.

We know that they've done a lot of damage to the Natanz nuclear plant, but no evidence that they've gotten down deep into where the centrifuge halls are. And they haven't really touched, as far as we can tell, the Fordow plant, that's the other major enrichment site. And that site is deep under a mountain, about a half mile underground, according to international inspectors who have visited it.

And to do that, they would need the help of the United States. They would need the bunker busting bombs. They would need the B-2 bombers to lift those bombs and drop them. And that's a huge decision for the president, who so far has said that he knew everything about this program, but that he was not -- and about the Israeli plans, but that the U.S. was not a participant. And that was very clear in his and Secretary Marco Rubio's comments.

So we're at a real hinge point. Does the U.S. get involved? If so, how deeply and what is -- what are Netanyahu's real objectives here? Is it the nuclear program or is it regime change?

GOLODRYGA: And these are questions I'll be asking Israel's Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar right after the break. It is notable, as I'm sure you heard, we had also scheduled the foreign minister of Iran, who was going to be on the program, and he canceled just moments before air. Obviously, a lot of questions we had prepared for him.

SANGER: Yes.

GOLODRYGA: But in terms of what the United States' role here is, David, going forward, there are conflicting reports. I'm sure you're hearing them as well, both from Israelis and the United States, as to how far the United States will allow this to go. As one Israeli journalist told me, Israel started this war, but it will end only by America, and that is whether America will be pressuring Israel to end this war prematurely if Israel does, in fact, want to bring it in, to go after Fordow, or bring Iran for serious negotiations now given what Israel has unleashed.

What do you think will happen?

SANGER: Well, certainly, if you looked at the president's post on Truth Social last night, it was very late. It was after the parade was over. It was a little after midnight that he put this up. He warned the Iranians against attacking any American bases or Americans in the course of this and said, if you do, it will bring the full force of the U.S. on them.

[10:10:08]

Interestingly, we have not seen in this first 48 hours any Iranian attacks on those U.S. bases. Of course, they've hit them before with drones and some other weapons in previous times. Interesting that they are being very cautious on that now.

The second thing the president said was we can end this war easily with a negotiation that would basically end the nuclear program. Basically, what it was that the U.S. put down on the table when Iran was in the negotiations with Steve Witkoff, the president's special envoy. The Iranians rejected about a week or week and a half ago the main element of that, which was that Iran would ultimately give up all enrichment on its soil and move to producing fuel as part of a consortium with their Arab neighbors.

And that in the end, the Iranians said, we must keep enrichment here. And that's what was supposed to be the subject of negotiation today in Oman between Witkoff and Foreign Minister Araghchi. Obviously that meeting did not happen. Would be interesting to see if the U.S. reaches out and says, want to talk now? I can't imagine the Iranians can conduct a negotiation while they're in the midst of the conflict.

GOLODRYGA: Yes. And we should note that 24 hours before Israel started striking Iran, the IAEA, for the first time in 20 years, announced publicly that Iran was not in compliance with its nonproliferation pact, as well in guarantees. And we should also note that the president just moments ago posted, to your point, Iran and Israel should make a deal and will make a deal. We will have peace -- in all caps -- soon between Israel and Iran.

We will see how soon that will be in my exclusive interview with Israel's Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar after the break.

David Sanger, thank you so much.

SANGER: Thank you.

GOLODRYGA: We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:16:37]

GOLODRYGA: Iran launched over 200 rockets into Israel last night alone. Some of those managed to evade Israel's vaunted air defenses, hitting 22 different sites.

So what's next in terms of Israel's offensive and defense?

Joining me now is Gideon Sa'ar, the foreign minister of Israel, in an exclusive interview.

Mr. Foreign Minister, thank you so much for taking the time. We know that Israel has struck a number of the ballistic missile sites. They're taking out a significant portion of their arsenal. But Iran is set to have an additional 1,000 to 1500 ballistic missiles.

Even with the sophisticated defense systems that Israel has, like Iron Dome and David's Sling, how long and how capable is Israel willing to withstand what could be more barrages in the days and weeks to come?

GIDEON SA'AR, ISRAELI FOREIGN MINISTER: Thank you, Bianna. And of course, when we took this historic decision, tough decision, we knew we will have difficult times and we will face casualties and -- but saying that we didn't have any other choice simply because they went forward with their nuclear program. Reached very soon to nuclear weapon, which we cannot allow for a country that openly declaring and acting for the elimination of the Jewish state, and at the same time, going forward for a huge, huge missiles plan, ballistic missiles plan.

So if we wouldn't act, we would have confronted with a much more catastrophic attacks on our cities and on our communities. So it was really in the last minute because these two threats creates threat of elimination if we will not act. This is why we acted. While we acted, we knew that there will be tough days, casualties, but we know we must continue to do this historic work for our people in order to guarantee the future of our people and of our state.

GOLODRYGA: And we know that the United States, along with other allies, have shot down a number of these missiles that have come down and helped in Israel and its defense. Have you received assurances from the United States that the U.S. will continue to provide defensive aid for the days and weeks to come, however long this conflict may last?

SA'AR: Well, we have aid from the U.S. in terms of defense, as we had when we had previous attacks of Iran on April 24th. On October 24th, we had hundreds and hundreds of missiles and drones in each of these daily attacks at the time. We are thankful for the U.S., for the administration, for the president, for the aid, and I believe that what we are doing as an ally for the U.S. and for the Western civilization as a whole, is critical in order to get back stability in this part of the world because nuclear Iran, and Iran which exports terrorism and radicalism to all the Middle East, is the cause for the war we are in since October 7th.

[10:20:22]

What we did here, first of all, we took care of Hezbollah and Hamas, two terrorist states that Iran financed and trained on our borders. And now we are dealing with the head of the snake with their ambitious, which is in the heart of their plan to eliminate the state of Israel, to get that nuclear capabilities. If we learn something from our history is when someone is saying, I'm going to eliminate the Jews, take him for his word, don't say he doesn't mean that and take all necessary steps in order to prevent him to fulfill his goal.

GOLODRYGA: How far along are you in reducing and eliminating Iran's nuclear program? We know that there were strikes, severe strikes against the Natanz facility and Isfahan as well. But obviously as many experts, all experts, and including your ambassador to the United States have noted, the entire operation really has to be completed with the elimination of Fordow.

Despite all of the sophisticated weaponry that you have in your arsenal, you do not have the B-52 bombers that are needed, as well as the bunker buster bombs that only the United States has. So are you hoping, are you anticipating that the United States will join you in eliminating the nuclear program fully by going after Fordow, too?

SA'AR: First of all, we did very significant things in terms of hurting this nuclear program. Not only hurting the main enrichment facility, which is in Natanz, but also to took out those leaders of the nuclear program, mainly those who push it forward, push for the weaponization of this program. It's something that blocked its progress in a very crucial moment.

So we, Israel, we will do whatever we can do in order to stop it. Of course, the U.S. is a sovereign state. They have their calculations and they'll decide. I'm not speaking for the U.S. We are -- we say thank you for what the U.S. support Israel, but it is not for us to decide what other nations will do in that context.

GOLODRYGA: So what does success look like for you if you don't have the B-2 bombers supplied by the United States in assistance, as well as its bunker buster bombs? How much longer will this go on before Israel can declare success if you are not able to unilaterally go after Fordow?

SA'AR: We have significant success already, and I can tell you, Bianna, that our assessment was that they are within reach of maybe less than six months for atomic bomb, and they have enough material. They enriched enough for nine nuclear bombs. So we already did something which was crucial, and we did it in the last possible minute. We are continue to deal with the threats.

I can tell you that during this night, due to the fact that we have now more ability to free -- freely fly over Tehran, we attacked also targets, objectives that is connected to the nuclear program. So that is really important. We hadn't finished our job. We still have objectives which is connected to the missile program, strategic weapons, nuclear program, and we'll continue to work there.

GOLODRYGA: Prime Minister Netanyahu said in his first statement just hours after this war began, that this was a day of liberation for the Iranian people. So is the ultimate goal here to eliminate the nuclear program or is it regime change? Is this Supreme Ayatollah and leader? Is he a potential target?

SA'AR: The goal is not a regime change. I mean, the Cabinet, the Security Cabinet had decided on the objectives. It was not one of the objectives. This is for the Iranian people to decide.

[10:25:00]

We, Israel, we don't see the Iranian people as our enemies. We had great relations with Iran until 1979, until the Islamic Revolution, when a very fanatic and barbaric regime came to power. And these are the people that chant, death to America, death to Israel. And they put as an objective to eliminate the state of Israel.

But if you will ask in closed room also other countries in the region, they would happy if this regime will stop its oppression over the Iranian people, and we will have a different one. But it's not for us to decide. That's for the Iranian people to act or to do what they want to do. We took as an objectives the nuclear program, the ballistic missiles program, the elimination program. It's all things we must stop and create the conditions for moves afterwards that also will able to achieve these objectives.

GOLODRYGA: Mr. Foreign Minister, quickly, I'm sure you're aware there is a question and confusion about how much the United States was involved prior to this attack, how much the United States knew about what this attack would look like. So can you clarify for our viewers once and for all, was the United States on board and made aware of every single plan that Israel had had in terms of unleashing this war over the past week?

We know that the president has now come out in support of it, but that's different than whether or not they knew about what Israel was going to do and were in support of it.

SA'AR: I won't say more than we informed the U.S. administration that we are going to act, and we did it after we gave chance to negotiations between the U.S. and Iran. And hopefully they would have reached an agreement that would achieve this goals by peaceful means. But Iran was not there. Iran just wanted to waste time and continue. And they even, during negotiations, push forward the nuclear plant and just the previous week, we've heard the decisions of the IAEA.

Iran is in a situation of noncompliance. They breached everything they were committed to. I'm not surprised the Iranian foreign minister canceled the interview with you. So after all other options are gone, we must take care of our security and of our existence. Of course, we informed the U.S., as friends and allies, that we are going to operate.

GOLODRYGA: Mr. Foreign Minister, thank you so much for the time. We appreciate it.

SA'AR: Thank you. Thank you for having me.

GOLODRYGA: And up next on GPS, what role will the U.S. play in all of this? I'll talk to Vali Nasr of Johns Hopkins and Susan Glasser of the "New Yorker." That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:32:47]

GOLODRYGA: Well, as the conflict between Israel and Iran shows no sign of slowing down, what can we expect from Israel's top ally, the United States? Joining me now are Vali Nasr, a professor at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, and Susan Glasser, a staff writer at "The New Yorker." Welcome, both of you.

Susan, let me start with you, because the president has been quite cagey, on the one hand, issuing statements and posting on social media that this war needs to come to an end, that peace can be made quickly between the two sides. Then there are conflicting reports about whether or not he actually would support, eventually, joining Israel in going into Fordow. What do you make of the administration's position as this war continues to expand?

SUSAN GLASSER, STAFF WRITER, THE NEW YORKER: Well, thank you, Bianna. I think you're right to point out that there's a certain confusion right now. And I think that confusion comes because it's not probably been decided yet by President Trump exactly what approach to take. It does underscore the extent to which this really was an action taken by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. They may have informed the United States, but it definitely was not the decision that Donald Trump would have made.

As you know, he's been really in fairly desperate search for one of the vaunted peace deals that he claimed would be the hallmark of his second term foreign policy. They have yet to materialize, whether it's Russia-Ukraine or an end to the war in Gaza, and now this new conflict in the midst of nuclear talks, he was conducting.

As you pointed out before the break, President Trump just posted on social media this morning a really long and, I think, fascinating post that's very defensive in tone. I think the reason for that defensiveness is because his own MAGA base was expecting Donald Trump to play the role of peacemaker.

He seemed right now to be more comfortable, frankly, deploying U.S. troops to Los Angeles than to the Middle East. And I think this pressure that we're getting from Israel is, can the United States join in in this campaign? Will the United States make the decision to help Israel essentially finish the job when it comes to attacking its -- Iran's nuclear facilities, especially Fordow, which we understand they really cannot do without some of the U.S. military capabilities, like the bunker busting bombs.

[10:35:07]

GOLODRYGA: And, Vali, let me bring you in here as well, because the president also over the weekend, in an interview with "The Atlantic," was clearly pushing back at some of that criticism within his own MAGA base, I think, primarily even Tucker Carlson, about going into potentially joining Israel in this war.

And the president said that Make America Great actually means making Iran not have a nuclear weapon as well. And that's also, in his words, America first.

There had been intelligence, and we heard from the IAEA that Iran was coming closer and closer to doing just that. What do you make of the situation at hand now?

VALI NASR, PROFESSOR, JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: Well, I think if you looked at it the way the Iranians are seeing it, and that's important because what happens next greatly depends on how they interpret events, is that they're facing two separate things. They're facing a war -- a full-fledged war with Israel.

That is not about the nuclear issue regardless of what Israel says. It's about essentially downgrading Iran as a state, finishing the job against the axis of resistance, and then hoping that maybe the regime would fall. And they see that Israel did not just attack nuclear sites, but decapitated the leadership of the military, and is also targeted large amounts of civilian targets, including apartment buildings. And there's a lot of civilian casualties. It has hit electrical and energy infrastructure, et cetera.

So, they see this as a full-fledged war against Israel. And they believe that, you know, they have to fight. They have to take the fight to Israel, and they can't get to a -- to a resolution with Israel unless they show teeth.

On the other hand, I think their interpretation is that President Trump double crossed them, that the diplomatic process was still ongoing, the talks had not failed, and yet he greenlighted, as they see it, an attack on Iran as a way of leveraging the Israeli attack to get a better deal from Iran. And the Iranians -- actually, their trust in the United States has further gone down, particularly in President Trump.

But I don't think they think they can go back to the table without actually disabusing President Trump of the notion that, you know, one off uses of Israeli military attacks on Iran can be a negotiating tool at the table. But I don't think they want to expand this war into a war with the United States. And that's where it sits.

It all comes down to whether President Trump can step in as with a -- with a kind of a deal that would stop this fighting and would resume the diplomatic negotiations. And that's not going to be easy.

GOLODRYGA: Yes, there does seem to be this narrative that he's taking a good cop sort of bad cop approach here, even saying that it will get even harder on Iran if they don't come to the negotiating table. That is what he is pushing for right now.

Vali Nasr, Susan Glasser, please stay with me. We're going to take a quick break and come back with more.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:42:43]

GOLODRYGA: Vali Nasr and Susan Glasser are back with me. And, Vali, it does appear that we are watching a seismic regional shift in the balance of power in the Middle East right now with Israel over the past year and a half really taking out the majority of Iran's proxies, and opening perhaps a new era for the Gulf states and Israel having ultimate supremacy there militarily.

The question is, what becomes of Iran right now? And does Iran, in your view, escalate under pressure and move even quicker to now develop a bomb, or do they fold?

NASR: I think the argument inside Iran that Iran needs a serious deterrence against a superior military force in the region is going to get stronger. However, despite what the foreign minister of Israel said, it's not a straight path for an easy path for Iran to build weapons. It's not that quick, and it also is fraught with a lot of different dangers. So, I think it's going to be a debate and it depends on how this phase ends before we know what Iran will do.

GOLODRYGA: And, Susan, bringing it back home, because it was interesting how you noted the president was very willing to send in troops and the National Guard to the second largest city in the streets of Los Angeles this past week, and very hesitant to do the same overseas.

He also hosted a military parade in Washington yesterday after sending those National Guard troops into Los Angeles. A lot of this is up in the courts right now. But what do you make of the president's relationship with the military? Is it healthy for America's democracy because his supporters would say yes?

GLASSER: You know, Donald Trump has always craved these very performative displays of military strength. Remember, that's one of the reasons he appointed what he called my generals to key positions in his first administration. He soured on them when he realized about America's tradition of nonpartisan military, and the idea that our military leaders, as well as our rank-and-file officers, swear an oath to the constitution, not to a president personally.

So, you know, Trump is always about the performance, about the show. He seems much more comfortable with wrapping himself in that metaphorical flag in in using the displays of military power to convey strength.

[10:45:05] But at the same time, he has made very explicit promises, political promises to his kind of core MAGA base that he was a president about focusing on America first, not getting entangled in overseas conflicts, but in fact, in ending them. He has struggled and will continue to struggle to be a meaningful peacemaker in the world, in part because the world's conflicts are more intractable than the kind of negotiating that Donald Trump is used to doing in his business life.

You notice, for example, that he no longer talks about settling the Russia-Ukraine war. But it was really striking to me that he takes a phone call from Vladimir Putin on his birthday yesterday and is getting Putin's advice about, you know, what he should do with Iran. He just apparently gave an interview this morning, said he was open to Russia playing some kind of mediation role.

You know, again, this is a real underscoring that Donald Trump is not where he wants to be and not where he promised to be politically, being a peacemaker in the world. America's closest ally, Israel, is the one that launched this war. It's a -- it's a real dilemma for Donald Trump.

GOLODRYGA: Right. And a lot is at stake here with Russia in particular right now into its third year of war in Ukraine, because so much of it relies on getting some of that weaponry and drones from Iran itself. So, it's no surprise that Russia is wanting to participate in these talks as well in the conflict. All right. Vali Nasr, Susan Glasser, thank you so much.

And up next for us on GPS, I'll speak with retired Major General James Spider Marks about the military might at play in the war between Israel and Iran.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:51:22]

GOLODRYGA: So, where does the war between Israel and Iran go from here? To help us understand the military dynamics at play, I'm now joined by retired Major General Spider Marks. Thank you so much for joining us.

This was clearly an operation that Israel had been planning for a number of years now. Yes, they have full air dominance over the skies of Iran right now. They have a number of weapons at their disposal in terms of going after specific targets, whether it's energy infrastructure, whether it's natural gas fields and oil fields, and going after top leadership.

I guess the question is if their ultimate goal is to go after these nuclear facilities, do you envisage -- Fordow specifically, do you see any way they can do that without the United States stepping in?

MAJ. GEN. JAMES "SPIDER" MARKS (RET), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Well, first of all, thank you, Bianna, for having me. I do. I think what Israel needs to do very clearly is to continue this campaign that they are on right now. They've got a very extensive target list. You just laid it out very precisely.

And then define what they are truly trying to achieve. And if it is the elimination of the Iranian capacity to develop a nuclear weapon, well, that's a -- that's a long run for a possibly short slide. I don't know how attainable that is.

However, they are conducting right now, the Israelis, effects-based operations, which means they are going after the capacity for the Iranians to develop this nuclear weapon, and then they've got to be able to deliver it.

They've got to weaponize it -- take the enriched uranium, they've got to weaponize it. They've got to get it to the missiles. They've got to marry that up. Then they have to be able to deliver it.

So, all of that capacity, which includes nuclear R and D, the individuals that are engaged in that, the distribution, the further development of capabilities that would be hidden from Israeli capacity to gather that intelligence. Israel can go after all of those ancillary and tangential targets and effect -- get an effect that they're looking for, which is Iran may be able to develop uranium and be able to store that nuclear fuel deeply into deeply buried targets, but they can't do anything with it at that point.

That's where I think they are going at this -- at this stage of this campaign. And then what that does at some point, Israel, you know, has the momentum. They are acting, whereas Iran is reacting.

The momentum belongs to Israel. And at some point, I think, they can determine where they want to stop. That is, I think, the near-term objective. Ultimately, there's got to be a diplomatic solution but that comes next.

GOLODRYGA: Well, and it's disappointing then that Iran's foreign minister canceled with us just moments before the show, because those were some of the questions we were planning on asking him.

The United States, at least publicly, from the secretary of state to the president himself, has said that this was a unilateral move by the Israelis. And that if U.S. targets are hit, all hell will break loose, to paraphrase some of the language the president and the threats the president has leveled against Iran. We have a number of assets in the region as well personnel. Some were sent away before this attack. But if there was to be a strike against U.S. assets quickly, in your view, what should the U.S. response be?

MARKS: Well, it depends upon what the Iranians are able to do in terms of attacking, delivering kinetic results on those U.S. -- that U.S. presence, whether it's in embassies and consulates, if it's military presence, if it's in the Mideast or in the Red Sea, elsewhere in the region of the United States, does have a presence.

[10:55:08]

So, what happens next from the Iranians is the first determination. I'm very skeptical that Iran has that capacity. They certainly have the bluster and the narrative is very, very emphatic and clear that they will do something, the Iranians. But clearly, I don't think they've got the ability to reach and to achieve that.

But let's not underestimate the IRGC. This is very capable. Of course, it has been damaged. But like any other organization that's professional and it is -- there are leaderships that will -- there are other leaders that will step up into those leadership roles and take over.

I don't think the United States -- I think the United States would be very much a part -- is very much a part of the defense of Israel, the air defense in particular. But I don't think there would be an in-kind response kinetically from the United States.

GOLODRYGA: Well, we will be continuing to cover all of this. General Spider Marks, thank you so much for your time. And thank you all for being a part of GPS this week. Fareed, will be back next week.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:00:00]