Return to Transcripts main page
One World with Zain Asher
Israel Launches New Strikes on Iranian Military Infrastructure; After U.S. Enters the Fight, What Happens Next in Iran; NATO Leaders to Meet this Week in The Hauge; CNN sees Aftermath of Iranian Missile Strike in Tel Aviv; Trump Suggests "Regime Change" Possible in Iran; Oil Prices Spike, Then Fall After U.S. Strikes on Iran. Aired 11a-12p ET
Aired June 23, 2025 - 11:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[11:00:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN HOST, ONE WORLD: Tehran vows the U.S. will pay for strikes against Iran. "One World" starts right now. Israel and Iran trade
strikes. Israel hitting nuclear targets and a notorious prison. U.S. President Donald Trump floats the idea of regime change in Iran as he
prepares to meet with his national security team.
Plus, assessing the damage to Iran's nuclear program, what we know about the destruction and how long it may take them to rebuild? Hello, everyone.
Live from New York. I'm Bianna Golodryga. Zain is off today. You are watching "One World".
We begin this hour with breaking news, Israel is launching new attacks on Iran using what it's called unprecedented force, as Tehran vows retaliation
for U.S. strikes and nations across the region brace for the possibility of a wider war. The IDF says that it targeted access routes to the Fordow
Nuclear Facility in central Iran today, along with a paramilitary headquarters and a notorious prison in the capital.
Tehran, unleashed a new wave of missiles at Israel as well, but its rhetoric was largely directed at the U.S. The Head of Iran's Armed Forces
warning the White House it will, quote, never back down following American strikes on three of the country's nuclear sites over the weekend.
President Donald Trump, meanwhile, is meeting with his national security team in a few hours. On Sunday, he floated the idea of regime change in
Iran, an idea that was reiterated by his press secretary just a short time ago.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: If the Iranian regime refuses to give up their nuclear program or engage in talks. We just took
out their nuclear program on Saturday night, as you all know, but if they refuse to engage in diplomacy moving forward, why shouldn't the Iranian
people rise up against this brutal terrorist regime? That's a question the president raised last night.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: CNN's Nick Paton Walsh is monitoring developments for us from London. But first, let's go to Nic Robertson in Tel Aviv. And Nic the
Israeli military said that it carried out over 100 strikes in Tehran over just the past two hours alone. Again, they have air superiority and
dominance over Tehran, just something that would have been unthinkable a few weeks ago.
And as we have noted, continuing to target not only nuclear sites, but also Evin Prison, a notorious prison there and other targets of the government.
What is the Israeli military and what is the Israeli government saying about these new strikes?
NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: It appears that the Israeli government is shifting focus tactic, perhaps a little bit. It's
keeping up the targeting of those nuclear facilities, of the weapon storage, missile launch sites, those sorts of things.
But shifting it, as the defense minister said, unprecedented force being used on Tehran, targeting Evin Prison, targeting the besieged, much feared
paramilitary force that the regime uses to crack down on anti-regime protesters.
Indeed, the IDF here listing a number of different headquarters and facilities in Tehran that they said were associated with internal security
in Iran, not the external threat to Israel, but the internal security.
And I think perhaps it was the foreign minister who gave the strongest hint about the intent here, leaning towards opening the door physically at Evin
Prison, even for the potential of a move towards regime change, saying that we warned the Iranian regime not to target civilians.
And you might think when he says that he means Israeli civilians, but he goes on to say they didn't, and this was our response with a picture of
Evin prison with the door being blown off. Evin prison being, of course, the prison where Iran locks up political prisoners and foreign nationals, a
much feared and brutal prison that its reputation is. So, Israel really does seem to be switching footing slightly towards that.
And we got a hint of that also from the finance minister here, Betzalel Smotrich, far right, member of the Israeli government. And then a hint of
it as well from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in a speech yesterday talking about the issue of regime change. And it was coming out fourth
rightly and saying that's what we're doing. But every indication is they're trying to enable the possibility for it appears.
[11:05:00]
GOLODRYGA: Right. They're saying it's not an official goal but if that is the fallout, so be it. Nic Robertson, thank you. Let's turn to Nick Paton
Walsh. We've heard some harsh rhetoric, I guess, to be expected from the Iranians. We haven't seen a physical response just yet, but warnings aimed
not just at Israel, but at the United States as well. What are they saying?
NICK PATON WALSH, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. I mean, we've heard from a variety of Iranian officials, one speaking to our
Fred Pleitgen, suggesting that they would choose to respond against the United States directly. And I think that echoes the notions we've been
hearing for previous days.
The retaliation is something that would essentially be inevitable if indeed, the United States, as it did over the weekend, attacked Iran. How
that could happen, though, is really going to be a reflection of how degraded Iran's capabilities have become over the last 10 days, because the
United States struck their key nuclear sites with 12 bunker buster bombs over the weekend, Iran didn't suddenly become more militarily capable.
In fact, the opposite is increasingly true day by day, particularly with the airstrikes Nic was just talking about, that have appeared to have hit
Tehran in what seems like the most substantial wave we've seen since the very first hours of the conflict about 10 days ago now.
Key military sites in Tehran, indeed, the access routes to the Fordow Nuclear Plant that was struck, it seems, at least six times, according to
satellite images by the United States over the weekend. But those access routes hit again by the Israelis today, and I think, a sense that Israel is
slowly working through what remains on its target list.
What indeed can Iran do? It faces another challenge of how many nuclear -- sorry, how many Iran, Israel capable missiles indeed, do they have left?
That's missiles of the range that can hit Israel. That was estimated weeks ago at being 2000 the Israelis have suggested now potentially 2500 was the
total of their arsenal.
But their security source is now suggesting 800 may have been destroyed on the ground and 500 launched. And that many experts I've talked to puts them
at about 1200 or so left. That's kind of close to the key minimum you'd want to get to, to even have some kind of missile deterrent. So limited
ballistic missile options.
Could they use drones to potentially attack U.S. military facilities. That's a possibility. But remember to the telegraphing of this has been
days, if not months, if not years, depending on how you view the threat level against U.S. forces in the Gulf, their fifth fleet in Bahrain, the
air facilities at Qatar's Al-Udeid Air Base.
So, a lot potentially Iran could do, but it has to weigh the consequences of the U.S. retaliation, regardless, frankly, of how impactful their attack
might be. It will be simply the bid, the ambition of what Iran tried to do that the U.S. will respond to and the damage it's already had done to its
military infrastructure. It leaves it in a very difficult place. It can't provoke further escalated American and Israeli retaliation.
It has minimal, I'd say significantly reduced military capabilities at this point, but somehow has to restore a deterrent despite the extraordinary
damage done to it in terms of prestige and capability in the region over the past 10 days, an exceptionally hard choice, and that indeed may be what
we've yet to hear repeatedly publicly from Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Bianna.
GOLODRYGA: Yeah, you note the number of missiles that Israel was able to take out, also the missile launchers themselves. I believe the IDF said
that they've limited about two thirds of their missile launchers thus far, so a significant number, if that is, in fact, the case. Nick Paton Walsh
and Nic Robertson, our thanks to you both.
As the U.S. attempts to figure out how much damage has been done to Iran's nuclear program, it is worth looking at what Donald Trump was trying to do
with these air strikes. CNN Politics Senior Reporter Stephen Collinson says the president effectively tried to bomb Iran to the negotiating table and
to an effective surrender of its capability and capacity to enrich uranium.
But Collinson adds that if the attack did not destroy Iran's nuclear stockpile, Trump's bid to eliminate its path to a weapon could instead
catalyze a race by Tehran to build a rudimentary device that would leave the world a far more dangerous place. Stephen Collinson joins me now. Yes,
there is concern about perhaps Iran rushing to build even a dirty bomb at this point, and concerns about where the 400 kilograms of enriched uranium
are.
I'd like to have you also weigh in on the Truth Social post from the president yesterday, which seemed to come out of nowhere, following what
appeared to be a disciplined response and narrative from this administration on all of the talk shows that this was strictly aimed at
pushing back and eliminating Iran's nuclear capability and program, and nothing to do with regime change.
[11:10:00]
And then you saw the president posts it's not politically correct to use the term regime change, but if the current Iranian regime is unable to
quote in all caps, make Iran great again, why wouldn't there be a regime change? And then he wrote -- make Iran great again. Talk about the
significance of that post.
STEPHEN COLLINSON, CNN POLITICS SENIOR REPORTER: Yeah, in some senses, you could argue that was Trump being Trump. He likes to provoke. He's clearly
feeling very bullish about what he regards as the success of the strikes and the way that, once again, he sees the central stage in the world in
pulling this off.
The words regime change are politically toxic in the United States because of so many people remember what happened, particularly in the Iraq War,
when the U.S. toppled Saddam Hussein and then lost the peace and was embroiled in a quagmire for many years.
But it is worth I think, listening to what Trump says, he often trials things. Sends up trial balloons. He likes to see what the reaction is.
Perhaps he was irritated that all of his lieutenants, the Vice President, the Secretary of State, were on the Sunday talk show saying, no, no, no,
this isn't about regime change.
Perhaps it is coming around to the Israeli apparent, Israeli point of view, that if the regime fell, that would be a good thing, despite all the
certainties. So far, though, you have to look what's happening in the United States, and there doesn't appear to be any attempt to engineer that
regime change. But I think in Washington, not many people would lose much sleep if the Islamic Republic were to dissolve.
GOLODRYGA: Yeah, there's a difference, though, between the Islamic Republic dissolving and there being sheer chaos in a country the size of 90 million
people --
COLLINSON: Yeah.
GOLODRYGA: -- especially when you've got some 400 kilograms of enriched uranium, which no one can vouch for at this point. So, we'll talk more
about that later in the hour. But as far as this difficult decision for the president to have made, it appears that this there was a feint of sorts in
terms of distance between Prime Minister Netanyahu and the president as the planning for this went along.
And the president, to quote a number of reporters, may have had a case of FOMO, not only just green lighting Israel's attack, but then seeing how
successful that attack was, and ultimately saying, let the United States close the deal here with the bunker busting bombs that only the United
States can produce.
COLLINSON: Yeah, and certainly it looks like Trump walks straight into what you would think would be an Israeli plan, since they started this war with
attacks on Iran's nuclear facilities that only the United States ultimately could finish.
But when we get back to that idea that I was talking about, about how Trump was trying to bomb Iran into the negotiating table. It does raise the
question, really about how much strategy there is going on? How much people in this administration really do understand about the Islamic Republic?
Because if they weren't responding to negotiations before Iran was bombed in the most violent moment in the history of the showdown between the
Islamic Republic and the United States over nearly 50 years, I'm not really seeing the logic that makes it more likely that the Iranians now, when
they've been -- they potentially have lost part of their nuclear program, which is almost existential to the regime, would be more likely to talk to
the President of the United States.
So, I think, as always with Trump, he seems to be making decisions on impulse and on the spur of the moment. Sometimes they pay off, sometimes
they don't. But what we have is a United States President who ordered these raids without notifying Congress, without preparing the American people,
totally bypassing all of America's traditional allies.
That is something I think to think about that tells us a lot where the world is right now, and it's something that I think if this does end up
working out badly, is going to leave the president very exposed.
GOLODRYGA: Though, we should note, he is not the first president to launch a strike like this without the official authorization of Congress, as well
his predecessors did. And that is something that obviously you've got members of Congress on the Republican side raising in response to the
outrage you're hearing from Democrats. Stephen Collinson, thank you so much.
COLLINSON: Thanks.
GOLODRYGA: Well, for another perspective on everything that's happening the past couple of days, I want to welcome CNN's Fareed Zakaria, Host of Fareed
Zakaria GPS, good to see you, my friend Fareed. So, Rafael Grossi, the Head of the U.N. Nuclear Watchdog IAEA came out today and said that the U.S.
strikes likely caused, quote, very significant damage at Fordow.
[11:15:00]
And beyond the damage, though, is the question of the status of Iran's 60 percent enriched uranium in their stock there. We're talking about some 400
kilograms of enriched uranium that is a short step away from the roughly 90 percent needed to make it weapons grade. You spoke with Grossi yesterday.
Can you talk about what stood out to you most from that conversation?
FAREED ZAKARIA, CNN HOST, FAREED ZAKARIA GPS: Probably the fact Bianna that he didn't think that this meant the program was destroyed, ended
obliterated, any of the words that administration officials are using. I think he viewed this as a potentially very serious setback. But you know,
it's important to remember, the Iranian nuclear program is 70 years old.
It was started under the Shah of Iran. They have thousands of scientists and technicians who have worked on it. They have, as you point out, a huge
stockpile of enriched uranium which can be used just as easily. And so, it isn't clear that the strikes will have the effect that people are looking
for, in the sense that it doesn't end the program.
And it doesn't end the need for some kind of negotiation with Iran, because at the end of the day, Iran is an oil rich country. It can rebuild what has
been destroyed. Now it may not be able to rebuild in Fordow because there's some geological issues if the -- you know, if it's become an unstable
place, so there will be costs associated, and it's a big setback.
But it's important remember, for a regime like this, if this -- if they view this as existential, they can rebuild. They can take what they have
that they've hidden. There may even be a site. There's -- you know there is some discussion of the fact that might be another enrichment facility that
they were going to talk to the IAEA about just before the bombings.
So, all of which tells you, at the end of the day, this has to -- this has to lead to a negotiation where the Iranians agree to wind down the program
the way they had in the Iran nuclear deal. It's important to remember, they got to essentially zero installed centrifuges under that JCPOA gave up 98
percent of their stock pile of enriched uranium. That's where we need to get to, and it's not clear the bombing got us there.
GOLODRYGA: Well, getting Iran to the negotiating table clearly came for the president something that he had prioritized. There wasn't a lack of
interest on his part for bringing them to the negotiating table and avoiding turning this into a kinetic situation.
In fact, according to "AXIOS", here's what they wrote about it. They said the timing was right. The Ayatollah gave Trump and the U.S. the middle
finger, and that came with a price. Can this regime Fareed survive without its nuclear program?
It has cost them upwards of half a trillion dollars over the last several decades to work on Iran sits on 10 percent of the world's oil and gas
supply, and yet their economy continues to suffer at the hands of sanctions. Can it survive without a nuclear program?
ZAKARIA: It's a good question, Bianna. And I think the answer, which we can see in the history is, I don't think they can give it up entirely. But I
think they can put very substantial limitations on it. And I come to this conclusion very simply because they did.
Israeli intelligence, let alone American intelligence, came to the conclusion that the Iranians had basically been adhering to the to the Iran
nuclear deal signed under Obama. So, they seem to be willing, in return for sanctions relief, to place the program under very substantial inspections
and very substantial constraints.
Could they give it up altogether? Would they be willing to literally dismantle every element of it, including the purely peaceful enrichment
parts of it? I think it would be a very hard climb down given as you say, that they've invested so much in it. They've spent so much in it. Though
it's worth pointing out that half trillion-dollar figure is a calculation based on lost revenues, opportunity costs that they've incurred.
In other words, the cost of all the sanctions, the actual cost of -- I only make this point because building nuclear weapons is not that expensive for
any -- for an oil rich country. It's the sanctions, the cost of the sanctions that they have brought burn the brunt.
But they've borne that brunt, as you as you point out. And so, I don't think they would be willing to literally -- you know tear it all out, but
would they be willing to put it under substantial supervision and constraints? Well, they did it once before.
[11:20:00]
So, Fareed, looking at the battle damage assessment from a wider lens, you have the majority of the nuclear scientists, at least the modern day
current nuclear scientists eliminated. Nuclear facilities have been crippled. Two thirds of the ballistic missile launchers have been
destroyed.
We've seen what's looking more and more like a weakened or confused leadership now, over the past few weeks, and a defanged proxy group
throughout the region. So, in terms of what Iran could do in response now we've seen the hot rhetoric. What are they capable of at this point?
ZAKARIA: Iran is at its weakest point since the Iranian Revolution. And I think that the real story of the last week is not the American strikes.
It's the Israeli strikes. Israel has absolutely devastated Iran. First of all, the loss of the military high command.
You're talking about almost 15 people at the senior most level dead, the loss of nuclear scientists, again, maybe 20 of them have been killed, the
loss of those missile launchers very, very important, because it means the only way you can overwhelm the Iron Dome Israeli air defenses is by massive
barrages at a time -- you know, maybe 100 going through in a five second period.
That becomes very, very difficult to do. The proxies, Hezbollah, largely decimated. The Houthis have been checked to a certain extent. Hamas
obviously essentially destroyed. So, the Iranian asymmetrical strategy, which was, we're going to use all these militias to keep Israel on edge,
and it'll be -- it's a kind of cheap, asymmetric way to put Israel and the Gulf States under pressure.
That is in counters. I think Iran is in a very, very weak position. The Israeli strikes both several months ago, which destroyed the air defenses
and Hezbollah and the ones that took place now extraordinary, because they combined extraordinary intelligence with devastatingly accurate air raids.
So, I think that's the real story here. Iran is a shadow of itself. I don't think it has a lot of options. The options people talk about like blocking
the Straits of Hormuz would be a nuclear option, it would hurt Iran as much as anybody else. They don't have many asymmetrical options left.
I don't really believe that there are thousands and thousands of sleeper cells all over the West. I think this is -- you know kind of Iranian
propaganda that I don't think one should believe. So, I think they're in very bad shape.
GOLODRYGA: And perhaps that's one of the reasons we haven't seen oil prices spike as one would have expected. I actually think they were higher once
Israel started these attacks over a week ago, than they currently are right now.
Perhaps the market is taking into fact what you've just laid out as well in terms of what economic suicide that would be to shut down the Strait of
Hormuz and damage that would cost one of its only remaining allies or friends, and that is China right now. Fareed Zakaria, always good to see
you. Thank you so much for taking the time to join us.
ZAKARIA: My pleasure Bianna.
GOLODRYGA: And still to come for us, NATO leaders are gathering this week in The Hague. The top agenda item is increased defense spending, but the
rapidly unfolding events in the Middle East could overshadow that discussion. We'll explain up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[11:25:00]
GOLODRYGA: Well, as Israel and Iran exchanged fire for an 11 straight day, Russian President Vladimir Putin hosted Iran's foreign minister in Moscow
earlier. Putin condemned the U.S. attacks on Iran and reassured the people of Tehran that they have Russia support. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas
Araghchi said Russia was, quote, on the right side of history. The two countries have been close allies for years.
According to U.S. officials, the Iranian regime has supplied Russia with weapons in its war in Ukraine. Meanwhile, European leaders met in Brussels
earlier to discuss the Middle East and Ukraine. Spain's Foreign Minister called on the EU to suspend its pact with Israel and impose a weapons
embargo, largely over Israel's conduct in Gaza.
He says Europe must show courage. Those comments come ahead of this week's NATO Summit, where a major agenda item will likely be defense spending.
U.S. President Trump, who is expected to attend, has frequently criticized the alliance for not spending enough on defense.
CNN's Clare Sebastian joins me now from The Hague where the NATO Summit will be taking place. And all the more interest now in the president's
appearance at this summit, because it can interpret -- be interpreted in a number of ways. One in a positive sense that in time of need, the United
States will come to the support of a close ally. And the other, obviously, is that the president could be distracted by other regions in conflict as
well. Walk us through what you're hearing.
CLARE SEBASTIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, certainly Bianna Iran did take up quite a lot of the press conference that NATO Secretary General gave
earlier. The big deliverable here will be a big increase in defense spending from 2 percent which was set in 2014 to a target of 5 percent
which NATO allies have apparently agreed to reach over the course of the next 10 years.
But obviously that is an intricate job getting to consensus. We know there's been some watering down already. Spain appears to have negotiated
some language a Spanish government source telling CNN that means that it's somewhat ambiguous, and they say they won't necessarily need to hit that
target in order to hit NATO's capability requirements.
And all of this is not just about deterring Russia, of course, even as we see attacks on Ukraine escalate. But as you noted, keeping the U.S.
engaged, keeping it on side. And on the issue of Iran, I did put that question to the NATO Secretary General, Mark Rutte, what impact this
situation, the U.S. involvement could have on its commitment to NATO?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEBASTIAN: Secretary General, thank you very much. I wanted to ask you, now that we see the United States directly involved in the conflict in Iran,
are you concerned that that impacts their view of their obligations to NATO, that it perhaps pushes NATO further down the list of priorities?
MARK RUTTE, NATO SECRETARY GENERAL: I don't think so. Of course, the news about Iran is, at this moment, grabbing all the headlines. And it is, of
course, important news. But this summit is really about making sure that the whole of NATO, 1 billion people, will be safe, not only today, but also
in 3, 5, 7, years from now.
And Iran, let's not forget. Iran is heavily involved in the fight of Russia against Ukraine by, for example, their drones' deliveries, which are
killing innocent Ukrainians every day in cities, in communities without any respect for life. So, there is also a close connection between Iran, of
course, North Korea, China, Belarus, but also Iran with Russia when it comes to the war in Ukraine. So, no doubt it will emerge in the
discussions.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SEBASTIAN: And I think Bianna he alluded to sort of another piece of this complex chess board, which is that if Russia steps up its support for Iran,
and so far, it's tried to balance both sides of this conflict.
[11:30:00]
But of course, we saw the Iranian Foreign Minister in Moscow today. If that support steps up, does that then put at risk the reset, the sort of
cautious reset we see in relations with the U.S. And that, of course, would be something that NATO allies would welcome.
But I think the big question for this summit happening over the next couple of days is, will that 5 percent spending pledge be enough, essentially, to
keep Russia out and the U.S. in?
GOLODRYGA: All right. Clare Sebastian, thank you. Still ahead for us, Donald Trump calls on oil companies to keep prices down. Will his words be
enough? We'll take a look.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
GOLODRYGA: All right, welcome back to "One World". I'm Bianna Golodryga in New York. Here are some international headlines we're watching today.
Iranian officials are vowing America will pay for its strikes on three nuclear sites last weekend, but so far, there's been no comment from Iran's
Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khomeini.
Meantime, there's uncertainty about President Trump's intentions after his defense secretary said the U.S. strikes were not about regime change. Trump
then floated the idea of exactly that on his social media. Iran and Israel trading strikes today with Israel unleashing on the Iranian capital and
striking access routes to the Fordow nuclear facility, as well as the entrance to the notorious Evin prison.
Footage from Iran's state broadcaster captured the blast as it happened. Iran launched a wave of missiles at Israel, setting off air raid sirens and
disrupting power to several communities in the south. The Head of NATO says he doesn't believe U.S. strikes on Iran mean it's any less committed to the
75-year-old alliance.
Mark Rutte was speaking the day before NATO's two-day summit opens in the Netherlands, against the backdrop of Russia's war in Ukraine and Israel's
military campaigns in Gaza and against Iran. President Trump will be there. He's been demanding that NATO members boost their defense spending to at
least 5 percent of GDP.
[11:35:00]
And a brutal heat dome is building over parts of the U.S., including here in New York City, with millions of people from the Midwest to the east
coast facing extreme temperatures. Some areas are expected to break heat records reaching upwards of 35 degrees Celsius.
But with the humidity, it could feel like it's well into the 40s, especially in the mid-Atlantic region. Well, Iran is also launching a fresh
missile barrage today, disrupting the electricity supply to several communities in Southern Israel. Over the weekend, a residential community
in Tel Aviv suffered heavy damage after the city was hit by a missile strike. CNN's Jeremy Diamond visited the scene of the attack.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN JERUSALEM CORRESPONDENT: A few hours after those U.S. strikes in Iran, a barrage of Iranian ballistic missiles came raining down
on Israel, and this right here is the destruction that was wrought by just one of those ballistic missiles here in Tel Aviv.
DIAMOND (voice-over): More than 20 people were injured in this strike, which sheared off the side of this residential building, laying bare the
lives of those who once lived here.
As cleanup crews pushed piles of debris survivors returned to grab what they can. Many still shaken by what they have just survived and all they
have lost.
JEREMY ZETLAND, LOST HOME IN MISSILE ATTACK: Maybe I do need to take some of these things.
DIAMOND (voice-over): Half a block away from where the missile struck. Jeremy Zetland has spent the day picking through the debris of his
childhood home.
ZETLAND: We used to put the DJ up there, and we used to have parties here, our friends --
DIAMOND (voice-over): Moving from one destroyed room to the next. Jeremy has been trying to separate the things that matter from those that don't.
ZETLAND: It's just things. It's nothing. This is not important, but it's just to --
DIAMOND (voice-over): And in that moment, he is reminded of what is.
ZETLAND: So, who you are, the people and so that's what's important. This is not important, but it's just a symbol of how we're holding ourselves to
be strong. It's hard.
DIAMOND (voice-over): Jeremy Diamond, CNN, Tel Aviv.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GOLODRYGA: The human cost of this war, while Israel is also unleashing what it calls unprecedented force, striking at what it calls the heart of
Tehran. Social media shows clouds of smoke over the capital. The Israeli military says one target was the headquarters of the Islamic Revolutionary
Guards.
Another target Iran's notorious Evin prison. Security forces there are known for their long record of human rights abuses. Let's bring in Israeli
journalist Amit Segal. He is the Chief Political Analyst for Israel's Channel 12 news and a leading Israeli newspaper. He anchors Israel's "Meet
the Press" show and is author of "The Daily Newsletter". It's noon in Israel.
Amit, I'm so glad you're able to join us. Welcome to the program. So, in terms of a battlefield damage assessment here, meaning how many centrifuges
have been destroyed in these attacks these three sites, has the 400 kilograms of enriched uranium been located? What is the latest read from
the Israeli intelligence on this front?
Is it too soon, because it was notable to hear from the prime minister over the weekend, hinting at more insight into what they have gathered?
AMIT SEGAL, ISRAELI JOURNALIST: So good evening, Bianna. I'm from Jerusalem. There isn't a single centrifugal left in Iran. As far as I
understand, Natanz is fully destroyed. So does Isfahan and Fordow, especially the site of the central folks. As for the uranium, I think this
is the 450-kilogram question, where is the enrich uranium to the level of 60 percent.
And I think 36 hours after the U.S. attack, we give or take, know the answer, and the answer is that it is buried under the ruins of Fordow and
Isfahan. This is it. This is the reason why it was quite hard to detect where it is, since the Beatles bombed the site. Now here's the thing, it is
locked there.
Israel attacked today the roads leading to Fordow in order to prevent Iranians and the ILGC to actually approach the site. So, it cannot be used.
And as far as I know, Bianna, the responsible for obtaining this uranium, or preventing Iranians from getting to it, is at the U.S. and not at
Israel. So, the U.S. is in charge of actually taking care of the uranium, as far as I understand.
GOLODRYGA: So that may explain why Israel has been attacking the access routes at Fordow as you have laid out.
[11:40:00]
So, assuming Iran isn't completely incompetent, and at this point, just given their lack of actions over the last few weeks, and anticipating what
we've seen that, that is worth asking in and of itself, but assuming that Iran had been expecting some sort of attack. What are the chances?
Is Israel concerned at all, at the opportunity perhaps, that they had of moving the 400 kilograms of enriched uranium to a separate site?
SEGAL: So, first of all, I think Iranians were not aware of how devastating this attack is going to be, especially the American one. Well, they
haven't. They didn't anticipate the Israeli attack, let alone the American one. The one of the proofs is that the military leadership slept at their
homes at the night where the attack began.
So, I think it would be fair to assume that they haven't smuggled the uranium. And I think it's more than merely assumptions. More than this,
there was fear in Israel that Iran might try, if walls come to wars in their eyes, to make a dirty bomb, aka not putting it on a ballistic
missile, but trying to smuggle it, maybe to Israel on a truck or something like this.
But this is a very far-reaching scenario. As far as I understand, all, if not most, if not all of the enriched uranium lies under the ruins of Fordow
and Isfahan.
GOLODRYGA: So how long is Israel willing to wait to make that determination? I mean, they have air superiority right now. Is there a
scenario where you're actually going to see Israeli special forces on the ground looking for that enriched uranium and confirming if it is where you
say it is believed to be underground, they're buried at Fordow.
SEGAL: So as far as I understand, Israel's plans for a week or so. I don't know if ground forces are about to reach Fordow. I'm not -- I haven't got
the memo, but what I can say is that the U.S. attack actually prevented Israeli plans from happening. I luckily enough, so I don't see it happening
quite soon, but Israel's plan is for give or take a week from now, and since the entire nuclear project of Iran is, give or take destroyed.
So, I think the emissions left are the ballistic missile industry, especially the places where it is produced, in something like 80 launchers
that still actually a feel active, and the results of which you actually described a few minutes ago from Ashdod and Ashkelon in Israel.
GOLODRYGA: So, I sense the sarcasm when you say you didn't get the memo, but we should note that there appear to be have been more memos delivered
to you than other reporters, because all along, over the past few weeks, and especially the last few days.
You have been absolutely right in terms of what the reporting has confirmed, and that was --that there was much more alliance between the
United States and Israel as far as this operation would unfold. And that then leads me to my question about regime change, because you got that
tweet, that post from President Trump that sort of blindsided Americans here and deviated from their official talking points.
And now you're hearing from more Israeli officials that while it is not the official policy and war goal that they wouldn't be upset if that indeed
happened. So how much focus is on that alone?
SEGAL: I hope that not too much. It's an exaggerated appetite. The achievements are amazing. It was the single most dramatic military
achievement since six-day war in 1967. So, I think it would be a grave mistake to actually try and topple the regime, first because Israel and the
U.S. has a very bad experience in trying to actually do it, both in Lebanon, Iraq, Cuba, et cetera.
And second is because I think this administration, this regime, is doomed. We already see the public opinion in Iran, as far as there is such thing
officially that 80 percent of the Iran population is against the regime. I think this might even rise up following the Israeli attacks that actually
put Iran with no defense at all, thus shredding to pieces.
The image of Iran as a regional superpower, and without the nuclear program, I think they are quite doomed, and we have to give the Iran people
to do what they need. And as far as I understand, Bianna, this is the official policy of the State of Israel. But since Israel is a democracy and
not an Iranian dictatorship, so ministers are allowed according to the law to say stupid things.
[11:45:00]
GOLODRYGA: Yeah, well, one of the ministers, I'll let, you describe him, as stupid or not, or at least what he said stupid or not is in an interview
today, the heritage minister said that Israel is working with the opposition in Iran, and that coupled with Israel a striking Evin prison. Is
there any significance to read into that?
SEGAL: I think the heritage minister is less informed than most of the CNN audience about the world, because they watch CNN and he doesn't.
GOLODRYGA: All right, we'll leave it there. Amit Segal, thank you so much. Good to see you.
SEGAL: Thank you so much, Bianna.
GOLODRYGA: And still to come on "One World". We'll take a look at how the conflict in the Middle East is affecting oil prices. That's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
GOLODRYGA: Well, as with any major conflict in the Middle East, it brings uncertainty in the oil markets, and uncertainty typically brings higher oil
prices, and that brings a strain on your wallet. Since the U.S. strike on Iran, oil prices have inched up, but right now, the global Benchmark Brent
crude, is actually down, trading down ever so slightly, down nearly three tenths of a percentage point.
So that is notable, and we've talked about the rather muted response as well, since the latest fighting and escalation in the region between Israel
and Iran, and now the United States and Iran has been evolving into 11 days. The U.S. benchmark, also the Brent crude also down three tenths of a
point until now, a period of relatively tame oil prices has kept gas prices below $3 a gallon as well, a welcome relief for inflationary consumers,
that's for sure.
And that has prompted President Trump to issue this all-capital letters warning earlier. Everyone, keep oil prices down. I'm watching. You're
playing into the hands of the enemy. Don't do it. So, Matt Egan is following oil prices for us and joins us now. I guess, a message to oil
companies and not to price gouge as well, in terms of gas stations throughout the country.
Matt, it is rather surprising though to see oil prices, while a bit higher over the last 11 days, not nearly as high as they could have been.
MATT EGAN, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: That's right, Bianna. I'm amazed at how calm financial markets are about this increasingly alarming situation in
the Middle East.
[11:50:00]
And if you told me a few weeks ago that the U.S. would be striking Iran, I would imagine you'd see oil prices way up and stocks way down. And we did
see that last night, but it was really brief. So let me take a look at where oil prices are right now. As you noted, they're in the red, which is
pretty amazing when you think about it.
This gives back a rally of up to about 6 percent for WTI, the U.S. benchmark that we did see last night. All of those gains going away. This
is good news, I would argue, really, for the economy, for consumers around the world, because an oil price spike would have lifted gasoline prices,
and it would have been an inflationary shock, and it's still a risk, but we're not seeing it at this point.
The trillion-dollar question, though, of course, is, how is Iran going to respond? And the fear is that their response could end up being an attack
on U.S. military assets in the region, or energy infrastructure. Of course, the nightmare scenario is some sort of effort to close the Strait of
Hormuz.
Right, that is the most critical choke point for oil on the planet. It's how oil comes out of the Persian Gulf, the oil rich Persian Gulf into the
world's oceans. And every single day, 20 million barrels of crude flows through the Strait of Hormuz. That's about 20 percent of what the world
consumes.
And that's why analysts say that, yeah, if there was a closure of this waterway, you could easily see oil prices go to 100, 120 maybe $150 a
barrel. That would mean $4, 4.50 gas in the United States. And the White House is signaling they are taking this very seriously. Take a listen to
the White House Press Secretary earlier today,
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LEAVITT: I can assure you the administration is actively and closely monitoring the situation in the Strait of Hormuz. And the Iranian regime
would be foolish to make that decision.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
EGAN: And the Vice President J.D. Vance, over the weekend, he said that he believes it would be a suicidal move for Iran, because Iran itself, and
their economy relies on the Strait of Hormuz to get their oil, mostly to Asia, to China in particular. And what's notable, though, is that poly
market the prediction platform.
They're signaling they do think that this is still a real risk. Look at this, a 45 percent chance price in the poly market that Iran does close the
Strait of Hormuz this year, right? That is not nothing. But I do think that the reaction from the market, the oil market, the stock market, is that
they're not overly worried about this happening, right?
I think that the market is kind of saying, wake me up when there's a real disruption here. Because we do know, Bianna, there's been some false alarms
in the past few years where investors feared a disruption that did not ultimately materialize. Back to you.
GOLODRYGA: All right, Matt Egan, thank you so much.
EGAN: Thanks.
GOLODRYGA: Well, the world's most powerful digital camera was just switched on, after the show. We'll show you after the break, we'll show you how the
new observatory can see what no one have seen before? There's a little sneak peek.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[11:55:00]
GOLODRYGA: All right, we're getting the first images from the world's largest digital camera. It's at the brand-new Vera Rubin Observatory, built
at the top of a mountain in Chile. Its 10-year mission is to capture images of distant stars and galaxies on an unprecedented scale.
In one of the stunning first images, you can see gas and dust clouds swirling several 1000 light years from Earth. The Head of the U.S.
Department of Energy, which funded part of the project, says it will collect more information about all our universe than all optical telescopes
throughout history combined.
That is incredible power. And look at those images, beautiful. Well, do stay with CNN. I'll have more "One World" after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
END
