Return to Transcripts main page
One World with Zain Asher
Iran's President: Agreement "Message from a Strong Iran"; U.S.-Iran Agreement Calls for End to the War on all Fronts; Trump Hits Back at Critics of U.S.-Iran Agreement; Ukraine Launches Largest Attack on Moscow Since Start of War; VP Vance Speaks at White House Briefing. Aired 11- 11:30a ET
Aired June 18, 2026 - 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: Hello everyone. Live from New York, I'm Bianna Golodryga.
ZAIN ASHER, CNN HOST, ONE WORLD: And I'm Zain Asher. You are watching "One World". U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance is set to hold a press briefing any
moment now. We'll, of course, bring you that as soon as it happens.
GOLODRYGA: It comes after the U.S. and Iran signed an initial agreement to end the war. A signing ceremony was originally planned for tomorrow, but
now Switzerland's Foreign Ministry says initial talks between Tehran and Washington will get underway at a mountain resort kicking off 60 days of
negotiations.
ASHER: Yeah, Donald Trump signed a hard copy of the Memorandum of Understanding at the Palace of Versailles Wednesday after earlier attending
the G7 Summit. The document was then signed by Iran's President as well. Let's go straight to Senior White House Reporter Betsy Klein.
So, obviously, one of the key questions that J.D. Vance, the U.S. Vice President, is going to be asked about is, of course, the deal with Iran.
This press briefing by the vice president comes on the heels of Trump signing that very important memorandum of understanding that now kicks off
the 60 days of negotiations. Just walk us through what we can expect from the vice president when he speaks today.
BETSY KLEIN, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Well, certainly a lot of questions for Vice President J.D. Vance. We are standing by for him to
begin addressing reporters in the briefing room any moment now. But we are seeing criticism from both sides of the aisle pour in regarding this deal.
The president's reaction at 04:30 this morning was to call all of the critics jealous, bad people, or stupid in his own words. But as for what
comes next, all these questions ahead for Vance. He has taken a leading role here, and all of this comes as he is expected to travel to
Switzerland, where he will be part of the talks with Iran, as well as mediators Pakistan and Qatar, really laying out some of the thornier
aspects of this next 60 days of investing of negotiations, including over what happens to Iran's nuclear material.
So, a lot of very challenging discussions are expected ahead. But this White House also has a very challenging messaging job right now, and that
is to convince a skeptical American public, which includes Republicans, that one, this deal is different from the Obama era Iran deal, and that it
is a good agreement for the United States.
President Trump trying to do that yesterday at a press conference in France, where he made clear that Iran will not produce or procure a nuclear
weapon. This agreement will reopen the Strait of Hormuz, that critical oil thoroughfare. He also tried to defend criticism that Iran will receive
waivers to export oil, as well as this provision that is going to commit the United States and regional partners to a $300 billion fund for
redevelopment in Iran.
The president is saying that the U.S. will not be providing any money, and this is contingent on good behavior by Iran, but a lot of questions about
how that is going to work. We can expect the vice president to field today. The president also made very notable remarks yesterday when he said that
ending this conflict is going to avoid, in his words, an economic catastrophe if it were to have kept on going.
He said he didn't want to be Herbert Hoover, that is the U.S. President, who presided over the Great Depression. So, clearly, some economic
motivators for getting to this memorandum of understanding there. The president signed a hard copy of this agreement at a dinner at the Palace of
Versailles before traveling back here to Washington, DC.
And, as you mentioned, this is starting a 60-day clock for those intensive negotiations, President Trump did indicate that that 60 days could be
flexible. Meanwhile, the White House fielding so much new criticism that this deal is strengthening Iran, including from Senate Republicans.
And that includes Senator Ted Cruz, who says that this $300 billion fund is a quote mistake, as well as Senator John Cornyn, who says that it is a
mixed bag at best. Senator Bill Cassidy saying it is the worst foreign policy blunder in decades. The White House clearly still has work to do
here. We'll be watching how the vice president addresses all of that Zain and Bianna.
GOLODDRYGA: Yeah, some comparisons I know the president didn't want to be compared to Herbert Hoover, some comparing the location of this treaty
being signed at Versailles to what happened to Woodrow Wilson as he signed the treaty to end World War I, a bit ominous given what that precipitated
years later with the start of World War II.
[11:05:00]
Betsy, it is notable that Vice President Vance is really the face of this MOU, given that he had reportedly been one of those cabinet officials who
had opposed the start of this war at its outset. Just why is he once again, after spending a week defending it nationally all across television here in
the U.S., why does he feel that it is necessary to once again hold a press conference now?
KLEIN: Well, I think he understands that this White House needs to be aggressive about the messaging, and obviously he has been very aggressive
about messaging, one because he is becoming the face of this deal for the administration, but also because he is currently on a book tour, trying to
sell books, but the president made sort of a joke yesterday.
He said it in jest. He was asked whether this means if it's a good deal, the vice president and his administration can get the credit, and if it's a
bad deal, the vice president will take the blame. The president joking that yes, Vance could take the blame there.
But I think there is a little bit of truth to that, that it does shift that blame away from the president, gives him a little bit of a shield, and
obviously could be something that the vice president, who notably is likely to have presidential ambitions, is going to have to bear, depending on how
this sorts out.
ASHER: Betsy Klein live for us there. Thank you so much. We are still waiting for the vice president to speak any moment now. Right, Iran's
President is touting the agreement with the United States, calling it a historic document and a message from a strong Iran.
GOLODRYGA: Yeah, more now on to that 14-point U.S.-Iran Memorandum of Understanding, which leaves some major details to be ironed out later. It
aims to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and achieve a final deal within 60- days, extendable by mutual consent.
ASHER: Yeah, it also calls for $300 billion for a reconstruction fund Iran may be able to use if it meets commitments and the eventual lifting of
sanctions as well.
GOLODRYGA: It's supposed to end the war on all fronts, that includes Lebanon, where Israel continued to strike today, and that brings us to
CNN's Oren Liebermann, who is joining us from Jerusalem. Safe to say, a lot of concern, trepidation in Israel about being excluded from the framework
of this MOU.
I believe it was presented to the Israelis just moments, hours before President Trump signed it, there, though the mediators and obviously the
parties involved had access to it. And it is that first clause, really, that all cessation fighting stopped.
All fighting stopped, that includes Lebanon as well, Israel coming out the Prime Minister's Office saying that Israel will continue its operations in
Lebanon, fighting against Hezbollah. Just bring us the latest, both politically and on the military front, as to how this impacts Israel now?
OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN JERUSALEM BUREAU CHIEF: Well, Bianna and Zain, I would say it's much stronger than concern or worry about the memorandum of
understanding. It's pretty much open criticism across the political spectrum here, in terms of what's in the agreement, and crucially, what's
not in it, and you're right to start right at the top.
This demands a complete cessation to hostilities, including in Lebanon. Israel is not a party to agreement, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
has tried to impress upon Donald Trump that Israel does not see itself as binded (ph) by this agreement, but we have seen Trump repeatedly set
boundaries around what Israel is and is not allowed to do during the war in Lebanon.
And right now, it seems that limits Israeli strikes to south of the yellow line in Lebanon. We haven't seen an Israeli strike in Beirut in quite some
time now, as Trump has basically said, that's off limits for Israel. Now, Netanyahu said a short time ago in a statement that Israel would not be
withdrawing from the occupied territory in Southern Lebanon and will be staying there as long as Israel deems it's necessary for the security.
So, you see Netanyahu trying to push back there against the terms of the agreement itself. Meanwhile, we've also seen continued Hezbollah fire as
well, so that conflict has continued, not only since the signing of the Iran Memorandum of Understanding, but since the latest ceasefire, the
previous ceasefire, and the one before that, going back to November 2024.
So, we'll see what leverage Trump and Iran have on really ending the conflict there, but it's clear there is major Israeli concern here. And
again, it's not just about Lebanon. It's the fact that this gives Iran a windfall, strengthens a much more hardline regime, doesn't really include
limits as stated here on the nuclear issue.
Doesn't remove the highly enriched uranium, gives Iran a reconstruction fund, and that's just scratching the surface here. All of that is yet to be
worked out. Now Netanyahu, according to Israeli source, doesn't believe that Iran and the U.S. will reach a final agreement, and he will try to
influence that process, as we reported earlier today, according to the source, through right-wing media figures who are critical of the deal, as
well as through friendly pro-Israel Senators.
But given the way Trump is pushing this and Trump's determination to get there. We'll see how much influence he is able to exert on this process.
[11:10:00]
GOLODRYGA: All right, Oren Liebermann. Thank you so much. Let's get some more perspective and analysis from Steven Cook. He's a Senior Fellow for
Middle East and Africa Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. He's also the Author of "The End of Ambition: America's Past, Present, and
Future in the Middle East".
So, Steven, let's just start with this MOU. What the president signed, what he's been defending, what the vice president will be defending before
reporters in just a moment's time. In that, I don't know how else to interpret it objectively, just from reading it myself and hearing from
other experts. How do you interpret it as anything but a capitulation by the U.S. and a victory for Iran?
STEVEN A. COOK, SENIOR FELLOW FOR MIDDLE EAST & EAST AFRICA STUDIES, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: I think this just underlines how easy it is
to get into a war and how hard it is to get out. It is essentially an American capitulation. If you go through all 14 points, they clearly
benefit the Iranians at the expense of the United States and its partners in the region, most of all Israel.
ASHER: And just speaking of Israel, when it comes to this sort of really difficult situation predicament that Netanyahu is in, obviously has to
appeal to a domestic audience, you've got Israeli elections. But at the same time, what's interesting is that his relationship with Donald Trump
was a selling point for him at one point.
He could sort of sell to the Israeli people that only he could have this kind of a strong relationship with the United States. But the problem is
that Donald Trump, as we all know, is very unpredictable. I mean, you see that some of his relations and some of the relationships he's had with
people that have been close allies at one point, including, for example, Elon Musk, things can turn on a dime.
And Donald Trump referred to Netanyahu as effing crazy, and that he has no effing judgment. Israel would be nowhere if it wasn't for me. How does
Netanyahu walk that fine line, trying to ensure that Israel is kept safe, especially for people in Northern Israel, but at the same time trying to
maintain that relationship with the U.S. President?
COOK: Yeah, it's a very, very good question. And in fact, Netanyahu may have some room for maneuver here. Not only is the operation in Lebanon very
popular with the Israeli public, as was the conflict with Iran popular with the Israeli public, but President Trump's own popularity in Israel has
cratered.
Three weeks ago, 58 percent of the Israeli public supported the president, looked upon him fondly, that was down a bit, but now three weeks later he's
in the mid-30s. So, there is an opportunity here for Netanyahu, if he wanted to pick a fight with the president, there are risks to that, of
course.
But your overall point, Netanyahu believing that he could sort of ride the tiger of Donald Trump, was pure hubris. He just had to look to people like
Rudy Giuliani, Elon Musk, others who have ended up on the short end of a partnership with Donald Trump, so it is going to hurt him.
The Likud Party had been planning on rolling out a campaign which demonstrated the close relationship between Trump and Netanyahu. They've
now shelved that because of the fallout as a result of this memorandum of understanding.
GOLODRYGA: And that's the political lens that we're looking and discussing this through in Israel ahead of the elections. But broadly, you don't have
a closer ally or more important ally to Israel in the world than the United States. It was David Ben Gurion who had always said keep the United States
close.
And now, especially when so many other countries have essentially ostracized Israel over the course of the last few years, that is especially
key now for that country. I'm wondering, Steven, if you listen to the president's own words yesterday and try to make sense of his rationale here
at times seeming to defend Iran, treating as a normal country, suggesting that they can keep some of their ballistic missiles.
It's understandable if their neighbors have ballistic missiles, they should too. I mean, it wasn't that long ago that that was one of the key points
and arguments made by this administration to go to war, and it was to eliminate the ballistic missile program in that country. And now the
president suggesting, you know, what I understand, that they're going to keep a few, and that's OK with me.
COOK: Right. Look, it is an extraordinary turn around. The president had criticized President Obama's agreement with the Iranians, because it didn't
cover ballistic missiles, it didn't cover the proxies. It gave the Iranians financial relief. And here is the President of the United States doing all
that and more.
It does seem that there's a pattern in the president that when he is unable to establish dominance and claim -- an actual victory. He steps back and
says, well, these people are rational anyway, and I can actually deal with them.
[11:15:00]
That seems to be his climb down from his very provocative previous statements. But it does indicate once again that the President of the
United States led the United States into a war that we essentially lost. There were certainly tactical achievements on the part of the U.S.
military.
But overall, the United States and its partners in the region, Israel Gulf partners on the other side of the Gulf, are in a worse position than they
were on February 27th the day before the President launched Operation Epic Fury.
GOLODRYGA: Yeah, it shows the limitations to just a war that involves strikes, air campaigns, even from two of the most powerful and largest
militaries in the world. If the president had chosen, perhaps, to send in ground troops, things could be quite different. It's understandable why he
didn't, but I think one lesson learned here are the limitations to just strictly air strikes. Steven Cook, thank you so much. Really appreciate the
time.
COOK: Thank you.
ASHER: All right, overnight, Ukraine launched a major attack on Moscow, damaging a key oil refinery in the process. This barrage marks the largest
drone offensive on Russia's capital since the start of the war. Russian officials say at least 17 people are injured, and that air defenses shot
down nearly 200 drones. In all, Russia says nearly 1000 drones were intercepted across the country.
GOLODRYGA: Meantime, Ukrainian officials say Russia fired back with Sten (ph) missiles and more than 200 drones. Attacks in the Kyiv and Poltava
regions, striking oil and energy facilities. This moment is a stark example of how Kyiv has dramatically improved its drone capabilities, and it comes
after world leaders gathered at the G7 Summit in France. U.S. President Trump once again urging Russia to reach a peace deal.
ASHER: Yeah, the war is also taking center stage in Brussels, where NATO Defense Ministers are meeting. U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth again
pushing for Europe to take a bigger role in its own defense, announcing the U.S. is reviewing its force posture in Europe.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PETE HEGSETH, U.S. DEFENSE SECRETARY: Our allies must step up. President Trump has been very clear on this point for many years, and over two
administrations, and for too long, NATO has been a paper tiger and a one- way street.
No more, and that's what the Hague Summit is all about. That's what defense spending commitments are all about, transforming NATO back into a real
military alliance that's focused on hard power and real deterrence. A NATO 3.0.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ASHER: CNN Producer Sebastian Shukla has more on Ukraine's recent long- range attacks.
SEBASTIAN SHUKLA, CNN PRODUCER: The ferocity of these attacks last night is clear to see, and very, very evident from those images. If we can play them
again, there is one in particular that I'd like viewers to see, which is the Moscow City skyline covered with black plumes of smoke, and that is
just a real indictment about the level of the attack that the Ukrainians unleashed this morning, or late or early late last night on the Russian
capital.
The focus was an oil refinery here. I mean, it has left several people wounded. There are no dead. But the fact that the Kremlin or the Kyiv have
been able to launch an attack like this, as is becoming the kind of the symbolic way that, both sides are fighting each other at the moment in this
war.
Nevertheless, sends a message to the Russian people and to the Russian President that Kyiv is able to bring the war home to Russia. And as the
Ukrainian president called it a little while ago, when he was at NATO, he said that all of these attacks are completely and utterly justified as
retribution for Moscow's attacks on Kyiv.
And subsequently we have been hearing from the Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy too, speaking ahead of that NATO Summit that you just
mentioned. Take a listen to what he had to say about the attacks last night.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT: We have the tools and they are strong enough to put Russia on path where diplomacy becomes the only
choice. We all see that Putin is now relying on one lasting thing: constant missile attacks, and he has ballistic missiles, so we need anti-ballistic
capabilities.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SHUKLA: So, anti-ballistic capabilities there what he's talking about is there has obviously been huge development in this warfare on both sides
towards drone warfare that both of the sides able to attack each other with consistent ferocity.
What the Ukrainians are hoping now is that attacks like these are eventually able really to force President Putin to the negotiating table
and the message that he's sending around Brussels today, the meeting at NATO that I mentioned, the upcoming EU Summit is to try to bring the
Europeans back together as they have been for some time now.
[11:20:00]
Just to refocus and double down efforts, and remind President Putin that Kyiv and Brussels are able to hurt him where it hurts the most.
ASHER: All right, thanks to CNN's Sebastian Shukla for that report. All right, still ahead on "One World", England fans rejoice as Harry Kane leads
his team to victory and sets a record in the process.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ASHER: All right, World Cup teams begin playing their second matches this Thursday.
GOLODRYGA: The first game of the day is between Group A teams, Czech Republic and South Africa, in around one and a half hours. Then, in Group
B, where all four teams sit in one point, Switzerland take on Bosnia and Herzegovina, while one of the host nations, Canada, play Qatar in
Vancouver.
And fellow host Mexico will take on South Korea and Guadalajara. Well, England fans are in jubilant mode this Thursday. Watch this game, it was a
high-scoring game after their team's thrilling victory over Croatia, winning 4-2.
ASHER: Yeah, striker Harry Kane scored two, including a penalty that takes his total World Cup goal tally to 10, which is basically the same as Gary
Lineker's record. Cristiano Ronaldo though struggled to make his own mark on the tournament, though, as Portugal were able to impress, they actually
drew with the DRC, they played, which was, I think, surprising to a lot of people. Don Riddell is at the city's fan zone and joins us live now. Don?
DON RIDDELL, CNN WORLD SPORT: Hey guys, welcome to Atlanta, where we are getting ready for the second round of group stage games. And this
tournament so far has been absolutely brilliant. There was some concern and some skepticism about FIFA's decision to expand the tournament from 32
teams to 48.
The one of the concerns was that there'll be a lot of weaker teams in there who might provide maybe a Cinderella story. But they might also just be
cannoning fodder, but that's not the way it's turned out. We've seen a lot of goals, 75 goals, that's more than three per game. We haven't seen an
average like that after the first round of group games since 1958.
And there's been a lot of parity to Curacao, the only team who've really been blown out. They got beaten by Germany 7-1 at the weekend. On tap
today, we have four games in Group A and Group B. Here in Atlanta, we're getting ready for South Africa versus the Czech Republic, just up the road
here at the Atlanta Stadium. That is a stadium with a roof.
I think they're going to need it, because the weather forecast here today is absolutely miserable. It's humid, it's really, really humid, and we've
already had quite a lot of rain which might explain why we haven't got too many fans here in the fan park yet, but that's the first game of the day,
Czech Republic against South Africa.
[11:25:00]
The night cap is the other game in Group A, that's going to be Mexico against South Korea. Those teams have already got three points in the bag.
And then in Group B, we're going to see Switzerland versus Bosnia, Canada, another co-host against Qatar, and that group couldn't be tighter. They all
drew their opening games by the same score.
We had some real entertainment yesterday. England fans are absolutely buzzing after their team's 4-2 win against Croatia. Harry Kane scored a
couple of goals, meaning he's now got 10 World Cup goals, tying him for the national record with Gary Lineker, Jude Bellingham also scored, as did
Marcus Rashford.
It was a really encouraging display for England, whose fans are well used to seeing their team make slow, nervy, anxious starts to these tournaments
not this year. Of real concern, though, will be the Portugal situation. They would have been fancied to beat the Democratic Republic of Congo,
possibly easily.
They had to settle for a 1-1 draw, despite the fact that they have arguably the best midfield in the game, certainly that they've ever had. Their 41-
year-old star, Cristiano Ronaldo, does seem to be holding them back. He did not have a good day yesterday.
ASHER: All right, Don Riddell, thank you. And U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance is speaking at the White House, let's listen in.
J.D. VANCE, U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: Ships to go through our naval blockade, and so we're also honoring our end of the early part of the agreement. On
the military side a couple of things that are still true and will be true whether the Iranians comply with the rest of the deal or not.
Number one, their nuclear program has been completely destroyed. Their capacity for enrichment, the facilities at which they were using to develop
enrichment and develop a potential nuclear weapon those facilities are still destroyed. Their conventional military is still destroyed. Their
capacity to threaten their neighbors is still largely gone.
And now we see whether they are willing to comply with the next step of the president's peace plan. As you all know, the part of the peace plan, the
part of this MOU that I think have been most misrepresented by certain parts of the media is the idea that the Iranians get all these benefits.
You will hear things about $300 billion or $24 billion or this or that number of money or amount of money, and the simple fact is that the only
way the Iranians get any of those resources not a single penny, by the way, from the United States of America under any circumstances, but the only way
that they would ever get any benefit of the bargain is if they comply fully and change their behavior.
So, you really have a win-win situation for the United States of America. If the Iranians don't change their behavior, their military and their
nuclear program is still destroyed. If they do change their behavior, then they are going to have a transformative relationship with the Middle East,
and the Middle East will have a transformative relationship with the people of Iran.
That is a win for the American people and for the President of the United States, regardless of which option the Iranians ultimately choose. We
obviously want them to choose the right option. The interesting thing about their system, and I think it's important for the American people to
appreciate this point in particular.
Is that there are real divisions within their country about how exactly to proceed? And what we've seen over the last couple of months is that the
pragmatists within the Iranian system, the people who really do want to transform their relationship with the Middle East and within -- with the
world. Those people are winning the argument.
The United States wants those people to win the argument. The United States wants to have a better relationship, but in order for that to happen, the
Iranians have to perform. And if they don't perform as we've said before, they don't get any of the benefits of the bargain.
So, what I'd ask all of you is just to report honestly that the United States isn't giving up a cent of money to Iran, and even the economic
benefits, the sanctions relief, and so forth that comes along with this bargain only happens if the Iranians perform. So, with that, I want to say
thanks to all of you. It's good to be with you this morning, and I'll kick it over to questions. Let's start right over here to the right.
[11:30:00]
(SIMULCAST CNN DOMESTIC - SITUATION ROOM)
END
