Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

Iran Seeking Russian Help?; Iran Vows Retaliation. Aired 11:30a-12p ET

Aired June 23, 2025 - 11:30   ET

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

[11:30:00]

WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: How likely is it that this stockpile of uranium wasn't eliminated at that facility?

DAVID ALBRIGHT, FORMER UNITED NATIONS WEAPONS INSPECTOR: I think it's pretty likely.

I mean, the Tomahawks did hit the tunnels that were there.

BLITZER: At Isfahan.

ALBRIGHT: At Isfahan. But two days before, Iran was filling the tunnel entrances was sand and dirt. So I would imagine the damage is limited to the entrances.

I think the attack was more effective at taking out the aboveground facilities. And I think they did real damage to Iran's ability to rebuild an enrichment program by the U.S. strike, because they were -- the U.S. hit, for example, a nuclear site that absolutely is critical if you want to enrich uranium.

If you don't have that site, you can enrich for a while, but then it's over until you rebuild.

BLITZER: Israel confirms it struck what are called access routes to the Fordow nuclear facility today following this weekend's airstrike.

Listen to what Representative Jim Himes, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, told CNN and get your reaction. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JIM HIMES (D-CT): We have no idea whether these strikes were successful. Now, if what you're looking for is a big boom and a large hole in the ground, I have very little doubt that our bunker-busters did a big boom and a very large hole in the ground.

But, Kasie, we don't know sitting here right now whether the highly enriched uranium was in the Fordow facility or in the Natanz facility. We have no idea.

(END VIDEO CLIP) BLITZER: All right, you're a former weapons inspector. Walk us through the process of assessing, assessing the extent of the damage at these nuclear facilities.

ALBRIGHT: Well, one is the -- you need inside information. It's an intelligence question. But I would say that we do have information of how that facility was designed, because it came out of the Iranian nuclear weapons program in the early 2000s.

And we know that the bunker-busters went down the area where the ventilation shaft is. And without that ventilation shaft, it's very hard to operate that facility. And also the ventilation shaft area is a softer part of the mountain.

And so I wouldn't agree with the extent of his comments. I would agree that we don't know and we need to find out. But I think there was probably very serious damage done to that facility.

BLITZER: So what I hear you saying is that they really need good intelligence and to get sources who know what happened to tell them what happened.

ALBRIGHT: That's right.

BLITZER: If the regime, the Iranian regime, still has access to enriched uranium, what would that mean for its ability to make a nuclear bomb down the road?

ALBRIGHT: Well, I think -- in the short term, I don't think they can do it.

And Israel's been degrading Iran's ability to actually make the bomb itself and hitting facilities, people. And so I think, in the short term, we're OK. In the longer term, you have to worry that, with 60 percent enriched uranium in the hands of the Iranians, with centrifuges that have been made, but were never deployed at the main centrifuge sites, we have to worry that this isn't over.

And it may be a time where, if there is a deal, that that deal makes sure that there's sufficient verification and requirements that Iran has to not only turn over its stocks of enriched uranium like 60 percent, but also allow verification that they don't have more.

BLITZER: Yes, when we heard Saturday night that Trump saying that Iran's nuclear capabilities were obliterated, we thought it was all over, but clearly it's not over yet.

ALBRIGHT: Yes. No, I don't think so. And he made a political statement. I mean, from a technical point of view, I mean, we're really talking about getting years before that Iran can make a bomb. We're not talking about that they can never do it.

BLITZER: All right.

David Albright, thanks very much for your expertise. Good to have you here in THE SITUATION ROOM. ALBRIGHT: Yes, well, glad to be here.

BLITZER: And just ahead: an Iranian official telling CNN Tehran wants the U.S. to pay for its attacks. What could a possible retaliation from Iran look like and is the U.S. prepared?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:38:26]

BLITZER: Israel and Iran are trading attacks today as this deadly conflict continues for a second week. Iranian military officials are vowing retaliation for U.S. strikes on their nuclear facilities. And Israel says that it has hit the -- quote -- "heart of Tehran" in its latest round of strikes today.

And that includes the Iranian Revolutionary Guard facilities and even the notorious Evin prison in Tehran.

Joining us now for more is retired U.S. Army Brigadier General Steve Anderson.

General, thanks so much for joining us. What's the significance of Israel the Israeli military targeting these specific sites?

BRIG. GEN. STEVE ANDERSON (RET.), U.S. ARMY: Well, Wolf, what they're trying to do is obviously follow up on the success of Operation Midnight Hammer.

They're trying to essentially build on that success and follow up with other additional strikes. They say they're a few days away from ending their other offensive operations against Iran. We shall see. But you need to follow up.

Although President Trump was saying that these sites were completely obliterated and their nuclear capability is completely gone, that's probably not the case. And so the Israelis need to continue to leverage their air superiority, which they continue to enjoy, and take advantage of that and take out additional sites.

BLITZER: When you say the Israelis should do that, shouldn't the U.S. be doing that as well?

ANDERSON: No, we should not. I think actually it was a mistake that we got involved with Operation Midnight Hammer in the first place, to tell you the truth, Wolf.

BLITZER: Operation Midnight Hammer was the operation to destroy the three Iranian nuclear facilities.

ANDERSON: Correct. It was a tremendous operational success, but I believe it's going to prove to be a strategic mistake.

BLITZER: Why?

ANDERSON: Because now we have enraged 91 million people in Iran. And these people are not going to go away quietly.

[11:40:04]

Now, there's many threats. We have got 46,000 troops overseas. We have got three carrier battle groups going to be out there. There's lots of asymmetric things that the Iranians can do. They can take out cyber -- they can do cyber warfare against us. They can exercise terrorist attacks. We talked about these sleeper cells coming alive here in the United States.

And, oh, by the way, they can take economic actions. They can close the Strait of Hormuz to oil traffic. So there's a lot that the Iranians can still do. The Israelis were winning this war. The United States did not need to get involved.

BLITZER: So what you're suggesting is that just the Israelis should have continued the military operations, the U.S. should have stayed behind the scenes?

ANDERSON: That's exactly what I'm suggesting, Wolf. Now we have crossed a threshold. Now we have essentially enraged the Iranians. Now we're the great Satan. We proved it.

Now, again, tremendous, a stunning military success, I mean, fantastic for everybody involved. They did a very difficult military operation. Oh, by the way, Operation Midnight Hammer is how you prove your military prowess, not a parade in downtown Washington, D.C., but that's another matter.

But it was a great success. But, again, the enemy always has a vote. And I suspect that this day will come back to haunt us.

BLITZER: The advantage that the U.S. military had is that they have the B-2 bombers and those bunker-busting bombs. The Israelis don't have either.

ANDERSON: That is true. However, they could have conducted some kind of a ground attack. They could have done some special forces.

BLITZER: But that would have resulted in a lot of Israeli lives lost.

ANDERSON: That is probably true.

But, again, now we have crossed a threshold. Now we have got the United States involved. Or maybe we could have used other means. There are other bombs that perhaps could have achieved the same success. Now, again, I don't want to take away from the great success of Operation Midnight Hammer.

However, the Israelis were doing fine. They had air superiority. They could have continued to degrade Iranian capability all this time. The United States did not need to get involved...

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: Should the U.S. have provided Israel with those B-2 bombers and those bunker-busting bombs?

ANDERSON: I would say probably not. They didn't need them. There are other bombs that they could have used that probably achieve the same success over time.

You know, to do a one-and-done is just -- I believe that's not really possible. I mean, General -- President Trump says the nuclear threat was obliterated. I don't believe that. I think that time will prove that they still have -- there's still 800 pounds of unaccounted 60 percent enriched uranium. That could very well be -- have been moved to some mountainside or some cave on the other side of Iran right now.

And that could be used to generate a nuclear bomb. And lord help us what they could do with that. I mean, they could put it on a ship and sail it into the Port of Bayonne. I mean, this is a potentially serious threat to the United States. And I'm afraid that we have enraged the Iranians, and a very degraded Iranian.

But, nevertheless, there's no guarantee that we're going to be successful. And, as we all know, there's no fanatic like a religious fanatic. And now we have enraged 91 million potentially religious fanatics.

BLITZER: This is what the IDF, the Israel Defense Forces chief, Eyal Zamir, says about Israel's continued strikes against Iran.

And I'm quoting him now: "We continue to increase the rate of our strikes in accordance with the operational plan. And we are prepared to continue for as long as necessary" -- end quote.

Sources telling CNN that Israel thinks they can achieve their goals in Iran within a matter of days. That's what they're suggesting. How do you interpret that?

ANDERSON: I think that they probably can. I mean, they probably can. I mean, they have been very successful in shutting down all the air defenses of Tehran and the Iranians.

Now, they don't really have the capability now to deliver a nuclear weapon, obviously. And probably their missile stockpile has been degraded significantly. Their leadership has been taken out. They continue to have intelligence dominance, which is extremely important.

So I believe that the Israelis are probably close to ending direct offensive operations. But if you think that they're going to give up air superiority over the near term, you're sorely mistaken. They're going to take advantage of the fact that they have been able to shut down the Iranian air force and their air defense, and they're going to continue to leverage that.

BLITZER: Retired U.S. Army Brigadier General Steve Anderson, thanks very much for joining us. Appreciate it.

ANDERSON: Thank you, Wolf.

BLITZER: All right, coming up: Israel and Iran trading fresh strikes earlier this morning, as a spokesperson for the Iranian government tells CNN negotiations, in his word, are meaningless unless Israel stops its attacks. So is there still a place for peace negotiations?

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:49:06]

BLITZER: Back to the breaking news out of the Middle East right now, Israel and Iran trading fresh strikes this morning, as Iran's foreign minister meets with the Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow.

Abbas Araghchi is thinking the Russian -- thanking the Russian leader for supporting Iran during the crisis. Russia's Foreign Ministry condemned the U.S. strikes in Iran, saying it flagrantly violates international law -- direct quote.

Joining us now, Ambassador Richard Haass, a veteran American diplomat and the president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations. He's also the author, by the way, of an important book entitled "Home & Away." He's got a newsletter on Substack as well.

Is diplomacy still an option, Richard, or is that -- is it clear right now that it's too late?

RICHARD HAASS, PRESIDENT EMERITUS, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: I don't really see a role for diplomacy right now, Wolf.

I think you could have some tacit signaling between or among the sides. But I think, after the Israeli and American attacks on Iran, given all the outstanding differences, I simply don't see where you're going to get any formal outcomes, even if there were some new talks.

[11:50:14]

BLITZER: The Russian president, Vladimir Putin, met today with Iran's foreign minister.

What role might Russia actually play in Iran's response to the U.S. strikes on its nuclear facilities? I ask the question because Iran, as we all know, has helped Russia as far as its invasion of Ukraine is concerned.

HAASS: Yes, any Russian role would not be welcome. It's outrageous or chutzpah, whatever word you want to use, that the Russians are criticizing the Israelis and the Americans for attack on the sovereign territory of another U.N. member. Physician, heal thyself.

I think the worrisome thing is, the Russians could help the Iranians with air defense, even more with their nuclear program, lots of reports, as you know, that Russia has helped North Korea. And I would think one of the real priorities for this Iranian government is going to be to reconstitute their nuclear weapons development program. So I worry about Russian assistance in that endeavor. BLITZER: Yes, I suspect you're right.

The head of the United Nations nuclear watchdog agency says he's not sure where Iran has stashed its stockpile of enriched uranium. How concerned should we be about that?

HAASS: Extremely.

One has to assume they have stashed uranium, potentially centrifuges, potentially some bomb-making equipment, but obviously know-how with the scientists who are still alive. So my -- what I take from this, Wolf, is that the Iranians are going to make a serious effort to reconstitute their program.

I expect there's many people in Tehran who are saying, if we had had a nuclear weapon, none of this would have happened. So I would think that we have to imagine that, over the next few years, the United States and Israel, there may be moments where either country gets some new intelligence. There could be some new attacks on this or that Iranian facility.

I would think this is now part of the future. This is not a problem that's been solved. This is going to be open-ended.

BLITZER: Yes, I think that's going to heat up big time.

There are growing calls, as you know, Richard, inside Iran right now to close the Strait of Hormuz. That's that vital artery for the world's oil supply. If that happens and there's a shock to the global oil markets, what is the potential impact of that? And how do you see the United States responding?

HAASS: I think it's unlikely because Iran continues to be able to export a large amount of oil to China and others.

And if Iran starts interfering with shipping or attacks the refineries in Saudi or elsewhere, they're going to be on the target list. And, right now, the United States has not given Israel the green light to go after, say, the cargo terminal. So I think it's highly unlikely that Iran's going to go down that path.

But if they did, yes, they would be vulnerable. The only country that would probably benefit from such a scenario is Russia, because they're an energy exporter and their own revenues would go up. But the rest of the world would not benefit.

BLITZER: Yes, that's a good point. Thank you for sharing it.

Do you see this military conflict that's ongoing right now potentially evolving into a prolonged full-scale war?

HAASS: No, because I don't see ground troops or whatever getting into this.

What I think is, you could have a prolonged, low-level intermittent war, where every once in a while Israel or the United States would take out this or that target associated with conventional munitions, nuclear development. Iran might respond in some way, particularly against Israel.

But my guess is, it's at a fairly low level, it becomes the background. And I think the big question down the road, again, is whether Iran ever gets to the point where it does essentially announce that it now has nuclear weapons. And then I think there's real questions for the U.S. for Israel, also for many of their neighbors.

As bad as the Middle East is -- and you have covered it for decades as have I -- one could imagine a Middle East where other countries, including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, you name them, would say, wow, if Iran now has these weapons, we need to think about having our own.

And that's a Middle East I don't want to see come about.

BLITZER: Yes, important information.

Ambassador Richard Haass, always good to welcome you back here in THE SITUATION ROOM. Thank you very much for joining us.

HAASS: Thanks, Wolf.

BLITZER: And we will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:59:17]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(CHEERING)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: The Oklahoma City Thunder are NBA champions after clinching game seven of the thrilling NBA Finals. The Thunder held off the Indiana Pacers 103-91 after Pacers superstar Tyrese Haliburton was forced out with a devastating Achilles injury.

It's a storybook ending for the league's best regular season team, led by regular season and Finals MVP Shai Gilgeous-Alexander. And it marks their first championship since the franchise relocated from Seattle.

Congratulations to Oklahoma City.

And thank you to our viewers for joining us this morning. You can always keep up with us on social media @WolfBlitzer and @PamelaBrownCNN.

We will see you back here tomorrow, every weekday morning 10:00 a.m. Eastern.

"INSIDE POLITICS," today with Manu Raju, starts right now.