Return to Transcripts main page

The Brief with Jim Sciutto

Trump Demands Iran's "Unconditional Surrender"; Israel Says It Struck Iranian Command Center In Lebanon; Trump Gives Update On Iran War; Russia Aiding Iran War Effort With Intelligence About U.S. Military Targets; Oil Surges 35 Percent This Week; U.S. Unemployment Rate Rose To 4.4 Percent In February; Trump: Cuba Will Fall "Pretty Soon"; WH: Not Ruling Out U.S. Strike In Bombing Of Girls' School; Arab Gulf States Drawn Into Iran War. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired March 06, 2026 - 18:00   ET

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

[18:00:00]

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR, "THE BRIEF": Hello, and welcome to our viewers joining us from all around the world. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington, and

you're watching "The Brief."

Just ahead this hour, President Trump says there will be no deal with Iran until it's unconditional surrender. This year, U.S. crude oil has surged 35

percent this week, the biggest spike since futures trading began back in 1983. And Trump tells CNN that Cuba has fallen right into his lap and will

fall pretty soon.

President Trump says he will not accept any deal to end the war with Iran unless Tehran agrees to an unconditional surrender. Listen to the White

House press secretary as she explained it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: What the president means is that when he, as commander-in-chief of the U.S. armed forces, determines

that Iran no longer poses a threat to the United States of America and the goals of Operation Epic Fury has been fully realized, then Iran will

essentially be in a place of unconditional surrender. Whether they say it themselves or not, frankly, they don't have a lot of people to say that for

them because the United States and the state of Israel have completely wiped out more than 50 leaders of the former terrorist regime, including

the supreme leader himself.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: The president tells CNN that Iran's leadership has been, quote, "neutered" in his terms and that Trump wants a new leader who will treat

the U.S. and allies well, even if the country does not become a democratic state. This as the U.S. and Israel have further expanded their strikes

across Iran. The country's ballistic missile and drone attacks have decreased significantly.

Israel claims it struck an Iranian command center in the Lebanese capital of Beirut. This as the IDF continues to target Hezbollah sites across the

country. Lebanese media has reported that more than 200 people have been killed so far in this latest front in the Iran-Israel war. A humanitarian

organization based in Norway says that nearly half a million people have been displaced now in Lebanon. Israel issued evacuation orders to Beirut's

southern suburbs, as well as a large portion of southern Lebanon.

Joining us now live from Tel Aviv is Nick Paton Walsh. And, Nick, listen, it seems now that if there was any doubt as to which partner in this war

was more aggressive, there's really not much doubt now that, at least in the way they describe it, both U.S. and Israeli leaders are in it for the

long haul, it seems.

NICK PATON WALSH, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Quite possibly, Jim, although while I think it's fair to say the Israeli assault

against Hezbollah marks a slightly different chapter to the combined operation that's running with the United States against Iran. I think we'll

see that probably endure longer than however the conflict with Iran continues. It's interesting you mention that people seem to be in this for

the long haul because you could also possibly read today some of the signals emerging from the White House that they want to retain great

flexibility to essentially call an end to this any time of their choosing.

President Trump's declaration of wanting unconditional surrender was immediately qualified, as the press secretary just said, to say he decides

that whenever he wants. And if you remember, the goals we've been hearing reiterated again and again from senior U.S. officials, destroying Iran's

missiles, its navy, and preventing it from having a nuclear weapon. That was reiterated by the White House's social media accounts just today as

well.

They are clearly saying they've got about 90 percent reduction in missile and drone launches. They say they've shunned 43 naval ships of Iran's, and

it's pretty clear the nuclear program, controversially on the brink of whatever it was prior to this, is significantly taking damage through

clearly all these strikes as well.

So, it's an interesting moment, certainly, because the messaging we're hearing from U.S. officials is one of maximum bravado and commitment to

pushing forward, demanding full surrender, while at the same time President Trump is also discussing, too, who he'd quite like to be the next supreme

leader of Iran. And that has the flavor of some kind of political discussion in the wings as well.

[18:05:00]

So, it's clear that we're seeing a very degraded Iran now, quite possibly because of these strikes, still trying to lash out. We just over here saw

interceptions flying over our heads, actually, the second of two quite significant salvos we've seen today here. Iran's certainly not out, but it

seems that frequency of these kind of attacks reduced, Jim.

SCIUTTO: No question. They have been able to hit some targets, including U.S. targets. Nick Paton Walsh, keep yourself safe there. Thanks so much

for joining.

Joining us now for a look at the political implications of this, CNN senior political analyst Ron Brownstein joins me now. And, Ron, you wrote that

President Trump began this war already on a, quote, "narrow ledge politically."

RON BROWNSTEIN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes.

SCIUTTO: As we see the economic costs of the war, for instance, rising gas prices being the one that folks here in the U.S. feel most directly, is

that ledge narrower?

BROWNSTEIN: Yes. Look, I mean, the military operation has been a tremendous success. I mean, I think everyone recognizes that. But, you

know, from the beginning, you had great doubt in the public about whether this was a mission that made sense for the country. Another poll out today

with a majority saying they opposed the military strikes on Iran.

Jim, you can't overstate how unique that is at the beginning of a conflict. At the beginning of a conflict, I'm not aware of a case where a majority of

Americans did not support the action. And, you know, you have 85, despite that majority disapproval, you have something like 85 percent of

Republicans, Republican voters saying they support the action, which means that you're not going to see any real pushback from Republican elected

officials, as was demonstrated this week.

So, he has no immediate political threat to undermine his ability to prosecute this war. But that doubt in the public, I think, without

question, means that there is very little tolerance for pain out of this. He has very little cushion for reversal. And gas prices are probably the

place where that is going to pinch first and hardest.

SCIUTTO: Ron, hang on there just for a moment, because President Trump has just been speaking about Iran. Let's play those comments. I want to get

your thoughts on the other side.

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: Somebody said, how would you score it from zero to 10? I said I'd give it a 12 to a 15. Their army is gone. They're

just about -- look, their Navy is gone. Their communications are gone. Their leaders are gone. Two sets of their leaders are gone. They're down to

their third set. Their Air Force is wiped out entirely.

Think of it. They have 32 ships. All 32 are at the bottom of the ocean. Other than that, they're doing very well, Coach. Very well. We're doing --

our military is doing phenomenally. That's the big thing for this week. We seem to have a new thing every week. But the situation with a very bad and

very sick group of leaders who were killing a lot of people. A lot of our people were being killed. They were being maimed. They were being destroyed

with their bombs all over the place, planted in roads. We call them the roadside bombs. Walking around without legs, without arms, face blasted.

Killed many, many people.

And we had a choice. We could take it and go on like that for years or do something about it. And we did something about it. And people are very

impressed with our military. And they admire our military with what happened in Venezuela and what's happening now. What's happened with the B-

2 bombers before this, where they took out the nuclear capability or potential of Iran.

I think right now we're a country that's more respected than we've ever been respected before. I saw what was happening with college sports. And it

doesn't sound very important compared to what's happening in Iran and other places. But it is very important to me. And if I can get it done, I'll get

it done.

Through a bad system, it's a bad system. Through a bad legal system. You want to know the truth, we have a situation that is almost unsolvable. And

we'll see if we can solve it.

And, you know, Peter, the fact is we're talking about colleges that are going to go out of business. Many, many colleges are going to be out of

business. This isn't just about student athletes. This is about our whole educational system is going to go out --

SCIUTTO: Interestingly, Trump was giving an update on the war while he was talking about college athletics, as it happened today.

[18:10:00]

Ron, it's been noted that this is, I think, arguably the first time a president has taken the country to war without public support and without

really an effort at building public support. Because, of course, even George W. Bush, prior to the Iraq invasion, they spent months and, of

course, some of that case was built on a shoddy foundation of false intelligence about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. But they thought they

needed some public support and some international kind of seal of approval. Trump's just forging ahead. It's a gamble. It's very revealing.

BROWNSTEIN: Yes. It's very revealing. Yes. I think it's very -- the way he has gone to war is as revealing as that he has gone to war at all. I mean,

it is -- he has made the most cursory effort to try to persuade either the public or an international audience why this is the right thing to do. His

reasons keep evolving. And I think it does show his conception of the presidency and how little kind of, how untethered he feels from the

traditional restraints of democratic accountability. He really is not acting as though he needs the consent of the governed to launch a war in

their name.

Now, as I said, as long as the costs seem low, you know, I don't think this becomes an unsolvable problem for him. But there is an opportunity cost

here, Jim. I mean, you know, the biggest problem Trump faces seven, eight months before the election is that most Americans do not believe he has

made progress on the biggest problem they elected him to solve, which is their cost of living.

And they, as CNN polling shows, two-thirds of them don't believe he is focusing enough on it. And this really becomes, I think, just -- you know,

at this point to most of the public, just more evidence that he is focusing on almost anything else, tearing down the East wing, cutting health

benefits, enriching himself and his allies and undertaking these wars of choice around the world.

So, the public, I think, can simultaneously be very impressed by the performance of the military and yet still question whether the cost of

this, you know, the actual financial cost to the Treasury or the cost to them in terms of higher prices really are worth the benefits that they see

out of it.

SCIUTTO: Yes. Well, and in terms of higher prices, at least one commodity is already going higher, that being gasoline. Ron Brownstein, thanks so

much.

BROWNSTEIN: Thanks for having me.

SCIUTTO: Now, to new CNN reporting brought to you by myself and my colleagues, Natasha Bertrand and Zachary Cohen, for the first time

indicating Russian involvement in this war with Iran. Multiple sources familiar with the intelligence say that Russia is now giving Iran

intelligence on U.S. military targets, including the locations and movements of U.S. troops, ships and aircraft.

One person said much of that intelligence consists of Russian satellite imagery. They have better capabilities than Iran does. CNN has asked the

Kremlin and the Russian embassy for comment. The state news agency TASS reports that President Putin spoke with his Iranian counterpart on Friday.

And during that call, they, quote, "agreed to continue contacts."

Joining me now, retired U.S. Army Colonel Peter Mansoor, now chair of military history at Ohio State University. Peter, good to have you on.

COL. PETER MANSOOR (RET.), U.S. ARMY AND CHAIR OF MILITARY HISTORY, OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: Great to be on, Jim.

SCIUTTO: So, this is Russia giving Iran arguably the most sensitive intelligence when it comes to America's interests in that it affects the

location of U.S. forces in the region and therefore impacts their safety. Tell us the significance of that, of Russia taking that step to become

involved in this war.

MANSOOR: Well, my first thought is, but of course they are. I mean, this is payback for the United States providing Ukraine intelligence on the

position of Russian forces and assets in the vicinity of Ukraine. So, I would be astonished if Russia didn't do this. So, quite frankly, this is an

expected development. And like I said, it's tit for tat because we're doing the same thing in the European theater.

SCIUTTO: Well, to see the White House response to this, one might imagine a president or a White House press secretary at least taking issue with

that support. But when Karoline Leavitt was asked about it, she said it doesn't matter. Her reasoning being that the U.S. is doing so well, it

doesn't matter that Russia is providing such intelligence. But we did see that U.S. forces were at least vulnerable. You had that Iranian drone

strike that killed six U.S. service members. I mean, should the U.S. president, should the U.S. defense secretary more definitively call out

Russia for this kind of help?

MANSOOR: Sure. I mean, absolutely, you should demarch Russia, give them a diplomatic protest and make public your concern about their involvement in

the war.

[18:15:00]

But like I said, you know, it would hypocritical of us to say that, you know, Russia, I'm sorry, you can't support your allies when we're doing the

same thing with Ukraine.

In terms of what advantage it gives Iran, you know, it gives them targeting information. And that could be useful if they have the access to the

information assets necessary to strike those targets. It's going to be hard to parse out whether any particular strike was made possible by Russian

intelligence. But we can probably assume that they were.

SCIUTTO: Yes. Given your experience under David Petraeus in Iraq, as you look at these first days of this war and the performance of the U.S.

military, do you see parallels between Iraq, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, arguably? Because in the early stages of both those wars, the

world was amazed at U.S. military capabilities and they performed quite well and hit their targets. And the issue, of course, was the next chapter

and the chapter after that.

Are you concerned that the White House is too concerned on the first step and not and not on the succeeding ones?

MANSOOR: Yes, this has parallels to how we approach to Operation Iraqi Freedom. A lot of emphasis on phase three combat operations. The ones here

in Iran are actually going better than they did in Iraq in 2003. Not a lot of surprises so far, unlike the march up to Baghdad. You know, but almost

no emphasis on what comes after.

You don't see any sort of strategy or plan or even hint of a plan from the White House about what to do if the Iranian government collapses. What do

we do if it continues to fight, even though we say the war is over? The Iranian regime might not believe it's over and they're going to continue to

fight.

So, the second and third order effects and the branch plans and the sequels, none of those have been discussed, at least publicly. And it

appears that this is kind of a replay of 2003, where the combat operations are wildly successful. But then, what comes next?

SCIUTTO: From a military perspective? Does public support matter, right? And I ask this because it seems that the president's view is he didn't need

public support and that it'll come along, right? That folks will be so amazed by the successes that they'll come to see this war is different from

Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere and back it up kind of retroactively from a military perspective, not in terms of hitting targets, right, you know,

today, but does it matter for the military to have the public informed and behind, behind the war?

MANSOOR: It matters in two ways. One, as a soldier in uniform or a marine, airman, you want to know that the American people are supporting you. And

even though the American people largely don't support this war, they still support the people in uniform and the people on the sharp end. So, I

believe that that isn't really coming into play here.

More importantly, and this only affects the operation in the longer-term, you know, through the representatives in Congress, the people can influence

whether the war is funded for the long-term. Right now, Congress is on the sidelines. They don't want to go on record either for or against the war.

But if it starts turning south and things start going wrong, and the American people start seeing, you know, super high gas prices and the air

corridors through the Middle East continue to be shut down, the Strait of Hormuz continue to shut down, and all these other things continue to

happen, as that's that swings the public against the conflict, then Congress might act and then intervene. And so, that's where public support

matters.

SCIUTTO: Colonel Peter Mansoor, good to have you on.

MANSOOR: Thank you, Jim.

SCIUTTO: Still ahead, the Iran crisis, as we've been discussing, is fast becoming an economic crisis. Oil keeps rising, stock sinking, new numbers

show the U.S. jobs market in trouble as well.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:20:00]

SCIUTTO: Welcome back. In today's Business Breakout, U.S. stocks fell sharply, wrapping up the worst week for the market since October. The S&P

and NASDAQ dropped more than 1 percent. The widening war in Iran and dismal new U.S. job numbers both weighed on sentiment.

In the energy markets, both Brent and U.S. crude, the two benchmarks, finished the week above $90 a barrel. U.S. crude spiked 12 percent just

today and rose 35 percent over the course of the week. Brent Crude is trading at levels now not seen since 2023. The head of one energy firm told

CNN, quote, "investors have gone from complacency to the edge of panic. And we're about to have a panic moment."

The war only worsening the U.S. affordability crisis as well. AAA says the national average for a gallon of gas hit $3.32 a gallon on Friday. That's

the highest price in a year and a half. It might, if things continue this way, get worse. The energy minister of Qatar told the FT that Gulf oil

producers will halt energy exports within days if there is no action to open up the Strait of Hormuz. He says that could lead to oil reaching as

high as $150 a barrel and warns the war could, quote, "bring down the economies of the world." It's quite a warning. The U.S. energy secretary

says it's too early to begin efforts to reopen the Strait.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHRIST WRIGHT, U.S. ENERGY SECRETARY: Right now, all the U.S. military assets in God bless the men and women in the United States military, all of

their focus right now is to suppress Iran's ability to wreak havoc on their neighbors and on Americans in the area. So, first, we got to get their

ability to cause trouble way down. And then as soon as it's reasonable to do it, we'll escort ships through the Straits and get the energy moving

again.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: The U.S. agency is offering $20 billion in reinsurance to help take away some of the insurance concerns and get traffic moving through the

Strait. In another move that could ease oil prices, the U.S. is offering Indian oil refiners a 30-day waiver to buy what? Russian oil without

repercussions. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent says the Kremlin will not benefit because the waiver only pertains to oil already at sea.

However, he says further sanctions on Russian oil could also be eased soon.

All this coming amid new signs of weakness in the U.S. economy, the latest U.S. employment report shows the country lost 92,000 jobs last month. It

had been expected to gain 60,000. The unemployment rate ticked higher as well. The U.S. has now lost jobs in five of the last 12 months. It's a big

concern for the Fed, which means later this month to discuss interest rates.

Anthony Chan joins me now, global chief of chief economists for Chan, economics former managing director and chief economist for JPMorgan Chase.

Anthony, good to have you on.

ANTHONY CHAN, CHIEF GLOBAL ECONOMIST, CHAN ECONOMICS AND FORMER CHIEF ECONOMICS JPMORGAN CHASE: Good to be on.

[18:25:00]

SCIUTTO: So, it seemed earlier in the week that the oil markets in particular were thinking, you know what -- oh, there he is. We might -- you

know, this war might not go on for long. The markets could probably take it. All will be OK. It doesn't quite look like that anymore. Is this a

breaking point?

CHAN: I don't think we've reached the breaking point, but we're certainly closer to that breaking point than we were a few days ago. I think that

right now we're going to be watching those oil prices. But one thing to keep in mind is that if you look at the futures prices of oil, say, six,

nine, 12 months from now, they're much lower than the front month contract that we are quoting here with regard to oil prices.

But nonetheless, when you look at oil prices for every $10 increase in the price of oil, WTI, that subtracts about a tenth of a percent off real GDP,

and it increases personal consumption deflated, the Fed's preferred inflation indicator by about three tenths, according to the estimates that

I've done. So, that suggests to me that we have a barrel of trouble ahead of us if this lasts for an extended period of time.

SCIUTTO: I want to get to how the Fed sees this. But before we do, President Trump has said he has, quote, "already figured out" the Strait of

Hormuz problem. And I know he's brought up two things that reinsurance kind of back up the insurance markets. And also, this discussion, at least of

escorting ships in there hasn't started yet. And it's not clear which ships would do it, right, because so many U.S. military assets are tied up. Do

the markets believe that President Trump has figured out the Strait of Hormuz problem?

CHAN: I don't think so, because the reality is, it's nice to have insurance, nice to have escorts, and of course, we claim that we have

control of the air, both the U.S. and Israel, but we don't have control of the drones. Drones can still attack these ships. And of course, you see

that Iran has the capability to produce as many as 10,000 drones per month. And they also have the capability of setting out anywhere from five to six

thousand mines right on the sea.

So, even though escort is nice and the insurance is nice, do you really want to ride the seas when you think that your life is at stake, even

though it could be money good? There may be a lot some people that may not be so sure they want to go through the Strait of Hormuz. Those 80 ships

that go through the Strait of Hormuz every day may not -- may think twice about it.

SCIUTTO: Yes, I understood the crews, too. So, this is a dilemma for the Fed, right, because the Fed has a weaker economy on one hand. Job market

does not look good over the last several months. So, that might lead them to want to cut interest rates. But new inflationary pressures with the

rising price of oil, therefore rising price of gas. How do they balance that out?

CHAN: Well, it's pretty straightforward. The Fed chair, Jerome Powell, has told us that they have two mandates. But when they're moving in in the

wrong direction, they pay close attention to the one that's deviating the most. So, if the unemployment rate, namely the labor market, is getting

weaker relative to inflation, getting worse, but not as worse as the labor market, then they go ahead and cut rates.

Right now, this employment report had really good support for people that thought the labor market is getting weaker and some that think it's getting

stronger. Those that think that it's getting stronger will tell you, well, there were 30,000 strikers. If you look at the three-month average, it's

still positive. Private payrolls are still 18,000, much better than the 92,000. And they tell you that the reality is that these numbers will start

getting better.

The people that believe it's very weak, they'll tell you, well, the unemployment rate ticked up a little bit higher. And that makes me a little

bit nervous. But I am actually very objective, and I don't have a preconceived notion. And what I do is I look at the overall report, and I

see the underbelly of the report. I look at the unemployment rates of African-Americans. That went up much sharper than the regular unemployment

rate. I look at the unemployment rate of Hispanics. That went up a lot faster than the underlying unemployment rate. Even the Asian unemployment

rate that usually does OK actually also went up faster than the national unemployment rate. That tells me that there is weakness in this employment

report moving forward.

Now, is the economy in danger of a recession? Not yet. The Atlanta Federal Reserve, which is pretty reliable, is forecasting 2.1 percent growth for

the first quarter. And of course, the betting markets, like Polly Market, they're still telling you that the odds of a recession are less than 25

percent. So, I'm not worried yet. But certainly, things are, in fact, moving in the wrong direction.

SCIUTTO: Anthony Chan, we'll keep watching. Thanks so much. Straight ahead, Trump now says Cuba will fall, as the island nation is struggling

with major power outages. We're going to have more on what Trump actually means and maybe what Cuba thinks about, after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:30:00]

SCIUTTO: President Donald Trump is now signaling Cuba is next on his agenda. After the war with Iran, he told CNN in a phone interview that,

quote, "Cuba is going to fall pretty soon." He added, quote, "They may want to make a deal. And so, I'm going to put Marco over there and we'll see how

that works out." Add a reference to Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Trump's comments follow the killing of Iran's supreme leader and the arrest of

Venezuelan president, Nicolas Maduro.

Cuba already grappling with severe challenges, including the longstanding U.S. embargo, but also now the loss of oil imports from Venezuela, leading

to power outages.

Patrick Oppmann joins me now from Havana. Patrick, you've been in Cuba for a long time. You've covered it for years. The president says Cuba is about

to fall. From where you're sitting, is Cuba about to fall?

PATRICK OPPMANN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Listen, Jim, you know, this would sound like so much bluster we've heard over the years from U.S. presidents

who claim that, you know, the Castro's communism will not outlast them. And somehow the government here, the revolution continues on. This time feels

different. It feels different to me. More importantly, it feels different to Cubans who are suffering from this oil embargo on a daily basis. You

know, we are talking about blackouts that before lasted hours. Now, last days, there are almost no cars on the road.

You know, before, when I came in, I had to sort of calculate if I had enough gas to get to the office and back home. A tank of gas on the black

market here is about $300. That's more than most Cubans make in a year.

So, we have seen things change from bad to worse and change quite quickly in a really stunning fashion. Whatever reserves the Cuban government has of

oil, because none is coming in from either Venezuela or from their allies in Mexico, is quickly running out.

[18:35:00]

And so, yes, people have claimed that, you know, Castro's final hour is at hand, that the government will collapse. And people have endured so much

here. And yet this really seems like a moment where even the government realizes that they have to come to some kind of terms with U.S. government.

As much as they don't want to, as much as they've resisted that, over the years, it is checkmate. And the government here is in a severe crisis. And

they realize that they could be looking at a collapse of the government, of the country, if something doesn't turn around very soon.

SCIUTTO: Wow. Collapse. Patrick Oppmann in Havana, thanks so much. Well, in that same phone interview with CNN, Trump said his top priority remains

Iran, and he doesn't care if the future government is religious or democratic. Trump said on Truth Social, there will be no deal except for

unconditional surrender.

Joining us now, Democratic Congresswoman Madeline Dean. She's on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Congresswoman, thanks so much for taking the

time.

REP. MADELEINE DEAN (D-PA): Good to be with you, Jim.

SCIUTTO: So, I'm just going to begin with Cuba, if we can, since we just had that report from Havana. And given that President Trump's comments

about Cuba now are quite similar to the kinds of things he was saying before Venezuela and Iran. And, you know, at the time, those comments about

U.S. intervention, et cetera, were dismissed as bluster. Do you think we should be listening to him about what his plans are for Cuba?

DEAN: Of course. You have to. You have to take him seriously. You have to take him literally. And you have to recognize his erratic behavior. His

erratic focus. He cannot stay focused on any one thing very long. Years ago, before I was a member of Congress, I had the chance to visit beautiful

Cuba. And I think of the decades of suffering they have been under, of oppression that they have been under. And now, it is being added to by a

war in Iran.

The president sending Marco to try to solve this problem does not persuade me very much. Mr. Rubio, the secretary, should have been moving toward

peace and diplomacy before we struck Iran, should have been talking with Congress before we struck Iran and lost six members of the military. If you

don't mind -- do you mind if I say their names?

SCIUTTO: Please, please.

DEAN: I think it's awfully important that the audience know that we care desperately for their families and for this loss. Captain Cody Khork,

Sergeant First Class Nicole Amor, Sergeant First Class Noah Tietjens, Sergeant Declan Coady, Major Jeffrey R. O'Brien, Chief Warrant Officer

Robert Marzan. These are six American heroes, members of our military who were struck and killed in the first hours of this war of choice by the

president and the secretary of defense, a rather reckless, boyish cowboy with a bunch of war toys, Mr. Hegseth. We have to remember these heroes and

we have to do right by them in terms of ending this conflict.

SCIUTTO: I imagine that folks watching this around the world, but even in this country, as they see a president who plucked the leader of Venezuela

out of his bedroom, took him to New York by helicopter, who has now launched this war in Iran, making threats to Greenland, threats to Cuba, et

cetera. They might ask, what are the current checks on the president's power? And given that Congress, they took a swing, right, at restricting

his war powers with Iran and failed. Are there any checks on his power to wield force abroad?

DEAN: Let me go back with what you just said about Venezuela. The president went there without authorization from Congress and with a false

pretense. Remember, this was all about fentanyl and drug trafficking. Of course, it was not at all. It was about oil and seizing control of oil, as

he seized Mr. Maduro.

In terms of Iran, they gave us absolutely no basis. And then once they were there, they gave us six or seven different conflicting bases. What check

does Congress have? I am very devastated, dismayed, to tell you that yesterday, you saw us vote on the floor of the House and you saw the Senate

the day before us. Vote to control this president, to remind him and to rein him in, and to say that Article 1, Section 8 says only Congress has

the power to declare war. And yet, we didn't have the full help of all Democrats and we lost that War Powers Resolution. I'm very dismayed by

that.

[18:40:00]

We have to, and I call upon Republicans. I thought Republicans should have voted for it, as well as all Democrats, because the president has every

right and actually obligation to come to the American people, to come to Congress, to say here is why we must be in this armed conflict, where we

will lose lives and we already have. And he didn't do it.

Four days before he began this war -- and Jim, I can't even believe it. We have not been in Iran for more than, for a week yet, as you know. It's felt

like a month. It's felt like three months. I can't imagine what it has felt like to the members of the military and their families. But four nights

before, the president of the United States was in front of a joint session of Congress, not to mention the American people, and made no claim about

why he needed to go into Iran and strike.

SCIUTTO: He seems now to be making a, not just a connection, but almost an equivalency between Venezuela and Iran, saying that because I was able to

take Maduro out and work with the Venezuelan government, that I can take the supreme leader of Iran out, and many of his lieutenants, and somehow

work with someone who rises from the ashes, literally. They're obviously two very different systems, governments, you name it. Is that a dangerous

equivalency, in your view?

DEAN: It's a false equivalency. It's an illogical one. It's an ill-advised one. It shows ignorance, sadly, on the part of the president and those who

are speaking with him, and it's extraordinarily dangerous. I compliment the exquisite nature of our military, both in Venezuela and, of course, in

Iran. But in many ways, we got pretty doggone lucky in Venezuela.

And of course, we have not made a difference to the good in terms of the people of Venezuela. The president has seized upon oil. It's always about

the money. It's always about the assets. It's always about the deal. And when you talk about Iran, your reporting and CNN's reporting has been about

the broad nature of this spider of a conflict, and how -- what a conflagration it can be. Lebanon, Iraq, and so many other countries. We had

a classified briefing, a joint classified briefing this week.

And my question to the Secretary, Secretary Rubio, and also General Caine, but they wouldn't allow General Caine to speak with me. My secretary was,

what preparation was made for Americans in the region, in the 14 nations region? Because I've heard from them in my own constituent office, trying

to get home, trying to get out, grounded where they were. And the secretary said something absurd like, well, since the conflict, we've heard from

about 3,530 -- no, excuse me, 1,535 Americans hoping to get home. Well, the reporting is we've already gotten 20,000 home. And the answer was they

hadn't prepared for stranding American citizens in the region.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

DEAN: This is a really dangerous and reckless way to go about armed conflict, where American lives, civilian and military are at risk. And

we've lost six. God bless those members of the military. God bless their families.

SCIUTTO: Indeed. Congresswoman Madeleine Dean, we appreciate you coming on.

DEAN: Thank you, Jim. Bye.

SCIUTTO: And we'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:45:00]

SCIUTTO: In the early hours of this war, a strike on an elementary school in southern Iran killed dozens of students and teachers. Now, there are new

details about who may have been responsible. Here's CNN's Isobel Yeung.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ISOBEL YEUNG, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Nearly a week after a strike killed scores of students in Iran's Minab, it seems more and more likely

that the U.S. was responsible. A new satellite image shows an Iranian Revolutionary Guards base and an elementary school in southern Iran. Here

you see craters in several of the buildings, including the school. They were hit in their exact centers, suggesting precision strikes, experts say.

A wall separates the school and the base.

Satellite images from December showed dozens of people in what appears to be a handball court at the school. Reuters now reports that U.S. military

investigators believe U.S. forces were responsible, though they haven't yet reached a final conclusion.

N.R. JENZEN-JONELS, DIRECTOR, ARMAMENT RESEARCH SERVICES: It paints a picture of multiple simultaneous or near-simultaneous strikes, and it looks

like these were delivered with explosive munitions, probably air-delivered. I think the most likely scenario in this case is that it's a U.S. or

Israeli airstrike going a little high. It's probably a targeting failure somewhere in the targeting cycle, an intelligence failure.

YEUNG (voice-over): The Israeli military say they weren't operating in the area.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: To date, we've hit over 2,000 targets --

YEUNG (voice-over): American military officials say they carried out extensive strikes in this area and released this map showing strikes in

southern Iran. The base and the school in Minab are located here.

PETE HEGSETH, U.S. DEFENSE SECRETARY: We, of course, never target civilian targets, but we're taking a look and investigating that.

JENZEN-JONELS: The damage we've seen is quite significant. It's unlikely it was something like an air defense missile fired by the Iranians, for

example.

YEUNG: When we try to assess who is responsible for airstrikes, we typically try to examine the weaponry fragments left behind. But in this

instance, there's an internet blackout in Iran. It's been really difficult to obtain that. And so, this investigation is still not conclusive.

Isabel Young, CNN, London.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SCIUTTO: Coming up just after the break, alliances between Arab Gulf states and the United States tested by the ongoing war in the region and

Iran's attacks. We're going to take a closer look at the potential consequences next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:50:00]

SCIUTTO: Repercussions of the ongoing war between the U.S., Israel, and Iran are reverberating across the Arab Gulf states. We have new reporting

that suggests President Trump's regional allies are now reconsidering their investments in the U.S. as the conflict threatens their economies. Iran has

killed U.S. soldiers, struck U.S. bases, injured dozens of civilians as well in the region.

It's also paralyzed the region's tourism industry, targeting luxury hotels, international airports. Nearly 14,000 flights have been canceled in the

region. Iranian attacks have also knocked out some oil and gas facilities.

My next guest believes there is growing frustration that the U.S. and Israel have dragged the region into a war that none of them wanted, and

perhaps they don't know, the U.S. and Israel, how long it's going to last. Mohammed Sergie is editor of Semafor Gulf, which provides specialized news

briefings. Mohamed, thanks so much for joining.

MOHAMMED SERGIE, EDITOR, SEMAFOR GULF: Thanks for having me, Jim.

SCIUTTO: So, help me understand the thinking here. Last year, as you note, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar collectively pledged to invest $3 trillion

in the U.S. economy. They're rethinking those investments now?

SERGIE: Yes. I don't think the reporting gets us that far as, you know, rethinking or how they're going to deploy them, but there's a simple math

that is involved here. Gulf states have to have surplus revenue from oil and gas exports, and then what they spend internally, and basically the

delta between that, that's what they invest abroad. As their expenses increase and their revenue decreases based on this war, and this is only a

few days in, they obviously will not have as much surplus to recycle through the U.S. and other economies.

But, you know, the frustration I would say right now is still early days, and we're seeing it more from business people and former government

officials rather than the current governments. The current governments -- or the current government officials, they are all -- they're defending

themselves, and they see the U.S. alliance as core to their security architecture of the region.

SCIUTTO: Is there any frustration with the moving target as to exactly what this war is about and how long it's going to last, right? Because I

know that the government officials, at least publicly, are very much on board, but I imagine there are a lot of questions floating out there.

SERGIE: I think that's the main issue here is just by geography itself, Gulf states will always be a neighbor to Iran, and it doesn't really have

to be Islamic Republic or not, just that territory itself. So, if the U.S. and Israeli war doesn't meet the objectives of maybe like a Venezuela,

Venezuela Plus, or finding some sort of stability going forward with a new type of regime, there could be a failed state, fracturing, and long-term

instability there.

If Iran itself, or, you know, basically IRGC and other groups within it, are stripped of their offensive weapons, missiles, to some extent drones,

and nuclear program is basically destroyed, Iran -- Israeli security could be much better off than they are now, so that serves their interests. The

U.S. could live with that. But then, all the other repercussions would fall onto the Gulf, and that's something that they've been worried about for a

long time.

SCIUTTO: I mean, the essential gambit is, if it works, it works, and they're happy, but if it doesn't, there's going to be problems.

SERGIE: Exactly, and that's really the fear here, and that's why they have been arguing for a really long time to de-escalate, to find a negotiated

settlement, to exhaust all avenues of diplomacy, because Iran is a very large country, 90 million people in Iran. Ethnically, to some extent, you

know, it looks similar to other countries that have fractured.

[18:55:00]

So, they're not all Persian, they're Azeris, Belushis, Kurds, some Arabs, others, and they could be armed at different points, and we've seen this

happen in -- you know, my family's from Syria, like things can spiral very quickly, and that is their fear that they have, because the Gulf states

have, as you know, spent trillions of dollars, not just on U.S. assets, and trophy real estate in London, but on their own domestic economies. So,

that's really crucial to them to continue to develop.

SCIUTTO: Mohammed Sergie, thanks so much for joining. And thanks so much to all of you. I'm Jim Sciuto in Washington, you've been watching "The

Brief." We hope you have a good weekend. Please do stay with CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:00:00]

END