Return to Transcripts main page

The Brief with Jim Sciutto

CNN International: Trump: "Whole Civilization Will Die" if Iran Doesn't Make Deal; Iranians Form Human Chains on Bridges Near Power Plants; U.S. Strikes Military Targets on Kharg Island; Democratic Lawmakers' Reaction to Trump's Iran Threat; Trump Agrees to Suspend Bombing of Iran for Two Weeks. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired April 07, 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 joining you from Tel

Aviv. You're watching "The Brief."

Just ahead, this hour, we are just two hours from Donald Trump's deadline for Iran and his threat to, quote, make a whole civilization die. The White

House says the president is being briefed on a Pakistan proposal for a two- week ceasefire. And NASA shares two stunning pictures of the moon taken by the Artemis II astronauts just ahead of their return to Earth.

Well, President Trump says that, quote, "heated negotiations" are taking place between the U.S. and Iran ahead of his deadline for Iran to reopen

the Strait of Hormuz. Pakistan's prime minister has proposed a two-week pause in the fighting for those talks to then continue.

The White House says President Trump is aware of the proposal and will respond. This morning, he posted, quote, "A whole civilization will die

tonight, never to be brought back again. I don't want that to happen, but it probably will." Those are the words of the U.S. president.

He's now given Tehran until 8:00 p.m. Eastern time in Washington, as we said, just under two hours from now to make a deal. That would be 3:30 in

the morning in Iran. Trump added, quote, "Now, that we have complete and total regime change, where different, smarter and less radicalized minds

prevail, maybe something revolutionary, revolutionarily wonderful can happen. Who knows?"

Iran's government spokesperson said in response that dialogue begins with respect rather than threats and pettiness. This video shows a group of

Iranians forming human chains on bridges as well as near power plants in Iran, it seems, to deter a U.S. attack.

Joining us from the White House, Kristen Holmes. Kristen, do we know how seriously the president and his advisers are considering this two-hour

pause in the fighting?

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Jim, they reached out to us saying that they had seen the proposal and that a

response would come, which means they are taking it at least somewhat seriously, because they want that message out there through the media that

they are considering this proposal. So, it's clearly not dead in the water.

Now, of course, part of this proposal for these two weeks would be that Iran would have to agree to open the Strait of Hormuz, which is something

they have been reluctant to do specifically, given that they believe that is a point of leverage for the Iranians.

So, there's a lot that has to happen to make this work. And it's unclear if President Trump is going to take this deal, although we have seen in the

past that he is willing to extend specifically or particularly in this case, because you're hearing this plea from someone else, the prime

minister of Pakistan, asking for this, which would give a little breathing room to President Trump so that it wasn't his idea. It's not him that's

actually adjusting the timeline. He's doing it in regards to the prime minister of Pakistan, who, of course, as we have been reporting, Pakistan

has been an intermediary between the United States and Iran. There are still enormous amount of questions.

President Trump did a brief interview with NBC News in which he talked about those human barricades, saying that it was totally illegal. Well, one

of the big questions that we've been putting to the White House is, isn't it illegal to bomb civilian infrastructure, particularly given that Iran

has not attacked the United States directly?

That is not a question that they are willing to answer. President Trump has essentially said he doesn't believe it's war crimes. He believes that the

only war crime would be giving Iran a nuclear weapon. And there were some that took the post that he said today about destroying an entire

civilization as a threat to use a nuclear weapon. I do want to note that.

We have gotten some pushback from White House officials, at least publicly, saying that that's not the intention here, that they've been posting on

other comments that J.D. Vance made, that people were linking to using a nuclear weapon. But of course, when you're saying something, a whole

civilization will die tonight. There are endless possibilities, and none of them are positive.

So, again, we know that they are looking at this proposal. We know that they've had this proposal since it came out. And we are waiting to hear

what the White House will respond. And of course, we do believe they will respond in some sort of a timely fashion, given that, as you noted, we are

just two hours away from that deadline.

[18:05:00]

SCIUTTO: We are indeed. Kristen Holmes, good to have you there. Thank you. Well, this all comes as strikes on Iran have continued throughout the day.

U.S. officials say the U.S. hit military targets on Iran's oil export hub of Kharg Island. Iranian media report that most oil infrastructure there,

however, remains intact.

Here in Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says that his military hit Iran's railways and bridges, in effect, beginning those attacks on

infrastructure in the country.

Joining me now, Firas Maksad, managing director for the Middle East and North Africa at Eurasia Group. Firas, good to have you back.

FIRAS MAKSAD, MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA MANAGING DIRECTOR, EURASIA GROUP: Thank you, Jim.

SCIUTTO: So, you have a two-week pause, in effect, on the table. You have some sources in the region telling us they see positive movement here. You

have the president, at least, considering this proposal, and you have the oil price going down somewhat. Do you see this as a serious effort here now

and a serious possibility of a pause, and then, therefore, the president does not act on this deadline?

MAKSAD: Difficult to say, Jim. But if I had to, I would say that, yes, this is a serious effort, if only because we know that the prime minister

of Pakistan, the chief of staff, Marshal Munir, is the favorite marshal of President Trump, has, in fact, been talking to the Iranians on behalf of

the United States. And it would be fairly convenient in terms of offering a climb down for the president, who has now put out this ultimatum of

destroying a civilization in the next two hours if a deal hasn't been struck. All that strikes me as fairly convenient.

Of course, there's a lot of details. This is immensely complex. The Iranians have in the past said that they would not entertain a ceasefire,

that they want a complete end to the fighting, at least not until the U.S. starts to show some goodwill by pulling some of the military assets away

from the region. We obviously know that, in fact, the U.S. is still sending military assets to the region. So, it's complicated and it's difficult to

see how this comes together. But it's also clear that there is a credible effort underway right now to avert the worst outcome in the coming hours.

SCIUTTO: You have written that initially America's Gulf allies were in support of U.S. military action. But is that changing now? I wondered, have

they had their fill, in effect, of this war?

MAKSAD: Jim, there's a very troubling dynamic that has set in, and it's unmistakable. And you pointed earlier in the report to Israel, in fact,

having begun its campaign against not only the civilian infrastructure in Iran, but also against energy infrastructure in Iran. And every time that

has happened, it has meant blowback against these Arab Gulf countries.

In Qatar, Qatar lost some 17 percent of its liquefied natural gas capabilities as a result of the last wave of Israeli attacks against the

Iranian gas facilities. Yesterday, attacks on Saudi Arabia energy infrastructure as a result of Israeli actions.

So, yes, these countries are increasingly nervous at what they see as Iran's continued ability to strike at them, despite the fact that they are

blocking some 90 percent plus of what's incoming. But when Iran wants to punch through to a particular facility, it's still demonstrating the

capability to do so. So, this dynamic is very troubling for the Gulf countries right now.

SCIUTTO: You have said that there is an inflection point in this war approaching. And to that point, Qatari officials have talked in similar

terms about the damage of this in the next couple of weeks expanding. Can you explain why that is, why that timing is so important?

MAKSAD: The timing, I mean, the thin watch is not what the president of the United States is saying. It's what the president of the United States

is doing. And that's been the case from the get-go. He continues to send and deploy U.S. military assets towards the region.

Now, Jim, I would argue to you that every time he's deployed these assets, whether it was during the 12-day war or in the up and the lead to this war,

or even if it was with Venezuela and Maduro, he's actually used those assets.

And so, we see Marines, we see the elements of the 82nd Airborne, we see an additional aircraft carrier that continue to be on the way. And that to me

signals a president who at the minimal wants to have options to further escalate that war. And that's what I'm focused on. That's what's likely

coming some two weeks down the road.

[18:10:00]

And it could be that this ceasefire, if in fact doesn't incorporate some kind of pullback by the U.S., provides him the time that is needed for

those further deployments to actually make it into position.

SCIUTTO: And that appears to be part of Iran's concern, right? And why they're pushing for a longer pause if they get there. Firas Maksad,

appreciate you joining.

MAKSAD: Thank you.

SCIUTTO: Well, as President Trump is saying, quote, "heated negotiations" are underway. The Israeli military is ready to launch more strikes on Iran

as that Tuesday night deadline nears, this according to an Israeli security source. The source says there is possibility the president could last

minute extend the ultimatum to reopen the strait or just give the order to the planes to take off.

Joining me now, Nimrod Novik. He was foreign policy adviser to the late Prime Minister Shimon Peres. He is now a fellow at the Israel Policy Forum.

And he joins me now. Nimrod, thanks so much for taking the time.

NIMROD NOVIK, POLICY FELLOW, ISRAEL POLICY FORUM AND FORMER FOREIGN POLICY ADVISER TO PM SHIMON PERES: Thanks for having me.

SCIUTTO: So, first, if I could just begin simply, do you see a genuine chance here for a diplomatic, I don't say off-ramp, right, really just a

pause in the fighting in the next couple hours? Or do you see the president acting on this deadline?

NOVIK: Oh, I wouldn't know. You know, good negotiators never make the final, the most difficult concession before the last minute. And a good

negotiator usually knows when the last minute is. The Iranians, however vicious the regime, have proven to be fairly good negotiators. Have they?

Are they? Will they make the last-minute concession that will satisfy the minimum requirement of the president? I have no idea.

SCIUTTO: You have said that there's a pattern that Trump has followed. And you related it back to the Gaza peace plan, where there was a ceasefire and

the most difficult issues were left, and frankly, to this day remain. For instance, disarming Hamas. Hamas is not disarmed. But then, in effect, from

the president's perspective, he declares victory and leaves the difficult problems to others. Do you see the potential for a similar outcome here?

NOVIK: I'm afraid so. Even the current discussion about the pause suggests that an issue that was not an issue prior to the war, which is the freedom

of navigation of the Strait of Hormuz, became the main point of contention, whereas the three issues for which the war was launched are left

unresolved. And that is regime change, ending its nuclear ambitions -- military nuclear ambitions, and ending the threat of its ballistic missile.

None of the three have been dealt with.

I mean, most professionals didn't buy that that could be done remotely from the air. But if the president indeed is going for a pause in return for

Hormuz freedom of navigation, then, yes, we are back in the same pattern of the, what I called, Trump model of conflict resolution.

SCIUTTO: New York Times has a piece today picking through the days and decisions before President Trump took the U.S. to war against Iran. And it

tells the story of how Netanyahu personally made the case to Trump that this would be quick, it would be decisive, there would be regime change. Do

you find that a credible account of what helped lead to this war and lead to the president's decision?

NOVIK: I read it. And of course, I'm not privy to intelligence, so I don't know what transpired in the Oval Office on that fateful meeting. But it did

remind me of the same prime minister of mine promising the American Congress that if the U.S. will strike Iraq, democracy will flourish in the

Middle East. And we've seen the consequences.

And the way the New York Times described his confidence in securing a quick regime collapse, end of the nuclear threat, end of the ballistic missile

threat, it's the same confidence in which he promised that getting rid of Saddam Hussein will bring peace and stability to the Middle East. And we

are still facing the consequences of that dreadful decision. So, yes, it may be accurate.

[18:15:00]

SCIUTTO: I wonder what your view is of if the war were to end today, or even a couple of weeks, but largely where it stands, would Israel consider

that a victory? Because Israeli officials have told me quite consistently, for victory, they want to see a decisive end to Iran's nuclear program,

securing of that highly enriched uranium, but also regime change. And while the president may claim regime change, I haven't spoken to anybody who

believes there's been regime change. Would Israel consider this job incomplete at this point?

NOVIK: Well, it depends who is Israel. I mean, if you open the black box called Israel, you will find an overwhelming majority of the public

supportive of the war, because of those three promises, higher expectations that are not likely to be met.

So, yes, Israelis, by and large, will be greatly disappointed. I mean, we've been taking missiles on a daily basis, not at the rate that was

feared from the outset. But nonetheless, Israeli society is resilient, is willing to take it, provided that the threats, which the prime minister for

decades have portrayed as existential, have been taken care of. Not having done so, I think Israelis are going to be very disappointed.

SCIUTTO: Nimrod Novik, we appreciate you sharing your thoughts.

NOVIK: Thanks for having me.

SCIUTTO: Well, coming up just after the break, as the clock ticks down towards the president's deadline of 8 p.m. Eastern time, less than two

hours to go, we're going to show how some Iranians are now taking to the streets to protect civilian infrastructure, a sign of defiance to

Washington. Is it voluntary? We're going to have a conversation next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCIUTTO: As Iranians brace for a possible major escalation in U.S. military strikes on their country. We've been seeing images like this one,

people forming human chains along bridges near power plants, which the president has said the U.S. would target, a show of resistance against

those threats which Trump has been issuing in order to force Iran to open the Strait of Hormuz, a an Iranian minister went on X, formerly Twitter, to

urge young people to form human change, chains.

[18:20:00]

For context, worth noting, Iranian authorities have a record of recruiting child soldiers to carry out acts like this in violation of international

humanitarian law.

Joining me now is Roxana Saberi. She's an Iranian-American journalist, previously held prisoner in Iran, who's kept frequent contact with Iranians

on the ground. Roxana, good to have you back.

ROXANA SABERI, IRANIAN AMERICAN JOURNALIST AND AUTHOR AND PREVIOUSLY HELP IN IRAN: Thanks for having me, Jim.

SCIUTTO: First, I would love to hear what you're hearing from Iranians reacting to the U.S. president saying he would end a civilization. How do

they respond to that kind of rhetoric?

SABERI: The messages that we've been getting, the ones that break through the regime's internet blackout, have been expressing a range of emotions.

Mainly, we've been hearing responses to President Trump's deadline of 48 hours, tonight some time, to start striking civilian infrastructure across

the country.

Many Iranians have expressed anger, fear. Some have expressed resignation, even numbness. Some Iranians are deeply concerned. Some have been sending

goodbye texts to their loved ones because they're afraid they could die. Some Iranians have been stocking up on basic goods, such as drinking water

and food and candles in the case the electricity goes out, if power plants are hit. Many Iranians are asking, why is President Trump threatening to

target the civilian infrastructure of the country, or to end the civilization of the country? They say this infrastructure belongs to the

people of Iran and the future generations of Iran.

And then doing so, striking and targeting this infrastructure will hurt the people more than the regime. But there are other Iranians who say they're

not really concerned. They hope President Trump's threats are empty, and they're just going to stay up tonight to see what happens.

SCIUTTO: Yes. Because Trump claim, not clear what he based that claim on, when he spoke that the Iranian people are willing to endure this pain, that

it's a price worth paying. As we've been reporting, more than 2,000 people have been killed in Iran since the start of the war, including children,

hundreds of children.

When you speak to Iranians, do they blame the regime for those deaths, or do they blame the U.S. and Israel?

SABERI: I hear a mix of responses on this question. And there are many who do blame the regime for putting Iran in this position in the first place.

And others blame the U.S. and Israel. Also, I would say some views have been shifting.

At the beginning of the war, in the early days, there was a lot of optimism among people who are opposed to the regime, which is the large majority of

the population. Cautious optimism that targeted military strikes could lead to the weakening and perhaps even the toppling of Iran's Islamic regime.

But as time has gone on and the weeks have passed, some of this hope has been fading for some Iranians. Many still want their theocracy to be

replaced by a democracy, but not if it means their nation will be in ruins. And yes, they've seen some of those civilian casualties mounting. They've

seen residences and universities and bridges and so on being destroyed. And they're also questioning whether the aim of the military strikes, of the

airstrikes, is to overthrow the regime, because they say even if President Trump says there has been a regime change, as you referred to just moments

ago, many Iranians say, what regime change? That hasn't happened. And if it doesn't happen, then what is all this for?

But I do want to say that there are still Iranians who tell me that they're willing to withstand some more of the suffering from the war and to make

some more sacrifices in the hopes that perhaps the regime will be weakened enough to one day be toppled.

SCIUTTO: Yes. I was going to ask you to sort of ask the Iranian people to fact check the president's claim that regime change has already taken

place. How should we take these images of people lining bridges, circling power plants? Should we look at that as a voluntary expression of defiance,

or might we expect that the government forced or somehow coerced people into that position?

SABERI: So, Jim, what I -- I think my initial response is based on what I've been seeing online, a little bit of recent history, but also what I've

been hearing from people inside Iran.

[18:25:00]

So, we know that the regime has a habit of bringing out its regime supporters in times like this when it's under pressure. And in the images,

it looks like many of these people are regime supporters. But I've also been hearing from friends of friends and seeing online that there are anti-

regime Iranians who have gone out and formed these human chains because, as one Iranian put it, it's the least that we can do or the only thing that we

feel we can do to protect the infrastructure and the resources that belong to the Iranian people.

SCIUTTO: Before we go, Roxana, I mean, you said earlier that you have sensed a change in view, that early on there were higher hopes that this

might improve their lives, that this might bring the regime down, and it's changed over time. Can you share a comment or two from people that you've

spoken to inside Iran?

SABERI: Yes. I mean, in terms of the views changing, I think, for example, one person, one man who's in northern Iran was saying when President Trump

says that there's been regime change, how can there have been regime change when the supreme leader that we have now shares the same surname as the

supreme leader who was killed, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

And he was -- you know, had told me that he had supported the idea of military strikes before they happened because it was a last resort for him

and he thought they would be targeted military strikes. But now he feels like, well, if the regime doesn't get removed through this war, and if the

infrastructure of the country is being damaged in the process, then why are we suffering from this?

Another person wrote to us, I'm not worried about these threats that President Trump is making. I'm worried about the Islamic Republic staying

in power and its execution squads, the executions of protesters, which we've seen, and executions of dissidents, which we've seen during the war

as well. So, I'm still hearing sentiments on both sides.

SCIUTTO: Yes. And we should, it's a good reminder, right, that those executions have continued, people who just stood up to their government.

Roxana Saberi, good to have you on. Thank you.

SABERI: Thanks for having me, Jim.

SCIUTTO: Well, still coming up on "The Brief," Democratic lawmakers reacting, reacting to President Trump's threat against Iran, that a whole

civilization will die. His words, my conversation with U.S. Senator Peter Welch, right after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:30:00]

SCIUTTO: Welcome back to "The Brief." I'm Jim Sciutto, live in Tel Aviv. And here are the international headlines we're watching today.

We are now just an hour and a half away from President Donald Trump's threat to bring destruction across Iran. The president says Tehran must cut

a deal and reopen the Strait of Hormuz, or the U.S. will attack and destroy the country's infrastructure. Earlier today, he said on social media that

Iran's, quote, "whole civilization will die tonight" if they don't reach a deal.

Turkish officials say one attacker is dead, two others injured after a gun battle near the Israeli consulate in Istanbul. Authorities say two police

officers were also hurt. The consulate is on the seventh floor of a building in Istanbul's financial district. Israel is calling the shooting a

terrorist attack, says its consulate was not staffed at the time of the shooting.

U.S. President -- Vice President J.D. Vance is in Hungary now to support Viktor Orban in that country's election Sunday. The far-right pro-Kremlin

prime minister and his party are trailing in the polls after 16 years in power. Vance says he was there in part because the E.U. is trying to

undermine Orban. Vance spoke at a rally and put President Trump on speakerphone to address the crowd there.

Democrats in the U.S. House are stepping up their demand for Speaker Mike Johnson to cut short the spring recess to bring lawmakers back to vote on

whether to end the war in Iran. They issued a statement saying, quote, "The House must come back into session immediately and vote to end this reckless

war of choice in the Middle East before Donald Trump plunges our country into World War III." More than a dozen Democrats in Congress are calling on

Trump's cabinet to invoke the 25th Amendment to seize power from the president.

Joining me now is Democratic Senator Peter Welch. Senator, thanks so much for taking the time.

SEN. PETER WELCH (D-VT): Thank you.

SCIUTTO: First, I'd like to begin to get your reaction to a U.S. president threatening, in effect, to wipe a country off the map, to end its

civilization, to never be rebuilt. I know that his defenders will say this is maximum pressure, the art of the deal. But how do you react to hearing

an American president make such a threat?

WELCH: He's unfit for office. He's unfit to lead our wonderful military who commit themselves to and put their lives on the line to protect

America, not to carry out just horrible threats by the president. The president is putting our country in grave danger. He's putting our

soldiers, including Vermonters, in danger. But he's threatening our whole honorable history of using force as a last resort when necessary to protect

our country, our people, and our values.

This is an impulsive act on the part of the president, and he's already causing an enormous amount of damage to our country and our standing in the

world.

SCIUTTO: I know it doesn't look like Republican leaders in the House or the Senate are going to call their members back to Washington and this

recess early. Should the Democratic leadership call Democratic lawmakers back to Washington regardless?

WELCH: Well, yes. I mean, anything we can do to demonstrate our horror at what the president is doing, we should do. But we all know that with the

way it works in our Congress, only the majority has the power to reconvene and to put a bill on the floor. But what it reflects, I think, is what

we're hearing from our constituents who are saying, this war is wrong. And when you have the president already, he's threatening to destroy the

civilization.

But the reality is he's already done things that our military has never done before. Him and Netanyahu, they bombed 60 hospitals in Iran. That's

not what the American people want. They bombed 44 schools. They bombed desalinization plants. This is wrong.

[18:35:00]

It's also, by the way, his goal now is to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Fact check, the Strait of Hormuz was open before he started bombing. And now,

that's going to be $2,000 a year for every American family and additional gas costs and home heating fuel. And he wants $200 billion as a

supplemental appropriation. That's going to be $1,400 per household. This is absolutely wrong. And it makes us less secure.

SCIUTTO: That's supplemental. And then the larger 2027 defense budget, which adds 40 percent to what is an already quite large defense budget in

historical terms. That would be the next opportunity for lawmakers to clip his wings in effect here. Do you see any Republicans who might vote along

with Democrats to hem in the war effort by hemming in the financing behind it?

WELCH: Well, I'm talking to my Republican colleagues and hoping. But we've got a problem that is really of epic proportions. We've got an executive

who is vastly overreaching with his authority, but it's being met by congressional capitulation. And that capitulation is because my Republican

colleagues are more afraid of a reaction by Trump than they are of their own constituents.

This war is not popular in red America or blue America. It's not necessary. It's a war of choice. And until we get Congress reasserting its own

authorities, an independent branch of government, and this is an obligation any of us in the Senate have, Republican or Democrat, to stand up for the

congressional power of spending, the congressional power of taxing. Those tariffs are terrible. And the congressional power to decide yes or no on

war when this enormously important decision of sending our men and women in harm's way is to be made. It can't be left to a reckless, out of control

president.

SCIUTTO: All right. So, we have some news just in to CNN. And this is a Truth Social posting from President Trump. I'll read it to you now, Senator

Welch, word for word. It says the following. Based on conversations with Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Field Marshal Asim Munir of Pakistan and

wherein they requested that I hold off the destructive force being sent tonight to Iran and subject to the Islamic Republic of Iran agreeing to the

complete, immediate and safe reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, I agree to suspend the bombing and attack of Iran for a period of two weeks. He goes

on to say this will be a double-sided ceasefire and goes on to claim having met all his military objectives.

So, it looks that the president is going to let his own deadline pass once again, Senator Welch. What's your reaction to hearing this?

WELCH: Right. It's enormous relief. We were going to be bombing innocent civilians. We were going to be destroying civilian infrastructure. So, I'm

very relieved that the president is backing down. But now that we have some relief of this historic attack not taking place, it's time for us to ask,

what do we get out of this whole thing? What did America achieve?

We fractured our relationship with our allies. We have, as a result of our actions, we closed the Strait of Hormuz. That was the result of what Trump

did. It was open before. We see now enormous economic dislocation and punitive expenses being imposed on Vermonters and all Americans, whether

they voted for Trump or not.

So, what we've done is put ourselves in a worse position as a result of this reckless action and really failed leadership on the part of the

president.

SCIUTTO: Before we go, where does this leave us? Because we're locked in this pendulum swing, are we not, between massive, massive threats and now a

pause. The truth is, in two weeks, we may find ourselves in the same place, right? And two weeks ago, or 10 days ago, we were in the same place. Where

does that leave this war effort? Do the American people know what defines victory?

WELCH: They do not. And the reason they don't is because the president doesn't know what defines victory. You know, we depend on our leaders,

those we elect, to have good judgment. Good judgment starts with a prudent plan, with clarity of what your objective is, with the means of executing,

and also with consistency.

[18:40:00]

And what's very clear is that President Trump has none of those qualities. He operates by the seat of his pants. He calls it his quote, "instinct."

There was just a story that reported how basically many members of his cabinet, many members of the intelligence community said, Iran is not

Venezuela. And he just disregarded that and listened to Netanyahu.

So, we have a person in the highest position in our country with the authority to send our military into military activity. And he doesn't have

the personal qualities that are required for a person who has such executive responsibility.

SCIUTTO: Senator Peter Welch, thanks so much for joining.

WELCH: Thank you very much.

SCIUTTO: And as we just reported, the president has now shared a post on Truth Social saying that he has agreed to suspend the strikes his own

deadline for a period of two weeks. We'll have more when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCIUTTO: Welcome back. This is Jim Sciutto. And you'll see that I'm not where I was when I was speaking to you just a few minutes ago. That's

because there is an air raid warning here in Tel Aviv. We've gone back into our bomb shelter here while we await the incoming.

As we do, I should note that just a few minutes ago, President Trump posted to Truth Social that he will suspend his threatened expanded strikes on

Iran that were meant to take place a little more than an hour from now by his 8:00 p.m. Eastern deadline. He suspended it for a period of two weeks.

He says in exchange for Iran reopening the Strait of Hormuz.

Joining us now is Bob McNally, former energy adviser to the Obama administration. Bob, I wonder how the oil markets will react to this. I

suppose the question is how quickly they'll react positively to this.

BOB MCNALLY, PRESIDENT, RAPIDAN ENERGY GROUP: Hi, Jim, and hope you stay safe there. You know, oil traders anticipated this. They're ready for good

news. There's been a lot of optimism, believe it or not, especially in the paper traders, those trading futures contracts. So, we saw oil prices,

Brent and WTI, sell off hard even before that Truth Post -- Truth Social post.

[18:45:00]

And the key thing there, and the key thing they want to see, though, for that sell off to sustain is that complete, safe and immediate opening of

the Strait of Hormuz. If that happens, that's enormous relief. And I think we'll see more downward pressure on oil prices.

SCIUTTO: But let me ask you this. That's for two weeks. And for the last couple of weeks, as I've been speaking to oil analysts, et cetera, they've

been saying that, you know, there's a real buildup in this system in that there's been a lot of production halted because you can't get it out,

right? You can't get it through the Strait and out to international markets. Does the two-week pause take just some pressure off the price, or

do you see something more lasting here?

MCNALLY: It takes some pressure off the price, but only if it turns into a long-term agreement. I doubt those countries that have shut in their

fields, Saudi Arabia, UAE and Kuwait are going to be quick to reopen their fields for a two-week ceasefire. They're going to want to make sure it

lasts longer than that. What it enables to do is get some of the boats that have the oil, have to get it out into markets. It'll help a little bit.

SCIUTTO: Understood. The next question is, how do they perceive the progress of this war, right? Because I imagine you can look into your

crystal ball of the futures markets, right? Do they put an outward bet as to how much longer the war goes?

MCNALLY: You know, if you look at the futures trading, the shape of the futures curves and so forth, oil traders basically expect this is going to

be over pretty soon. There's confidence in there. Futures prices are very backwarded. They don't see this as being sustained. They think that there's

either going to be a, quote/unquote, "TACO" or a ceasefire. It's a real nightmare for traders.

No one ever thought this could happen. They want it to be over. They expect it to be over. And, you know, now they're going to have even more hope. So,

they were ready for this. They're ready for good news. They're ready to price it in and take it on faith to some degree.

SCIUTTO: How quickly would this, if at all, be reflected in gas prices inside the U.S.? Because they've come up a fair amount. Is it a direct

connection? Do you see immediate relief at the pump in the U.S.?

MCNALLY: Not immediate. So, pump prices in the U.S. tend to follow what happens in global crude oil prices with a two-to-three-week lag. So, we've

got some catch up to do. We're at 4.14 and we're going to go a little higher. But if this sustains and we see flows resume and those fields start

to come up again and no damage to infrastructure, all good -- a good scenario, then I think, you know, in the coming month or so, we'll press

and start heading down.

SCIUTTO: And then how about for Asian countries such as Japan and South Korea that import so much of their energy from here? I mean, they've been

talking openly about an energy crisis. Does a two-week reprieve give them a lot of relief or just a temporary kind of breather?

MCNALLY: Yes, not too much. You know, they're already on the receiving end of the boats ending, right? Most of those tankers were flowing from the

Persian Gulf to Asia. And it's Japan and China at least have some stocks stored up. But your Australia's, your Philippines or Thailand's do not. And

so, that gap, that air pocket, if you will, is still there. And it's going to be a while before those flows get back out to them and restore oil to

that region. So, it's not much help for them in the immediate term.

SCIUTTO: Sure. And of course, in two weeks' time, we could be right back where we are tonight or were tonight. Bob McNally, appreciate you walking

us through the markets.

MCNALLY: Thank you, Jim.

SCIUTTO: Well, you heard us there discussing how the oil markets reacting to the news of the president delaying once again his deadline for strikes

on Iran for two weeks. He says that Iran has agreed to open the Strait of Hormuz for that period of time. We are where we are here because Tel Aviv,

as the war continues, is under yet another air raid warning. Please stay with us. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:50:00]

(CNN U.S. SIMULCAST)

[19:00:00]

END