Return to Transcripts main page

The Brief with Jim Sciutto

CNN International: At Least Three Killed at San Diego Mosque; Police: Two Suspects in Mosque Shooting are Dead; Trump Says He'll "Hold Off" Attacking Iran on Tuesday"; Iranians Urged to Prepare for War as Trump Issues New Threats; Lebanon: More Than 3,000 Killed in Israeli Attacks Since March; Musk Loses Lawsuit Against OpenAI; CNN Crew Witnesses Drones Attacking Supply Route in Ukraine; Agreements Emerge Out of Trump-Xi Summit. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired May 18, 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": Just ahead this hour, police say three people have been killed in a shooting at a mosque in San Diego. The

suspects, two of them also dead. Donald Trump says he called off an attack on Iran after speaking to leaders in the Middle East. And CNN follows

Ukrainian soldiers as they defend a key supply route threatened by Russian drones.

We do begin with a shooting at a mosque in California where at least three people were killed according to San Diego police. San Diego's police chief

said two suspects were also found dead and that they are treating the shooting as a hate crime. Have a listen to the FBI special agent in charge.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARK REMILY, FBI SPECIAL AGENT IN CHARGE: What we know at this time is that there are three deceased adult males. And those are the presumed

victims at this time. On behalf of the FBI, we extend our sincerest condolences to the family and friends of the victims of this tragic

incident.

There were two subjects, both teenagers, and both are confirmed deceased. I want to thank our local law enforcement partners for their quick response

that undoubtedly saved the additional loss of life.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: The Islamic Center of San Diego is the largest mosque in San Diego. It includes a school. And you see the children there being let out

by teachers. The director says that all students and staff are safe. The mosque's imam had this message for his congregation.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

IMAM TAHA HASSANE, DIRECTOR, ISLAMIC CENTER OF SAN DIEGO: We have never experienced a tragedy like this before. And at this moment, all what I can

say is sending our prayers and standing in solidarity with all the families in our community here.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Just a short time ago, President Trump called this a, quote, "terrible situation." Joining me now, retired FBI special agent Richard

Kolko. Richard, good to have you here. An all-too-common scene in this country, of course, a shooting. There are victims. And in this case, as

police said, they're treating this as a hate crime until they have evidence otherwise. What stands out to you based on what we know so far?

RICHARD KOLKO, RETIRED FBI SUPERVISORY SPECIAL AGENT: Jim, what stands out to me, and I know it stands out to you, too, you've been around a lot of

these. We don't know everything yet. The information is changing so quickly.

When you just look at this response size of San Diego and other law enforcement, every one of those law enforcement officers has to be

debriefed for what intel they have. So, there's still a big puzzle that needs to be put together with whatever information is available.

I will tell you, something just seems a little unusual about this one, though. Three deceased at the at the door to the mosque or outside the

mosque. Fortunately, not on the side where the school is. But we haven't heard anything additional about the other two people besides a security

person.

And then a 17- and 19-year-old cruising the streets, maybe taking some potshots at a person doing some yard work and then and then potentially

killing themselves. This is a strange, strange story. We know law enforcement's working hard to try and put these puzzle pieces together. But

I've been quizzing my sources as well. And just in the last 15 minutes, the story I've gotten has changed several times and it will for the next few

hours.

SCIUTTO: Yes. That -- those details, and again, with the with the proviso that this is early stood out to me as well. Teenage attackers that may have

taken their own lives does not fit a typical profile for an attack such as this, although I suppose, I mean, there is some variation. Any explanation

that you can you can come up with?

KOLKO: I'm going to -- you know, everybody's theorizing here or hypothesizing. When you go back and look at these active shooters, these

school shooters, and you go back and download and do the research on their computer, you will find almost to a T every single one of them has gone

back in time and reviewed school shootings, church shootings, temple, mosque shootings. And somehow, they, you know, they build on that they

fantasize about that they want to see themselves in that role. This goes all the way back to Columbine.

So, as soon as we get the identity of these two young men, 17 and 19 years old, you know, law enforcement will be at their homes going through their

computers, cell phones, iPads, whatever digital devices they have talking to friends, neighbors, associates, if they have them, and, and learn more

about what they did. And did they potentially write anything down? Did they make some threats? Did they write a manifesto? Does somebody else have some

inkling that something like this is going to occur?

I'm just telling you I wish it could be better for you right now.

SCIUTTO: That's enough. That's enough.

KOLKO: Something is very strange.

[18:05:00]

SCIUTTO: Yes, it's early. So, we'll continue to follow details. I do want to ask you because we have seen a rise in anti-Muslim crimes and incidents

in the past several years, the Council on American Islamic relations received 8,000 -- close to 9000 complaints across the U.S. last year. Has

there been a response from law enforcement, security, et cetera, as a result of those figures?

KOLKO: Well, those and also on the Jewish side, we know that those have gone up dramatically as well. I know for a fact that the outreach efforts

being done not just by the FBI, but state and local law enforcement has been just tremendous to try and interact with these different groups,

provide the safety and security that they need at their homes of prayer, houses of prayer.

And I'm spending some time down in Florida, you drive by the temples, you drive by the mosques anytime I see a sheriff's deputy car out there all the

time. They're making their presence felt just to make their presence felt, which is doing what they can to protect their communities. And that's not

just -- you know, we saw immediately as soon as this happened in San Diego, California, as far as you can get from New York City, NYPD put out a notice

that, you know, they're stepping up security at their mosque in New York.

So, everybody's concerned across the country about this going on. And can this inspire somebody else to do this? We saw outside he was arrested like

just a couple days ago, in Turkey, and he was recruiting people around the country to do this kind of attacks. He was obviously picking Jewish

institutions. But the way to get radicalized, that takes some time. But that seems a new thing that these folks are doing. Some of these recruiters

are just literally hiring the criminal element, just trying to get people to carry out these attacks without the full background of radicalization.

SCIUTTO: Now, listen, of course, you can increase security, but you can't put up walls around everything. I mean, we go through the same debate in

the wake of a whole host of shootings, including at schools, hospitals, Jewish centers, Islamic centers. Well, Richard, I appreciate you lending us

your expertise. Thanks so much for joining.

KOLKO: Thanks. I'll be following this one for a while.

SCIUTTO: To Iran now and the president's threat, at least of further U.S. military strikes. President Trump announced that he had planned to attack

Iran on Tuesday, but that as a result of the leaders of Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the UAE asking him to reconsider, he's reconsidering.

He posted on Truth Social, he's instructed the U.S. military to be ready on a moment's notice to launch a full-scale assault, but not tomorrow. The

president appears to have grown frustrated at the halting pace of negotiations, lack of progress so far. Washington believes Iran's newest

counterproposal to end the war did not offer significant concessions, this according to a person familiar with the matter speaking to CNN.

A sticking point, Iran's ability to continue to enrich uranium for civilian purposes, as Iranian officials are insisting they retain. President Trump

was asked about his decision to delay to delay further strikes on Iran a short time ago.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: Well, other countries have come to me and they've said we were getting ready to do a very major attack tomorrow. I

put it off for a little while, hopefully maybe forever, but possibly for a little while because we've had very big discussions with Iran, and we'll

see what they amount to.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Joining me now is Margaret Talev, senior contributor, contributor at Axios. Margaret, good to have you. Thanks so much for joining.

MARGARET TALEV, SENIOR AXIOS CONTRIBUTOR AND DIRECTOR, SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE FOR DEMOCRACY JOURNALISM AND CITIZENSHIP: Thanks, Jim. My

pleasure.

SCIUTTO: So, this is, of course, not the first time the president has threatened military action, renewed military action against Iran on a

certain time frame and then move that time frame. Is this about pushback from allies or is it about possible, at least an opening for further

negotiations?

TALEV: Yes, there are a lot of things going on and they're all happening at the same time. Not to mention that there is a midterm election year back

home here in the United States. But look, here are a number of factors. It is absolutely true that Qatar, Saudi and the UAE are a bit concerned that

if the U.S. escalates this with additional strikes on Iran, it's going to do major, major damage to a huge source of their revenue in the oil and

energy sector.

So, what the president's saying is they've asked him to hold off because they believe that a satisfactory deal is possible. That part nobody's too

sure about. Because what the U.S. wants, of course, is to make it impossible for Iran to further any nuclear ambitions. And what Iran wants

is not to give up any leverage because look how much leverage it has right now between the threat of that and between its control over the Strait of

Hormuz.

So, I think there are a lot of factors going on. But yes, I mean, of course, what the White House is saying is there could be a change of plans

at any time and they're, you know, prepared to strike if they decide that's what they need to do.

I think that pressure from Middle Eastern partners and allies and partners of the U.S. is quite real. And I also think that another element that's

quite real is the domestic implications back at home.

[18:10:00]

The latest in a series of mounting evidence on polls is this New York Times/Siena poll shows two things. President Trump's approval rating among

Americans at a new low, 37 percent. And maybe even more importantly, it shows that nearly two thirds of Americans think that going to war with Iran

was the wrong thing to do. That's like three quarters of independent voters. That is a big deal, just this close to pivotal elections.

SCIUTTO: So, given that, is Trump himself somewhat reluctant to continue and expand the war, right? He's worried about gas prices. He's worried

about long-term bond yields rising. There are a whole host of inflation indicators that are pointing in the wrong direction from his perspective,

plus the polling numbers and plus the best guesses as to what's going to happen in the House in the fall. I mean, does he want out, right, or is he

at least reluctant to strike again because of that?

TALEV: Yes. I mean, so my colleague, Barak Ravid, you know, his reporting has really showed both sides of the same coin. President Trump aid saying,

feeling a lot of anger, feeling really fed up and sort of embarrassed by his inability so far to make a lasting change.

Iran has proved fairly resilient because of the economic pressure they can bring to bear on the world. And coming off of the heels of some of the U.S.

moves in Venezuela and other elements like that, I think the president's initial hopes were that he could, you know, kind of move very quickly and

force immediate concessions and changes from Iran. That has not come to bear.

And so, you see now a president who promised American voters, who backed him, no more forever wars and time to focus on the U.S., that he's been

involved in initiating this thought that it would achieve goals, certainly that have proved elusive so far, and now is weighing these two concerns. He

needs the economy, wants the economy to be strong, wants Americans behind him again, and at the same time does not want to blink.

SCIUTTO: Margaret Talev, we'll see who blinks first. Thanks so much for joining.

TALEV: Thanks.

SCIUTTO: Well, Iran has maintained it will be ready if the U.S. were to resume military operations. Now, some of the Iranian people are preparing

for that very possibility. We should know. CNN operates inside Iran only with the permission of the government, however, retains full editorial

control of what it reports. Here's our chief global affairs correspondent Matthew Chance reporting from Iran.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MATTHEW CHANCE, CNN CHIEF GLOBAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Across Iran, the tension and the rhetoric is getting stronger. Thousands

have been gathering every night for state-sponsored rallies, mobilizing supporters against the United States.

CHANCE: How concerned are you that the war may start again soon?

TIANA, RALLY ATTENDEE: Concern --

CHANCE: Worried?

TIANA: I'm not worried. Why should I be worried? Because I'm so ready to sacrifice my life for my country and for my people. So, no, I'm not worried

at all, at all.

CHANCE (voice-over): This man's sign reads nuclear technology missiles are as important as borders. Key sticking points installed peace talks.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We need nuclear. Nuclear not for the bomb -- peaceful - -

CHANCE (voice-over): Still amid escalating threats from the White House, ordinary Iranians are now being urged to prepare for war.

CHANCE: Well, these rallies or gatherings have been taking place every single night for the past several weeks, and so they're not new, but what

is new is the introduction of weapons, and these kiosks have been set up in each of this sort of squares, where members of the military, there, you can

see them with masks on.

They're showing people, in this case a woman, basic skills of how to use what I think is an AK-47 or a Kalashnikov, and things like that. Look over

here, they're showing children how to use them as well. It's all part of a sort of state-sponsored call to arms in case the war begins again.

CHANCE (voice-over): It's all guns on state television too, and several Iranian channels broadcasting their hosts brandishing assault rifles. They

gave me a weapon, so I could learn how to use it, like you. This anchor tells her viewers.

[18:15:00]

After his on-air training, this presenter fires off a round into the -- but not all Iranians are gunning for a fight. Just around the corner from the

rally hints at the diversity of views about their country's plight.

CHANCE: Well, it's a very different atmosphere in this part of town. People are sitting with their partners, having coffees. Strolling around

the bookstores or just hanging out with their friends. And if you talk to people, you get very different views as well. You know, people didn't want

to talk on camera, but off camera. One woman said to me, she just wanted peace and freedom. Another one said she wanted to live in a normal country

where there was a potential future for her children.

CHANCE (voice-over): But Iran's future to many Iranians looks increasingly clear, especially amid regular threats from President Trump.

CHANCE: Waiting for the war.

FATIMA, RALLY ATTENDEE: We're waiting. We are here because we know this war isn't over. We know he's not negotiating. He's not going to negotiate

anything. He's just going to be like, either you do what I tell you or I'm going to kill you again.

CHANCE (voice-over): And it may be that bleak sense of inevitability drowning out in voices compromise.

Matthew Chance, CNN in Tehran.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SCIUTTO: Lebanon's health ministry says the death toll from Israeli attacks has now reached more than 3,000 this since March 2nd. That includes

some 200 children. The ministry does not distinguish, we should note, between civilians and combatants as it tallies a death toll. The Israeli

military says it is continuing to strike Hezbollah targets even after a ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon took effect in mid-April.

Joining me now, Congressman Mike Quigley. Congressman, thanks so much for taking the time.

REP. MIKE QUIGLEY (D-IL): Glad to be back. Thank you.

SCIUTTO: First, I want to begin on the Iran war. Do you think Iran buys President Trump's threats at this point, given the delays? I mean, of

course, he did carry out several weeks of strikes. But at this point, do they judge the U.S. to be still fully invested in this war?

QUEST: You know, I don't know which president that they believe in at this point in time. I mean, obviously, the world has watched President Trump

give ultimatum after ultimatum to Putin and back off on each one of those. And he's seen multiple ultimatums, where the president backed off here. So,

I'm not sure which president they feel like they're the material erratic, sometimes unhinged president. So, I suspect they're probably preparing for

the worst, understanding that anything could still happen.

SCIUTTO: Is there something more to Gulf allies pushing the U.S. president to back off attacks more than just hope for negotiations? Does the U.S.

have a problem with his Gulf allies? Are they losing confidence in the war, in the progress of the war? Are they concerned, increasingly concerned

about the economic costs of this war as well?

QUIGLEY: Well, look, and there's the actual physical destruction, the infrastructure that's already been destroyed, that would take years to

rebuild. And obviously, that's not just that oil manufacturing, refining infrastructure. It's water purification plants. It's the fact that they

don't just get oil through the through the strait, they get their food supplies.

So, obviously, they have a lot of skin in the game as to whether this conflict continues. They all want peace. And obviously, this could escalate

again tomorrow and make their lives just a living hell financially and actually real threats to their own people.

SCIUTTO: And of course, there's an effect on the global food supply as well, given fertilizer components of fertilizer that make their way through

the strait as well. I want to turn now to a domestic issue, and that is the Justice Department announcing this creation of a nearly $1.8 billion fund

to compensate anyone who claims they were unfairly targeted by the previous administration.

Based on what you know of this as a member of Congress, do you see any oversight as to who this money is going to go to and under what

justification?

QUIGLEY: Well, first, it should have to be approved by Congress. It's a dramatic appropriation and expenditure that's obviously never been any

budget or any appropriation bill. Do I expect that my Republican friends will push for that? Probably not.

But as you know, I was in the room on January 6. I was in the House chambers. I will say this again, without the courage of the Capitol Police

and the Washington, D.C. Police and others, I'm not sure I would be here, and I'm not sure our fragile little experiment in democracy would be here.

So, this is a big deal.

[18:20:00]

The first thing the president did was, to the many who were convicted in a court of law, he commuted or pardoned them, right? So, you get out of jail

free, and now he's going to reward them. He's going to, in a sense, pay them for what they did, right? These are people who wanted to hang the vice

president of the United States, who wanted to overturn a lawful election, who right afterwards, the Republican leadership scorned the president and

the people who did this.

And now, what are we going to do, stand by and watch them get paid for it? Not only is that absurd and dangerous, it sets a precedent for those who

would do this sort of thing again, almost at the president's bidding. If you do something like this again, don't worry, you're not going to be

charged. We're going to pay you for it.

SCIUTTO: In a statement, Trump's acting attorney general, Todd Blanche, who of course used to be his personal attorney, said, quote, "The machinery

of government should never be weaponized against any American, as he justified this new fund." What was your reaction to hearing that from this

current administration, given its many prosecutions of Trump's critics and adversaries?

QUIGLEY: It's a lesson to our country and to the world, the reminder that we learned in Russia and Hungary and here in the United States that someone

can be elected in the democratic process and then turn the assets of a democracy into weapons, as we've seen with the Justice Department, the

Department of War, our military and troops in the street. It's a very, very scary time. These are the actions of a tyrant. He's not halfway through

this term.

So, it is time to step up and stand up against what the president's doing. I beseech my colleagues on the Republican side, we're going to have another

war powers vote this week. Last week, it was a tie. When we get one more Republican to stand up and push back against an illegal war and illegal

appropriations and a fund like this.

SCIUTTO: Congressman Mike Quigley, we'll be watching. Thanks so much for joining.

QUEST: Thank you.

SCIUTTO: Still ahead, a California jury has handed down its verdict in the case of Elon Musk versus OpenAI. What that decision means for the future of

the A.I. industry. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:25:00]

SCIUTTO: Welcome back. In today's Business Breakout, U.S. stocks finished Monday's session mostly lower. Stocks under pressure from higher oil prices

and rising global borrowing costs. Ten-year U.S. Treasury yields climbed to their highest level in a year. Japanese 30-year Treasury yields hit all-

time highs.

Back here in the U.S., a big legal defeat for Elon Musk. A California jury tossed out the tech multi-billionaire's civil suit against OpenAI. The jury

ruled that Musk waited too long to bring the suit, and his case was barred by the statute of limitations. It did not rule on Musk's underlying claim

that OpenAI broke its promise to remain a non-profit.

Hadas Gold joins me now. And, Hadas, I mean, listen, there is open warfare in the A.I. world. I mean, just an enormous amount of competition, enormous

amount of spending. But you also have this kind of internecine warfare here. Does this jury decision end that, or is this just one chapter in that

battle?

HADAS GOLD, CNN A.I. CORRESPONDENT: I think it's just one chapter of that battle. It's kind of incredible to think about how it's essentially like 10

people or so who are controlling this really powerful technology that is likely going to change a lot of aspects of our lives.

But at least in this case that was a business case, but also a personal case between two of tech's biggest titans, between these billionaires, it

came down to the calendar. After weeks of testimony, hearing from some of the biggest names in tech, hundreds of pieces of evidence, including

internal messages and texts between some of these big names like Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk and Sam Altman and even more, it took the jury

less than two hours to decide this case.

And as you noted, they said to Elon Musk, essentially, you're too late. You should have filed this earlier. The statute of limitations has passed. They

did not rule on the other merits of the case. Elon Musk had argued he helped fund and co-found OpenAI. And he said that he was deceived that

OpenAI's founders unjustly enriched themselves, that they breached a charitable trust because OpenAI used to be a pure nonprofit, now has a for-

profit structure overseen by a nonprofit foundation. He is saying that they abandoned their nonprofit mission and he was deceived, essentially, into

funding a startup, which is not what he wanted.

OpenAI argued that that wasn't the case, that Elon Musk wanted a for-profit structure at OpenAI and he wanted to control OpenAI. And when he wasn't

able to do so, he left the company and eventually formed his own competitor. Here are what the attorneys had to say after the verdict was

read.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARC TOBEROFF, ATTORNEY FOR ELON MUSK: This, at its core, is a travesty. And but for Musk, you know, they get away with it, and they shouldn't.

BILL SAVITT, ATTORNEY FOR OPENAI: It did not take them two hours to conclude, upon deliberation of hundreds and hundreds of pieces of evidence

and days and days of testimony, that Mr. Musk's lawsuit is nothing more than an after-the-fact contrivance that bears no relationship to reality.

And they kicked it exactly where it belongs, which is to the side. The finding of the jury confirms that what this lawsuit was, was a hypocritical

attempt to sabotage a competitor.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GOLD: Elon Musk, for his part, of course, took to X to post his reactions. He says that he will appeal. He called it a calendar technicality and not

on the merits. He also called the judge in a post that I've now just learned has since been deleted. But he called the judge, in this case, an

activist judge who he said used the jury as a fig leaf, calling the ruling a terrible precedent, saying she just handed out a free license to loot

charities if you can keep the looting quiet for a few years. But he has since deleted that post.

But for OpenAI, what this means is that they can continue on their plans to develop A.I. Their plans for a eventual IPO, likely later this year, will

not be changed. And they're lucky, because one of Elon Musk's remedies that he wanted in this case, should he have won, would have been to revert

OpenAI back to a total non-profit and for Sam Altman to lose his job. Now, at least for now, that won't be happening. We'll see what happens to Elon

Musk's appeal.

SCIUTTO: So, as I understand it, beyond the statute of limitations, I mean, the jury -- there was evidence that Musk knew the structure of this

company prior, right? So, it was not purely a procedural issue. That then raised the argument that this was about sabotaging a competitor.

But let me ask you this, because Musk was not alone when OpenAI went for profit in criticizing that change, as you remember better than me. I mean,

there were others who left the company. So, my point is, separate from the lawsuit, does Musk have a point about OpenAI changing its mission?

GOLD: This wasn't just a case of, you know, billionaires battling each other. Elon Musk had a case here, and that's why the judge let this go to

trial. She said it was important to hear out the arguments here. And, you know, as you noted, a lot of people felt the same way about OpenAI and its

structure.

[18:30:00]

Now, OpenAI would argue, and they said this in court, they were just not able to raise the amount of money to fulfill their mission as a non-profit.

There was no way they were going to get billions of dollars of charitable donations for this, and the only way to be able to do so was to have a for-

profit aspect where investors would make money off of this. And they were arguing they still have a nonprofit foundation, which they note is one of

the wealthiest charities now in the world, that they say is, you know, handing out grants for A.I. to help develop, you know, new drugs and the

like. But the argument here is that this needed to happen for them to be able to fulfill the mission.

But, again, it's interesting, because we didn't hear any sort of verdicts on the merits of the case. Was this a deception? But now I would say, no,

that Elon Musk was always involved, always knew what was going to happen here, and he just wasn't able to gain control of what is now a very

successful company. Jim.

SCIUTTO: And it's going to be really highly valued as well. Hadas Gold, thanks so much.

Coming up after the break, Ukrainian soldiers keeping watch for the threat, a deadly one from above. Nick Paton Walsh joins troops on a key supply

route that is a target for Russian drones.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

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

Police say three people have been killed in a shooting at a mosque in California. The incident happened at the Islamic Center of San Diego. The

victims, two staffers and a security guard. Two suspects, aged 17 and 19, are also dead from suspected self-inflicted gunshot wounds.

President Donald Trump says he has decided to hold off on an attack against Iran. He posted on Truth Social the attack had been set to take place on

Tuesday, but the leaders of Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE asked him to reconsider. He went on to say that he has instructed the U.S. military to

be ready, at least, at a moment's notice to launch a full-scale assault if the U.S. and Iran do not reach some sort of agreement.

[18:35:00]

After days of searching, expert divers have now located the bodies of four people killed in last week's Scuba tragedy in the Maldives. Five Italians

died exploring caves in the Indian Ocean. It's still not clear what went wrong. However, currents and the darkness make diving there extremely

difficult. A Maldives military diver was killed Saturday on a recovery mission.

Ukrainian authorities say that Russian attacks have killed dozens of people, injured, I should say, in the cities of Odessa and Dnipro

overnight. Residential buildings, a school and a kindergarten, all damaged by Russian missiles and drones. The night before, Russia says Ukraine fired

more than 500 drones in an attack inside Russia, which killed at least three people.

State media called it the largest attack on Moscow in more than a year. At least two deaths were also reported from Ukrainian strikes on southern

Russia, seen as Nick Paton Walsh followed Ukrainian soldiers down a strategically important supply route to the front lines under threat of

constant attack by Russian drones. Ukrainians call that road -- the Road of Life. Here's his special in-depth report.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

NICK PATON WALSH, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT (voice- over): They call this the Road of Life, but it's about survival, not living. It is safest on foot, under skies ruled by tiny killer drones

targeting any vehicle, the nets trying to block the horror from above. If you can, make the robot your friend, your porter. The machines are normally

the enemy here.

WALSH: This now pretty much all over the front lines. Tiny bits of fiber- optic cable used to connect drones to their controller can go on for tens of kilometers, stopping the jamming before --

WALSH (voice-over): A Russian drone above. The Ukrainians open fire. They hit it.

WALSH: That's the impact. And you have to split out, because the drone will try and target groups of individuals.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): One, two, or three.

WALSH: Sometimes one, two, three, you find.

WALSH (voice-over): We're doing Sasha (ph) and Bogdan's (ph) usual walk along this road between two Ukrainian positions, but it takes five hours,

and we are buzzed by attack drones 14 times.

The threats change every month. Here, looking for loitering drones, they hover low and wait for you.

A radio warning. The trees aren't just a place to hide, but somewhere the drones cannot fly. Russian drones circle, targeting vehicles, but also

dropping explosives on troops. You have to keep moving, though they may swarm around you.

WALSH: The battlefield has completely changed in a matter of a year. Nobody drives cars on this road, unless you have to. Nobody drives in

tanks. That's outgoing artillery. These robots used for resupply, up ahead we can see people repairing the nets, a kind of key protection. But these

used to resupply food, ammunition, all around the front line.

WALSH (voice-over): Gunfire means run, again.

WALSH: This is a pretty constant, and the only move is to hide into the trees. There it lands, not far.

WALSH (voice-over): You might be thinking, why not walk inside the nets?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): To maneuver if there is a drone.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): Their speed is high. You need to get away, and not group up.

WALSH: This is part of the problem here, in that after an hour of this, you don't quite get numb to it, but let's see something here, you get

slightly too comfortable and tired.

WALSH (voice-over): The next one is right on top of us.

[18:40:00]

WALSH: There it is. There it is.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): Is it ours?

WALSH (voice-over): They hit it. That grey streak. And it falls. Whirling down.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): What a good hit.

WALSH (voice-over): But it hasn't detonated. Debris drifts. There's been no blast, so we are alive. It may have been a recon drone, but flew like a

Russian attacker.

Down the road is the Kostyantynivka front, where the Kremlin's advance has been slowed to a crawl, at the enormous cost, across the front, of 35,000

Russian dead and wounded a month, says Ukraine. This is the tenth attack.

WALSH: They caught sight of it briefly, and it appears to be coming closer now. Actually, intense fire. You can hear it. See it up.

WALSH (voice-over): Drones also target heavy gunfire. Their friend, a lieutenant, killed when this car was hit just two days ago.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): Roman, this is where it happened. Rest in peace.

WALSH (voice-over): We are nearing their bunker position. There are moments here to rest, see the trophies of drones that failed, but we have

to get back.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): Did you expect there to be so many robots and drones?

AFINA, 24TH MECHANIZED BRIGADE (through translator): No, to be honest, I didn't. I actually joined the army before the full-scale war and didn't

expect anything like this at all. It's a big tough at the moment. Over time, you get a bit bummed out by all of this. You realize you have to do

it.

WALSH (voice-over): As soon as we emerge, they are above us again. This is the new warfare, hide. Shoot at the sky. Run. Fire drones back. The

impact's just as deadly as shelling. The accuracy, horrific.

WALSH: Have to walk in, but also walk out.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): Monakh, Monakh, it is above the trees.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): Plus, plus. Heat it.

WALSH (voice-over): The buzz stays with you, ringing in your ears for hours later. No respite.

The grey smoke, perhaps it hit the net.

WALSH: That was close, loud. You could hear the shrapnel landing on the tarmac, clearly targeting that armored vehicle.

WALSH (voice-over): It is hard to see how this grind is a win, but it is. Ukraine on foot, robots in support, automation replacing scarce troops,

holding ground.

The drones never stop, but neither does Ukraine, adapting, learning, engineering this new warfare, and hoping any edge sustains long enough to

put Russia in reverse.

Nick Paton Walsh, CNN, Druzhkivka, Ukraine.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SCIUTTO: A constant threat from above. Well, straight ahead, President Trump, back, of course, from his summit with Xi Jinping in Beijing. We are

learning more about what he and the Chinese leader spoke about, perhaps what they agreed to. We're going to bring you the latest after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:45:00]

SCIUTTO: President Trump's state visit to China last week was full of pageantry. Not clear what else. Now, we are learning what he and the

Chinese leader Xi Jinping may have agreed to. The U.S. and China are poised to set up two new boards. One for trade, another for investment. The White

House says that China will buy at least $17 billion worth of U.S. agricultural products per year. It also says Beijing will make an initial

purchase of 200 Boeing aircraft. China's readout did not, however, confirm those deals in detail.

Joining me now, Nicholas Burns, who served as U.S. ambassador to China. Ambassador, thanks so much for joining.

NICHOLAS BURNS, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO CHINA: Thank you, Jim.

SCIUTTO: So, first of all, I want to ask you about Taiwan, if I can. Because perhaps the most concrete statement we heard is that President

Trump has not decided whether he will approve of, the U.S. will go ahead with, congressionally approved arms sale, 1$4 billion package to Taiwan. Is

that, in itself, a concession? Him saying he's thinking about it.

BURNS: It's a major concession, Jim. You know, for 50 years, every U.S. president has agreed that we had to help Taiwan with its deterrence against

a possible Chinese attack. It's the law of the land in the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979 that the United States must sell or provide defensive military

technology to Taiwan. And President Reagan, in the six assurances to the Taiwanese in 1982, he promised that American presidents would not negotiate

these arms sales to Taiwan with the leadership in Beijing.

So, when President Trump spoke to Fox News, but also on Air Force One returning from China, he equivocated. He said that he may or may not go

forward with the arms sales. He'd had a long conversation with President Xi.

I think this is extremely worrisome. Because, Jim, if the United States does not meet this commitment, consider the message to the 23 million

people of Taiwan who live in a democracy and consider what the Japanese, the South Koreans, the Filipinos will be thinking are true allies in Asia.

SCIUTTO: The Chinese leader came right out of the gate saying, in effect, that if you mess with Taiwan, there will be war. I mean, he mentioned

conflict, that if we don't come to some sort of agreement there, it seemed like an effort not just to set a red line, but perhaps to intimidate the

U.S. And I wonder, based on President Trump's comments, and he said in that Fox News interview, why would we go to war there, et cetera, 9,500 miles

away, et cetera? Does it look to you like that strategy, China's strategy, worked?

BURNS: Well, you know, it's interesting, Jim. As you know, normally, neither side would actually say anything in public about the meetings until

the meetings had concluded.

[18:50:00]

In this case, on the first day of the summit on Thursday morning, the Chinese foreign ministry leaked this statement to the press or gave it to

the press while the meeting was happening. It was clearly meant to intimidate the United States and try to move us off of our 50-year position

in our one-China policy.

And unfortunately, I think the confusion now over what our policy is and what our policy is has been a short-term victory for China, the People's

Republic. In the Global Times, as you know China well, Jim, from having seen it for yourself, this is the mouthpiece of the Communist Party of

China. They were gloating today about the fact that they had pushed the United States into a new position, and they were telling, messaging the

Taiwanese, you can't rely on the United States anymore.

So, I think damage has been done. Very important, in my view, that President Trump go ahead with this arms sale package. There's bipartisan

support on the Hill. And if he doesn't do it, we're looking at a major strategic move by the United States in the wrong direction. I think you

could even say this could be the greatest mistake of President Trump's foreign policy in this second term.

SCIUTTO: You know several China hawks among GOP lawmakers on the Hill, and even inside the Trump administration, who you've known well for many years,

Marco Rubio among them, who was on this trip. To your knowledge, in your communications with him, do they support such a softening?

BURNS: You know, I can't speak for anybody inside the administration, but I look at Capitol Hill, and I look at both the Republican and Democratic

leadership, there's widespread bipartisan support that we should be helping Taiwan. And of course, it is the law. And so, you have to follow the law in

this case. And if the president wants to renege on these arms sales, then it's going to have to go to Congress, because this is something that the

executive branch must do, and that every president has done.

And it speaks to our credibility as a global leader. The ramifications of us not going forward with this arms sale package is going to be in East

Asia with the allies, as I mentioned, but also with NATO. And it's going to make countries wonder if the United States stands by its word.

SCIUTTO: There was something else, a case of what Donald Trump was willing to do that the Chinese leader was not. And that is deliver praise, sort of

unadulterated praise, Trump calling Xi Jinping a great leader. What an honor it was to be there that he's his friend. We didn't hear that in

return. How would the Chinese government, how would the Chinese leader interpret that, that the praise seemed to be a one-way street?

BURNS: Well, you know, I -- it's certainly understandable that President Trump wanted to be polite and sensible to Xi Jinping. Of course, he should.

But I fear that in calling President Xi several times a great leader, President Trump appeared more as a supplicant than as a great leader

himself of the United States. And you did notice that President Xi Jinping did not return the favor, did not say anything similar about President

Trump.

I learned, Jim, in my years in China, flattery gets you nowhere with the Communist Party of China. They're all business. They're not sentimental.

It's not about friendship. It's about hardcore politics and foreign policy. And so, I worry that President Trump sent the wrong message.

And, you know, if you call someone a great leader, that means they're powerful. But are they a good leader? This is the leader, Xi Jinping, who

has engineered the most significant cyber-attack on the United States in our history, who's a major human rights violator, who's urging on the PLA

to overtake our military. He's not a friend of the United States, so he's not great at all in that dimension, in reading of the word. I think it was

a mistake by President Trump to be so obsequious, if you will, at that meeting.

SCIUTTO: Ambassador Nicholas Burns, you speak with experience from your time in China. We appreciate you sharing that.

BURNS: Thanks so much, Jim.

SCIUTTO: And we'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:55:00]

SCIUTTO: Finally, tonight, for the first time in more than seven years, South Korea is hosting North Korean athletes. A women's football team from

Pyongyang arrived to compete in the Asian Club Championship. The athletes rushed through the airport, avoiding journalists as well as pro-unification

demonstrators. Quite a moment, though, in that relationship. We'll wait for the football now.

Thanks so much for your company tonight. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington. You've been watching "The Brief." Please do stay with CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:00:00]

END