Return to Transcripts main page

Wolf

47 U.S. Senate Republicans Send Iran Letter on Nuclear Deal; White House, Democrats Furious at Senate Republicans; Arrests in Russia in Boris Nemtsov Murder; Netanyahu in Fight over "Two State Solution"; Apple Launching Smartwatch.

Aired March 09, 2015 - 13:30   ET

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

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Welcome back to our viewers in the United States and around the world. I'm Wolf Blitzer reporting from Washington.

First, House Republicans invited the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, to address a joint meeting of the United States Congress without earlier up informing the president.

Now in the midst of the negotiations with Iran about their nuclear program, a group of 47 senator Republicans, almost all of the Republicans in the Senate, led by freshman Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas, they've sent an open letter to Iran's leaders. Among other things, they write this, "It's come to our attention, while observing our nuclear negotiations with our government, that you may not fully understand our constitutional system. Anything not approved by Congress is a mere executive agreement." The Senators added, "The next president could revoke such an executive agreement with the stroke of a pen and future Congresses would modify the terms of the agreement at any time."

Bottom line, senators emphasize a deal won't last in their open letter to Iran.

Senator Cotton elaborated on the letter earlier today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. TOM COTTON, (R), ARKANSAS: Many Senate Democrats have been strong on this issue. They think we need to approve any nuclear deal with Iran. But the White House is putting a lot of pressure on Senate Democrats to hold their fire. We don't know what the final terms of the deal are but we know, so far, that Susan Rice, the president's national security advisor, has already conceded that Iran will have a robust uranium-enrichment capability. The president has said this deal will have sunset, perhaps as little as 10 years. Those two terms alone make this deal unacceptable, dangerous to the United States and dangerous to the world.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Just minutes ago, the White House press secretary, Josh Earnest, addressed the letter.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOSH EARNEST, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: I would describe this letter as the continuation of a partisan strategy to undermine the president's ability to conduct foreign policy and advance our national security interests around the globe. The fact is that the effort that is currently underway by the United States alongside our international partners seeks significant commitments from the Iranian government to curtail their nuclear program, and make clear to the international community that their nuclear program exists exclusively for peaceful means.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: We're joined by one of those Republican Senators who signed the letter, Senator Bill Cassidy, of Louisiana. He's a freshman Senator just elected.

Senator, thanks very much for joining us.

I want you to respond to the White House. They're really angry at all of you, all 47 of you Republican Senators, for what they call interfere in a delicate moment, reaching out directly and trying to address the Iranian leadership. Your response?

SEN. BILL CASSIDY, (R), LOUISIANA: They are criticizing us for stating the facts that in our Constitution Congress has to sign off, and Senator Cotton in the letter lays out that approval process. Why are they criticizing our constitutional form of government?

And by the way, the Iranians are quite open with their parliament about the negotiations taking place. Many in the Congress feel that the administration has not been so open. If you will, I think this is a statement of fact. I don't know why facts are threatening to the administration and I think the letter speaks for itself.

BLITZER: What they're saying, basically, is it's the role of the president of the United States to negotiate these kinds of agreements if. In fact, if it's a treaty, Congress would have the resolution ratifying that kind of an agreement. But in the midst of the negotiations, they say you should basically stay out of it, let them do their job, then at the right moment, they'll come brief you in Congress, to which your reply is?

CASSIDY: First, this is not a treaty. This is not a treaty. It will not require Senate to sign off, number one. Number two, I think if the American people felt better about the president's foreign policy, perhaps we would not have sent the letter. But if you look at the polls and if you talk to members of Congress, we're not sure if the president has a strategy in Syria or with ISIS or many other areas. It's that lack of confidence in the president that makes Congress step forward and say, listen, if this is a bad deal, it will be revisited. So that's also, by the way, a statement to the president that Congress wants to be engaged and we're going to represent the views of the American people.

BLITZER: They say it's unprecedented to actually write an open letter like this to a country like Iran in the tail ends of very sensitive negotiations with the other members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany, for Congress to write this kind of letter. They say it's almost unprecedented to interfere in a delicate moment like this.

CASSIDY: A couple things. First, the Iranian negotiators said they did not understand the American system of government. They said that, or something to that effect. And so clearly, our team had not told them. So if you will, this is a civics lesson for Iran, and I think that's perfectly appropriate. They should know the process that we go through. The administration clearly had not told them. Why is it wrong to tell somebody what our system of government is and that the Congress is a co-equal branch of government? I don't see anything wrong with that at all.

And by the way, and I go back to my other point, if the American people have more confidence in the president's foreign policy, what he's exhibited with ISIL, Syria, et cetera, then maybe we wouldn't have sent the letter. But this is lack of confidence in the president.

BLITZER: You don't want any deal, basically, no matter what the president or Secretary of State Kerry come up with the Iranians in the days leading before the March 24th framework deadline. You're concluding it is a disaster. You don't want any deal, right?

CASSIDY: That's not what the letter says. And that's frankly -- I'm hoping it's a great deal. But that's not what the letter says. Tom -- I mean, Wolf, this is not undermining the president. It's just saying that the deal will represent U.S. interests as well as Iranians. And there will be review by the Senate. So if it's a great deal, that will be a really good review. And if it's a bad deal, then frankly it will have considerations.

BLITZER: Senator Bill Cassidy, of Louisiana, thanks very much for joining us.

CASSIDY: Thank you, Wolf.

BLITZER: Appreciate it.

Let's get more on what's going on. Our political analyst, the columnist for "Bloomberg View," Josh Rogin, is joining us.

You heard what the Senator has to say. 46 of his Republican colleagues agree with him. The White House, a lot of Democrats are furious about what they say is an inappropriate intervention at this delicate moment. How did this letter originate? Who came up with this idea?

JOSH ROGIN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Tom Cotton, the freshman Senator, war veteran, on the Armed Services Committee, came up with the idea. But what's remarkable is he was able to get the entire Republican leadership, three presidential candidates for 2016 to sign on showing that most of the GOP caucus insists that Congress have some role to play in this deal. The letter was addressed to the Iranians but it's also a clear message

to the Obama administration, Republicans, especially, but also some Democrats are very frustrated that they think the White House has figured out a way to keep them from any meaningful oversight of the deal, so they're lashing out. Another thing is that they're trying to influence the ongoing negotiations in Geneva. We're told that negotiations are near the end, that a deal is coming. And this is the last chance for people in Washington to oppose the terms of the deal or the terms of the deal, to try to influence that process.

BLITZER: The White House doesn't want Congress to necessarily have to ratify this as a treaty, for example. They're not saying it's a treaty. The president can go ahead and sign this agreement or Secretary Kerry or whoever actually signs it. But Congress can get briefed but they don't necessarily have a role in approving or disapproving?

ROGIN: Sure. And this comes at the end of a two-year process. As many have reported, including "The New York Times," the administration crafted a strategy to avoid going to Congress for the entire term of Obama's presidency. What the Senators are saying is that even after Obama leaves most of them will be in office and they'll get another crack at this. Especially GOP candidates, Jeb Bush, Rick Perry, have all said they're against this. Whether or not they'll be able or willing politically to scuttle the deal after it goes into effect is questionable, which is why they're making their move right now.

BLITZER: The Iranians say they want U.S. international sanctions at least eased dramatically if not removed completely during the course of these 10 years, let's say, until the agreement is sunsetted. Doesn't Congress need to approve any language, any legislation that would remove the sanctions?

ROGIN: According to experts, Congress will need to weigh in eventually. But the president can use executive actions for the next two years, waivers, lifting the sanctions that he himself imposed. The Iranians know that. That's why they want the sanctions lifted up front. They're also skeptical that it won't last past the Obama presidency.

What this all means is that the Obama administration's decision to not include Congress makes the deal more fragile. But they've made that decision because they don't believe that Congress will ever support a deal. So they believe a fragile deal is the best we can get.

BLITZER: Have you heard any reaction from Iran to this letter from these 47 Republicans? Have you heard any reaction?

ROGIN: Not yet.

BLITZER: Not yet. I assume we'll get some reaction. We do have an angry reaction from the White House and a lot of Democrats in the U.S. Senate.

Josh, thanks very much. Russian police say they've arrested five men in the murder of the opposition figure, Boris Nemtsov. What they're saying about the arrests, not politically motivated. So what happened when police tried to arrest a sixth suspect? A very disturbing turn of events. We'll have an update for you when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Now to Russia where police have arrested five men in connection with opposition leader Boris Nemtsov's murder. Russian state-run TV said a sixth suspect blew himself up during a standoff with police this weekend.

Our senior international correspondent, Matthew Chance, has been following the investigation from Moscow.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MATTHEW CHANCE, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): With hands tied and heads bowed, the suspects were manhandled into the Moscow courthouse. Four of the men are protesting their innocence. But one, named Saur Dadayev, from Chechnya, has confessed, according to the judge.

SAUR DADAYEV, ARRESTED FOR MURDER: (SPEAKING FOREIGN LANGUAGE)

CHANCE: "I love the Prophet Mohammed," he told the court.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (SPEAKING FOREIGN LANGUAGE)

CHANCE: One of Russia's most prominent leaders, Boris Nemtsov, was gunned down steps from the Kremlin. His killing shocked the nation and Russian's president, accused by opposition activists as responsible, has vowed to bring the killer to justice.

As well as being a fierce Kremlin critic, Boris Nemtsov was of Jewish heritage and spoke out about the "Charlie Hebdo" attacks in Paris. A line of inquiry dismissed by the opposition but being pursued by the official investigation.

In an unexpected twist, the pro-Kremlin leader of Chechnya, Ramszan Kaderov (ph), has issued a statement praising the prime suspect who served in the Chechen Security Forces. "Dadayev is a true Russian patriot," he posted on social media. Everyone who knows Zaur knows he's a deeply religious man and he was shocked by the actions of Charlie and comments in support of printing the cartoon."

But those close to Boris Nemtsov say it's hard to believe he was killed for religious, not political reasons, especially in a country where they say those who oppose the Kremlin are increasingly seen as enemies of the state.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: Matthew Chance is joining us live from Moscow right now. Most of the accounts we're getting about the arrests are coming from

Russian police. A lot of people are questioning the credibility of the information. What are you hearing over there?

CHANCE: Exactly that. There's a lot of opposition figures here that have no faith in the willingness of the authorities to really get to the bottom of the case and find who really was responsible for the kill of Boris Nemtsov. A great deal of concern that this is a means that the Kremlin is adopting of arresting these people, of putting as much distance as possible from the killing of Boris Nemtsov and themselves. Because a lot of people here, very mistrustful of the authorities, are saying that they believe it's ultimately the Kremlin that's responsible for killing this prominent opposition figure -- Wolf?

BLITZER: Matthew, we'll stay on top of this story together.

Matthew Chance reporting live from Moscow.

Just ahead, the prime minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, is in the political fight of his life. Elections a week from tomorrow in Israel. Now there are reports he's raising questions about whether he supports what's called a "Two State Solution", Israel living alongside a new state of Palestine. We'll have a live report from Jerusalem when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: One week from tomorrow, Israeli voters go to the polls in one of biggest tests of prime minister's Benjamin Netanyahu's career. Polls show he's in an extremely tight race right now. Anti-Netanyahu sentiment was clearly evident with this massive rally in Tel Aviv over the weekend. Now the prime minister appears to have backed away from a long-standing commitment he's had to a ""Two State Solution"," Israel alongside Palestine. "The Jerusalem Post" is quoting him as saying, "In the situation created in the Middle East, any territory that will be evacuated will be taken over by radical Islam and terrorists organizations supported by Iran, therefore, there will not be any withdrawals or concessions. The matter is simply irrelevant."

Let's go to Jerusalem. Our global affairs correspondent, Elise Labott, is covering the elections for us.

In the days leading up to the elections, has there been a shift? What are the prime minister's aids saying about the earlier support? A couple of years ago he was clearly gave a speech in Israel saying he supports Israel alongside a new state of Palestinian, "Two State Solution"." Has he backed away from that pledge?

ELISE LABOTT, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Not really. I think what you have here is Benjamin Netanyahu's election campaign complicating his role as the prime minister of Israel and vice versa. The statement you read was put out by the Likud campaign, his own party over the weekend. That had followed even tougher language that the party had put out in synagogues over the weekend calling the prime minister's long-standing position about the "Two State Solution", quote, "null and void," saying he his whole political life had been fighting against a Palestinian state.

Now, the prime ministers -- I'll walk it back a little bit. The prime minister was talking in the context of radical extremism throughout the Middle East and also the Palestinian's unity government with Hamas, saying if you look at the situation now, the idea of Israel giving up territory that then could be taken on by extremists is unthinkable. So what he was doing was hedging enough not to abandon that long-standing position at that speech that you mentioned in 2009, but also, pandering a little bit to those right wing Israeli voters who he really needs now. He's in a neck-and-neck race. A lot of polls show him down. He's facing a lot of criticism for his position. Some reports last week that said he was giving up a lot of territory to the Palestinians in secret negotiations. He's on the ropes a little bit right now -- Wolf?

BLITZER: All right. I want to be precise when I quoted from "The Jerusalem Post," that was the Likud Party statement. That was not the prime minister. It was not him specifically, right?

LABOTT: That's right. Some campaign supporters had put out even those more damning statements that I talked to you about in the synagogues over the weekend. So I think the prime minister was kind of distancing himself a little bit from Likud but not abandoning the idea that the prime minister is going to fight very tough with the Palestinians on the idea of a Palestinian state -- Wolf?

BLITZER: The polls quickly they don't show his visit to Washington last week, his speech before Congress, had much of an impact, do they?

LABOTT: Well, he had a temporary bump for a couple of days after the speech, but right now, he's not doing well in the polls. There is a little bit of a momentum against him right now. He's slipping in the polls. The party not doing very well. Some of the other right wing parties are doing better. Certainly, Labour Party chairman doing much better. It's a neck-and-neck race, up to the last minute. You never know with Israel. You know from covering this place for a long time, the polls can be deceiving. We understand it's going to be a long night on election night -- Wolf?

BLITZER: A week from tomorrow, we'll be watching with you.

Elise, thank you very much.

Just ahead a very different story we're following. Apple right now throwing a coming-out party for the long awaited Smartwatch. Starting at $350, will consumers go for the bells and whistles? We'll have the latest on the newest gadget you can wear on your wrist.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Let's check in with Wall Street. Get a quick look at the markets now. Take a look at the Dow Jones trading higher, up 164 points right now, 18,000 plus. It ended last week sharply lower. Analysts say today's rise is partly due to a jump in shares of G.M. The company announced it will be buying back $5 billion worth of stock. We're watching the markets. But we're watching another story a high interest of our viewers here in the United States and, indeed, around the world.

Apple is about to unveil the specifics of its first new gadget in five years, the first since founder Steve Jobs died. The Smartwatch was announced in September but, until today, Apple was silent about many of the features.

Our technology correspondent, Samuel Burke, is tracking all of this for us.

So what have we learned so far about this new Apple Smartwatch, Samuel?

SAMUEL BURKE, CNN TECHNOLOGY CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, a lot is riding on this. It's the first new product under Tim Cook's watch. What we know so far it's going to start out at $349. That's just the starting price. There are going to be three different types of the watch. One called Watch. One called Watch Sport. And another one called Apple Watch Edition. They're going come in silver, gold and stainless steel.

Now the interesting thing here it needs an iPhone to work. For the vast majority of the functions, you'll have not only have the watch on your wrist, you'll need to carry around an iPhone 5 or newer. It doesn't have GPS, which disappointed a few people. If you want to go running in Central Park in New York, you need a phone with you to make the map work.

But keep your eyes on this number, Wolf. A lot of people believe and we're going to find out within the next few minutes that the most expensive version will cost $10,000, 18 karat gold.

BLITZER: That's a simple question, besides telling time, what else can it do?

BURKE: It will be able to check e-mail, send text messages, be able to check phone calls. Imagine, in meetings, instead of people looking at their phones, they might be able to look at the wrist and do that. Also, a lot of health functions. It will monitor your heart rate. A lot of people are seeing it different from the iPhone.

BLITZER: I'll see how it does. We'll stand by for that.

Samuel Burke, thank you very much. I'm sure there will be high interest on the new gadget. And that's coming up.

That's it for me. Thank you very much for watching. I'll be back 5:00 p.m. eastern in "THE SITUATION ROOM."

For our international viewers, "CNN News Center," that is coming up next. "AMANPOUR" will come back in an hour from now.

For our viewers in North American, get ready, "NEWSROOM" with Ana Cabrera starts right now.