Return to Transcripts main page

What We Know with Max Foster

Sources: Early U.S. Intel Assessment Suggests Strikes On Iran Did Not Destroy Nuclear Sites; Iran President: "Ready" To Resolve Issues With The U.S.; Iran Denies Firing Missiles After Ceasefire Began; CNN Poll: Most Americans Disapprove Of U.S. Strikes On Iran; U.S. Braces For Potential Cyberattacks After Strikes On Iran; New York City Democrats Vote In Primary Race. Aired 3-4p ET

Aired June 24, 2025 - 15:00   ET

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

[15:00:48]

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

MAX FOSTER, CNN HOST: I'm Max Foster in London getting new reporting on how successful the U.S. attack in Iran actually was.

Let's get straight to Zach Cohen. He's in Washington -- Zach.

ZACH COHEN, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: Yeah, Max, we're getting the first look at what is really called an early initial U.S. intelligence assessment

about how effective those U.S. military strikes were on Iranian nuclear facilities. And we're told that as of now, this early read is that the core

components of Iran's nuclear program and its capabilities remain intact and were not destroyed as a result of that strike.

This, again, is an initial assessment that could change with more scrutiny. And it's one that comes after the military has made clear that the mission

and the operation ordered by President Trump against those facilities was a tactical success, but insisting that more time was needed to assess the

amount of damage.

Now, Donald Trump himself has really come out strongly and quickly in the past in the wake of that attack and claimed that the strikes really

resulted in the obliteration of Iran's nuclear capabilities.

But again, this initial assessment from the Defense Intelligence Agency, our sources describe it as saying that the centrifuges and the enriched

uranium at these sites was not destroyed. And in particular that the centrifuges themselves, which are used to enrich uranium, remain, quote,

intact.

So, again, this is a little bit different of a viewpoint and an assessment of the impact of this, of these strikes than the one Donald Trump and some

of his top officials have been pushing in the last several days.

I want to read a statement from White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt. We reached out to her prior to breaking this news, and I want to

read it in full.

She said, quote, "This alleged assessment is flat out wrong and was classified as top secret, but was still leaked to CNN by an anonymous low-

level loser in the -- in the intelligence community. The leaking of this alleged assessment is a clear attempt to demean President Trump and

discredit the brave fighter pilots who conducted a perfectly executed mission to obliterate Iran's nuclear program. Everyone knows what happens

when you drop 14 30,000-pound bombs perfectly on their targets. Total obliteration."

Now, she -- the press secretary there, speaking very definitively, but noticeably not contradicting the reporting that this is what the initial

intelligence assessment does say. And in fact, this has been an open question, really, outside of the White House, even the top general here in

the United States, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Dan Caine, made clear the other day that more time was needed before he could even say what was

and was not still there after the strikes. And again, we're now getting the first formal conclusion by a member of the U.S. intelligence community.

FOSTER: Yeah, so it's a large community, isn't it? An implication there from the White House that this is someone that's got an ax to grind. How

reliable are these sources? Do they speak for the whole intelligence community? And as you say, it's just an early assessment. But how reliable

can we see this information as?

COHEN: Yeah. The Defense Intelligence Agency, which is the agency that produced this assessment that was described to us by our sources, both

sources who have seen the assessment itself and were briefed on it, is an - - is an agency of the U.S. intelligence community. It doesn't speak for the entire community, but it does conduct a lot of analytical. It goes through

the analytical process of reviewing the intelligence that's come in since those strikes. Things like satellite imagery, things like various forms of

intelligence streams to reach an early conclusion.

So this is an agency that deals with this on a professional basis. And the sourcing and our sources, proximity to that and the description, the detail

in which they were describing that assessment does create an accurate picture of what this early assessment says. So again, with more scrutiny,

this assessment could obviously change and could evolve. But at this point, this early stage, after the strikes themselves, this is the read of at

least one key intelligence agency here in the United States.

FOSTER: Yeah, it's fascinating. Zach, thank you so much.

Let's speak to Jeff Zeleny about the political implications of this. Of course, President Trump saying the sites were obliterated. This suggests

that might not be true. That's going to be a damning assessment.

[15:05:00]

JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF U.S. NATIONAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Look, there's no question that this has been one of the points of contention for the

president, really, ever since the strikes. The president has been defensive about the outcome. He talked about obliteration on Saturday evening here in

the U.S. when he addressed the nation and indeed the world. He repeated it the next day.

And again, it was getting under his skin just yesterday when the reports were just questioning the idea of it is still unknown. The battle damage

assessment is still unknown. Well, now, these early reports, as Zach was just talking about there, are indicating that obliteration may not be the

word at all. So that certainly has drawn the ire of the White House, as you heard from the White House press secretary.

But of course, as you're seeing on the right of your screen there, the president is at the, the NATO summit. And this also is hanging over all of

this. So they're taking the family photograph, as it's known there with the leaders and family and things. And this is something that is certainly

going to certainly going to aggravate the president.

But again, there has been a swiftness to the action here. An extraordinary 48 hours that the history books may well look back on from those strikes

early Sunday morning in Iran. And then the ceasefire announced by the U.S. president, just 48 hours later.

It is still holding, but it's fragile, there's no doubt about it. And this is the underpinning of all of that. So, the question of the Iran nuclear

program and whether it could be back up and running again, if it's true, if this early assessment holds and it could actually be up and running again

in a number of months, that would be very politically dangerous indeed.

But the White House and the president earlier today, as he left Washington, were trying to dismiss any criticism of this as an attack on the American

pilots that were flying the mission, that, of course, misses the point. It's not a questioning of the pilots mission. That was clearly carried out

safely and swiftly, but the attack on the obliteration is what the president has used.

So, again, an early assessment. We will see what later assessments come. But several other things happening indicate the administration is not keen

to talk more about this. And that is the postponing or the canceling of a classified briefing that was scheduled to happen this afternoon on Capitol

Hill. And that is not happening now. And it's a bit unclear why.

So certainly, again, an early assessment, but a pointed and important one.

FOSTER: Yeah, absolutely. Jeff, thank you so much for your look at that.

As a fragile ceasefire between Israel and Iran holds for now, Iranian state media claims Tehran is ready to resolve issues with the United States. That

statement came in a call between Iran's president and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the president said he would welcome any assistance and

that Iran achieved an historic victory in what he called a 12-day war.

The comments came after a night of intense bombings. Israeli forces claimed one of their targets was a radar site in northern Iran. Video obtained by

CNN shows smoke rising from the area.

CNN's Fred Pleitgen has more on Tehran's denial that it violated the ceasefire.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: After the Israelis made that claim that Iranian missiles were flying towards Israeli

territory, I actually got in touch with a senior Iranian official who flat out denied that the Iranians had fired any missiles toward Israel after the

ceasefire went into effect. In fact, they said that the moment that that time had come for the ceasefire, that no missiles had been fired from the

Iranian side.

The Iranians also now warning the Israelis against hitting Iranian territory, saying that that would open up Iranian retaliation once again

and that everything within what they call the occupied territories, of course, meaning all of Israel would then become a target for Iran. So, some

tough language coming out of Tehran here as well.

Also, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which of course is that elite wing of Iran's military claiming that there were several violations of its

soil, as they put it, by the Israelis, possibly meaning incursion by some sort of aircraft in the hours after the cease fire went into effect.

What we're seeing right now, actually, here in Tehran, is that things are fairly calm here. I was on the streets a little bit earlier today. Theres a

lot of people who are out driving some shops, opening up.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: As soon as we made the deal, they came out and they dropped a load of bombs, the likes of which I've

never seen before.

PLEITGEN: But what the president said there about the Israelis unloading overnight after the ceasefire deal was announced, was definitely something

that we saw and we felt here from our vantage point as well. I was up here on this roof and we, all of a sudden, heard Israeli air force planes

streaking -- what seemed to be Israeli air force planes streaking past, and then extremely loud explosions rocking our building and then rocking also a

lot of other places in central Tehran as well.

We saw a lot of outgoing anti-aircraft gunfire coming from the Iranians. The skies here over the city really were illuminated.

[15:10:03]

That went on for the better part of, I would say, about half an hour or 45 minutes, maybe up to an hour, where those loud bangs continue. The

Israelis, at some point even issued evacuation orders for certain districts here in Tehran as of 2:30 in the morning, when obviously people in those

districts most probably would have been asleep.

So, it certainly was a night that saw a lot of kinetic activity. And as of right now, the Iranians are saying that their forces are not firing back.

The foreign minister of this country, Abbas Araghchi, he came out and said that Iranian forces had fired until the moment that the ceasefire went into

effect, which the Iranians consider to be 4:00 a.m. in the morning, and that since then no projectiles, they say, have been fired from Iran towards

Israeli territory.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

FOSTER: Well, as Donald Trump continues to declare the U.S. strikes, the airstrikes on Iran are success, most Americans disapprove. That's according

to a new CNN poll which finds 56 percent disapprove of the airstrikes. It also found that about 6 in 10 Americans don't trust Mr. Trump's decision

making on the use of force in Iran.

David Chalian is CNN's bureau chief in Washington.

I mean, he's not going to like this, is he? But it is quite telling.

DAVID CHALIAN, CNN WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF: It is quite telling. And I think it sort of gets behind why he was so amped up this morning before

getting on the plane. He is so eager to have this ceasefire take hold, wrap this up with a bow and put it to the side. We know that the facts on the

ground may not allow for that, but I think he's aware that it's a wary American public watching this unfold.

So, you did the topline results there, about the 56 percent disapproving his action. You can look at that bipartisanship as well, Max, because as

you might suspect, Republicans pretty much overwhelmingly support the action. Democrats oppose it. You see there.

But look at that middle line, independents, the so politically important middle of the road voters, 60 percent oppose only 40 percent are in favor.

And the other thing that we asked is, do you think that these strikes in Iran actually make Iran more of a threat or less of a threat to the United

States? And nearly 6 in 10 Americans, 58 percent say after the strikes they believe Iran is more of a threat to the United States. That actually

includes a chunk of Republicans who were in favor of the strike.

So there are real questions that the American people are asking, or at least watching carefully here before they come up with a final judgment

here. And, of course, how things unfold will determine that. But in the immediate aftermath of the strikes, this is an unpopular action by

President Trump.

FOSTER: Yeah. I'm wondering, though, David, what you think, how personal this is. Is it, you know, a question of Donald Trump's decision making or

just, you know, people in America have got their own problems right now. They don't want to get involved in a protracted war. They're thinking about

Iran and Afghanistan, and they just don't like the idea of dealing with other people's problems when there are so many at home.

CHALIAN: That is precisely the argument we've heard from many inside the Republicans base. His base of support in the MAGA movement. Marjorie Taylor

Greene, the congresswoman from Georgia, a stalwart supporter of President Trump. And you were just giving voice in your question, Max, to the exact

argument she's been making, that there has been a series of endless wars Donald Trump promised to turn the country away from that kind of

involvement. And there's concern that this could grow to that.

Now, obviously, we don't know. Perhaps this will not grow into something like an expanded, wider conflict here. And Donald Trump can call it a

success. We're just not at the place that we know that. And in the interim, he knows that the public is watching carefully for precisely the reason you

say, which is not only are they concerned about this particular moment, but there have been decades of history here that suggest that this could

potentially be a slippery slope.

FOSTER: Absolutely. David, thank you so much. A fascinating study.

Israel's prime minister has just addressed the nation, declaring what he called an historic victory in this conflict. But as Israel continues its

war in Gaza, Benjamin Netanyahu said he wouldn't get complacent.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER (through translator): Even that we have tremendous achievements, we are not going to be complacent. We're

going to be the other way around. We have no intention to remove our foot from the -- from the gas.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FOSTER: Clarissa Ward joining us from Tel Aviv.

Very much aimed at the domestic audience there, unlike other speeches, Clarissa.

CLARISSA WARD, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Definitely. This was a sort of mission accomplished speech for the Israeli public. Prime

Minister Benjamin Netanyahu saying that Israel's strikes against Iran had thwarted its nuclear and missile capabilities, but also warning that they

would act again with the same force if they see Iran try to reconstitute their nuclear program or their missile programs.

[15:15:11]

I mean, what's interesting here, he obviously went on to thank President Trump as well, and to say that this was a historic cooperation and that

this is the best friend to Israel that has ever been in the White House, and also we've heard basically from the IDF now, Max, saying that the focus

really becomes Gaza again now that that they need to focus on toppling Hamas, on returning the hostages, though, I do think it's interesting.

Fifty hostages still inside Gaza, 20 of them are believed to still be alive today.

We saw the family members from the family hostage forum members coming out and saying, effectively, we want Gaza to be part of this ceasefire as well.

So, some people hoping that potentially now with the focus no longer on Iran, that potentially some kind of space can be created to try to come up

with some kind of a ceasefire agreement inside Gaza.

And obviously, as we have been talking about, Max, the world has been very consumed, understandably, with this conflict between Israel and Iran. But

during this 12-day period, more than 860 people have been killed inside Gaza, more than 70 in the last 24 hours alone. The U.N. still warning of a

manmade famine as a result of the dire humanitarian situation inside. So, certainly, a lot of people will be hoping that potentially out of this

space created with this fragile ceasefire holding here, that that might be a new direction.

And one other thing I just would add, Max, is that the home front command here in Israel has lifted the state of emergency. Airport is opening,

schools are opening, and some sense of normalcy returning now, Max.

FOSTER: One of his main missions was apparently to destroy the nuclear sites, Clarissa. But we've now got this reporting, haven't we, from CNN

saying earlier U.S. intel suggests the strikes on Iran didn't destroy the nuclear site. Does that change Benjamin Netanyahu's ideas here? Because it

wouldn't be mission accomplished if he hadn't achieved the goal.

WARD: Well, it's interesting. First of all, I should just say Israel has never fully stated what its strategic objective was or what the mission

accomplished metric was. Was it the complete decimation of the nuclear program? Was it regime change as so many people had been speculating?

I notice when we saw Prime Minister Netanyahu give that that mission accomplished speech, so to speak, you know, he didn't really the word he

used was thwarted. We have thwarted Iran's. Thats kind of a vague word. And it's definitely different from what we've heard President Trump talk about

total obliteration.

Yesterday, we heard the IDF talk about it being set back years. But I think what's really emerging, honestly, is that we are only just starting to get

pieces of the fuller picture as to the extent of the damage. But Israel, for now, seems, you know, intent upon upholding the ceasefire, spinning

this internally as a massive success for Israel and for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu -- Max.

FOSTER: Okay, Clarissa, in Tel Aviv, thank you so much now.

It wasn't exactly a love letter, but it was pretty close. We'll tell you about the message that NATO's chief sent to Donald Trump today, and what it

means for the future of that alliance.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:21:50]

FOSTER: Our breaking news this hour, sources telling CNN that according to an early U.S. intelligence assessment, the U.S. military strikes on three

of Iran's nuclear facilities last weekend didn't destroy the core components of the country's nuclear program and likely only set it back

just a few months. It comes as Donald Trump has arrived at the NATO summit in the Netherlands. He appears to be on a victory lap, claiming great

success from the attacks on Iran, which he says both destroyed Iran's nuclear capabilities and brought an end to the fighting between Israel and

Iran.

For some perspective on what to expect at the summit, were joined by Kurt Volker. He's a former U.S. ambassador to NATO.

I don't know if you had a chance to sort of get a sense of our reporting this hour, but there is a suggestion from intelligence sources that the

U.S. attacks weren't as destructive as the president has implied. Obviously, early days on the intelligence.

But what do you make of that?

KURT VOLKER, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO NATO: Well, that's exactly what I would say. We really don't know the exact extent of the battle damage, and

I think it will take some time before we get intelligence from people on the ground who are able to tell us exactly what happened.

We don't know the extent of the destruction of the underground facilities. We don't know what happened to the enriched uranium. Was it there? Was it

moved in advance? Was some of it moved? Was it dispersed?

And we don't know the extent of other equipment that Iran may still have that would allow it to reconstitute a program. So that's all things we're

going to be watching. But I don't think there can be any doubt that this set back the Iranian program by some significant degree.

FOSTER: On the basis that, you know, the intelligence might not all be there yet. Equally, that's the case for the president as well. And he's

said very clearly that it was obliterated. But he can't say that at this point, can he?

VOLKER: Well, he wants to make a statement, obviously, to take credit for what he's done. He's also trying to encourage both Israel and Iran to have

a ceasefire.

So, he wants to emphasize that as much as possible. But I think everyone knows Israelis, Iranians, even Donald Trump himself. They know that there's

a lot more that we don't know that we'll find out over time.

But I do think that he wanted to end the fighting. He wanted to set back Iran's nuclear program. And I also think that if it appears that Iran is

now moving to reconstitute its nuclear program, he or Israel will be prepared to strike again.

FOSTER: Yeah. Because if this is all correct, that, you know, it wasn't as destructive as first thought, surely Israel will be pushing very hard to go

back into battle effectively.

VOLKER: That's right. That's right. Israel, I think they launched this because they wanted to have a decisive impact on Iran's ability to present

a threat to Iran -- I'm sorry on Iran's ability to present a threat to Israel. And they seem to have done a very substantial job on conventional

forces. The U.S. appears to have done something on the nuclear sites, but as we said, we don't know the extent of the battle damage.

[15:25:04]

And Israel will want to make sure that there is no way that Iran is able to constitute a very serious military threat.

FOSTER: You know, so many people, everywhere are hoping that this does lead to some level of peace and some sort of negotiation, particularly

between the U.S. and Iran. They've got their red lines, though, haven't they? It's going to require some compromise on one side or the other, or

indeed both of them.

Do you think, you know Iran? First of all, will choose to move on that?

VOLKER: Yeah, I do. I think Iran right now is mostly interested in regime survival. And so, that's why they are agreeing to a ceasefire, even if

their program was set back, they'd rather stay in power and take time and try to rebuild it than to lose power altogether.

So, I think Iran is prepared to make a few concessions right now with the view towards buying time. And I think Israel, as you indicated, Israel is

determined to try to drive this as far as it can. But with President Trump putting pressure on them to say, okay, now it's time to wrap it up.

I think Israel may be prepared to do that as long as there's an understanding that they will go back to fighting if Iran violates any sense

of abandoning its programs.

FOSTER: We saw Donald Trump, didn't we, earlier in the morning. You know, I've never seen him criticize Israel in the way that he did this morning.

Do you think Israel's very close to pushing America too far?

VOLKER: No, I don't think so. I think Donald Trump emotes that way to make a point, to get people to respond to him. But I think at root, the U.S.-

Israel relationship is very strong, and particularly under President Trump, he has been very supportive of Israel. And I think that will continue.

FOSTER: Did you see the -- you would have seen the text that Donald Trump shared with the world, with the head of NATO today is pretty fawning,

wasn't it? And I'm not sure from a European perspective, it would have gone down particularly well. Do you think he's discredited?

VOLKER: No, I don't, because I think everybody understands the game. I think that they all know that Trump has a very large ego. He wants to get

credit for strengthening NATO, for getting everyone to increase defense spending, wants to get credit for bringing peace in the Middle East.

And so, to keep Trump happy, to keep him having a positive experience working with NATO, a little bit of flattery like that is part of the game.

And I think everyone understands that.

FOSTER: There was an element of truth to it, wasn't there? You know, a clear truth, which is that U.S. presidents have been trying to get Europe

to pay more for decades. They haven't achieved it. Donald Trump has. And that is quite an extraordinary achievement.

VOLKER: No, I agree with that. That is very true. If you'll remember, President Bush was complaining about NATO defense spending. President Obama

was complaining in 2014. He, President Obama, managed to get people to commit to 2 percent of GDP. And three years later, when Donald Trump took

office, only three countries were doing it. One of them, the United States.

So, this has been a very big change now for NATO to have so many countries already spending more than 2 percent and everybody committing to get to

five, even if implementation falters over time a little bit, this is still a major step forward.

FOSTER: Yeah, Kurt Volker, fascinating conversation. Thank you so much for joining us.

VOLKER: My pleasure.

FOSTER: Back in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:31:57]

FOSTER: Returning to our exclusive breaking news tonight, Iran's nuclear facilities were not destroyed by the U.S. airstrikes last weekend. And

that's according to an early assessment from the U.S. intelligence community.

President Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth have repeatedly insisted that the nuclear sites were obliterated in the strikes. But one

intelligence source told CNN that the centrifuges are largely intact and the strikes may have only set Iran's nuclear program back by a matter of

months.

CNN senior White House correspondent Kristen Holmes is with me.

What sort of political reaction are we getting to this? It's only just happened. Of course.

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: We haven't heard from President Trump himself, but this, of course, goes directly at odds of

what he has been saying. Just to give a little more context here, this was done by the defense intelligence agency, which is the intelligence portion

of the Pentagon. Now, the White House itself did acknowledge this, but I do want to read you the statement here, so you can understand how they

acknowledge this.

Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt wrote, "This alleged assessment is flat out wrong and was classified as, quote, `top secret,' but was still leaked

to CNN by an anonymous low level loser in the intelligence community. The leaking of this alleged assessment is a clear attempt to demean President

Trump and discredit the brave fighter pilots who conducted a perfectly executed mission to obliterate Iran's nuclear program. Everyone knows what

happens when you drop 14 30,000-pound bombs on their targets. Total obliteration."

Obviously, we've heard from the military as well who has said that this was a success. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has said the same lines. Total

obliteration. It's -- we are still waiting to see what the end result looks like. This is still based on preliminary information, and we are being

clear here that this is the early assessment based by three people who had been briefed on this assessment.

And this could change. We could get more information as we try to look into this. But as you said, the real key takeaway here is that Iran still has,

according to these sources, the enriched uranium as well as these centrifuges are still intact. President Trump has continued to say that

this was a total annihilation. Obliteration, that everything is gone, that they were set back years.

But we've been waiting to see what these actual intelligence assessments look like. We know how fortified these nuclear sites were, and one of the

things that makes this so fascinating is that President Trump himself, when he was making the decision to launch these strikes, spent so much time

asking people privately around him, will this take out their nuclear facilities?

That was one of the things that he wanted to ensure that they would do, that they wouldn't just waste their time on a strike that wouldn't do

anything. And he was assured by the people around him that it would take out these nuclear facilities. So, if that is in fact not the case, it will

be interesting to see what actually was done here. Is it a matter of months in terms of setting back that nuclear program?

Now, the other part of this, of course, is all of this comes on the backdrop as President Trump has been trying to get the Iranians to the

table.

[15:35:04]

And it does seem as though the Iranians are more willing now to negotiate.

The big part of this for President Trump is that he sees this cease fire as the beginning of he saw the strikes, then the cease fire as all the

beginning of the laying the groundwork for what he wants in the Middle East, which is an Iranian nuclear deal. So how this plays into it, that's

what were watching very closely. Of course, were waiting for Israeli assessments as well to see what the intelligence is there.

But of course, unsurprising if President Trump continues to push back and say there was a total obliteration, as that's as he often intends to do.

FOSTER: Yeah, I mean, obviously, the spokesperson at the White House talking about this being a low-level loser, leaking information to CNN. But

just to clarify, it wasn't just one source, was it? And we're pretty confident in what those sources are telling us.

HOLMES: Well, we're confident in the fact that there was a intelligence assessment that was an early onset intelligence assessment that we spoke to

a number of people who were briefed on this assessment. So, multiple corroborating sources on this.

And you hear from the White House there, they are acknowledging that this assessment does exist. It's not as though they're saying they never heard

of this assessment. They're just simply saying they don't agree with it. They're also saying that it was classified as top secret, but still somehow

was leaking.

So again, that's really how this White House tends to talk. I think that the big question is going to be how this plays out in the next couple of

days. Do we see a final assessment? And this is the truth, that this is the final -- excuse me. This is the final subject that, you know, this -- they

still have this enriched uranium. And how does that impact a potential deal?

FOSTER: Okay. Thank you so much, Kristen Holmes. So much more. So much to juggle every day on this story. It really appreciate it.

Donald Trump saying it would be chaos if the United States tried to impose regime change in Iran. Mr. Trump had floated the possibility of regime

change. Of course, over the weekend. Now he's told reporters that he doesn't want that and wants things to calm down instead.

So, what we want to know, is Iran ready to compromise?

Joining me now, Negar Mortazavi, a host of the "Iran Podcast" and a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy.

Thank you so much for joining us.

I mean, they're weakened, aren't they? So that means they have less room to negotiate. But the principles that they've laid out in the past were red

lines, and it's going to be a big thing for Iran to allow those red lines to move, isn't it?

NEGAR MORTAZAVI, EDITOR AND HOST, IRAN PODCAST: I think so. I mean, they are weakened, but they're not powerless. And they have shown that despite

the fact that they're the underdog, the weaker party, they're also prepared to defend themselves, even though it's very unconventional.

So, Israel has air supremacy. They don't have much of an air defense. And the way they're shooting the missiles is essentially their defense, but

they have been able to inflict pain in the past ten days. And also, they retaliated against the U.S., which I think was a bold move, again, as the

underdog.

But I guess that took them to the off ramp. And we saw sort of a tit for tat or one and done essentially on both sides and then leading to a de-

escalation. So I'm -- my reading of the statements from the Tehran side is that this might not really soften their position. I'm also not sure if it

would harden their position.

So, I think we're sort of landing back on square one. There's of course, a push for more diplomacy, more concessions or reconciliation from the more

moderate and reformist wings of the political structure. And there's also a push for hardening the position to showing that they're not going to

surrender under force and attacks from the more hardline camps.

Now, who is going to win? Or what part of this is going to come out as their ultimate position? We have to wait and see, but I don't think they're

going to be able to -- at this point.

They're not going to be prepared to give up the entirety of the program. Or again, their enrichment, which was their redline, which was zero

enrichment. But maybe somewhere in between. More creative ideas like sort of that consortium that they've talked about in the past as far as a fuel

cycle, with the involvement of other countries and not just Iran.

FOSTER: We have had this reporting at CNN that early U.S. intelligence assessments suggest that strikes on Iran didn't destroy the nuclear sites.

The White House isn't denying that this report exists. Obviously, Iran will know how much damage is being done.

If it's not as much as they expected, then they're probably quite relieved and happy for the fighting to stop so they can get into some sort of

negotiation, but it's going to give them confidence, isn't it, if there wasn't as much destruction as everyone's talking about?

MORTAZAVI: Well, I'm not surprised. I mean, first of all, nuclear experts had been warning that there is no way to completely destroy the nuclear

program through aerial bombardments.

[15:40:07]

And I guess this is just proof to that. And then also, Iran had advanced notice.

So, the chatter of attacking the nuclear sites was out for a few days, and then they got advanced notice, apparently on the same day. And they're

claiming that they removed all of the stockpile of enriched material from the location.

So, the fate of the stockpile is unclear where it is. And also, now with this reporting, sort of confirming that the sites were not completely

destroyed, I think it was more of a show of the U.S. military force. The mike, which is absolutely, you know, the most powerful military in the

world. But again, showing the impossibility of destroying the program, destroying the stockpile and also destroying the know-how, the knowledge

and the determination.

So, I would say this entire military spectacle started by Israel and the U.S. may even add to the determination of the Iranian side in the long term

to continue this program. And now I don't know if they would decide to weaponize it or not, but it may lead to the to them leaving the NPT, the

nuclear nonproliferation treaty, and have less international safeguards, monitoring and inspection on their program as a result of this attack.

FOSTER: I know, I know, you've had real problems getting hold of contacts in Iran because of the communication issues. You know, has that got any

better? What are regular Iranians feeling right now after all of this?

MORTAZAVI: It's better now. Internet was disrupted for a couple of days. Most of my contacts are back online in one way or the other. Still,

Internet is not great. And also people are sort of in a state of limbo. The evacuation orders that come usually in the middle of the night in

residential areas have confused people.

Donald Trump himself last week posted on Truth Social, ordering everyone to leave Tehran, which is a metropolis of 10 million people. And so, I know a

lot of people who have essentially been displaced on top of the civilian toll, which is high on the Iranian side, it's somewhere between 600 to 700

killed, many of them civilians, a few thousand injured.

Many, many have also been displaced, and they don't know how long this is going to go on if the ceasefire is going to hold, is there more U.S.

attacks coming? So, it's a state of shock and horror still and confusion.

FOSTER: Yeah. I mean, what a what a time for Iranians.

Negar Mortazavi, thank you so much for giving your thoughts on that. We're going to have a look at the digital frontlines next after this weekend's

strikes on Iran. The U.S. bracing for cyberattacks in retaliation. We'll look at who may be targeted.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:45:55]

FOSTER: Just in to CNN, the defense in the sex trafficking trial of Sean "Diddy" Combs has rested. Combs' attorneys have decided not to call any

witnesses. The prosecution rested its case earlier on Tuesday, having called 34 witnesses over the past few weeks. Closing arguments are now

scheduled for Thursday. If Combs is convicted of the most serious charges, he could face life in prison.

Now, American hospitals, water dams and power plants are on high alert for potential Iranian cyberattacks after the U.S. bombed three of Iran's

nuclear sites over the weekend. So far, there haven't been any new breaches of U.S. organizations. But hackers linked with Iran have reportedly been

scanning the Internet for vulnerable software and have openly discussed retaliating.

Joining me now is CNN's cybersecurity reporter, Sean Lyngaas.

And this is, you know, genuinely worrying a lot of regular Americans, isn't it?

SEAN LYNGAAS, CNN CYBERSECURITY REPORTER: That's right. Max. I mean, we've had examples of this over the years where the Iranians in cyberspace

haven't really shown much restraint.

Okay. A couple of years ago, the children's hospital in Boston was attacked. An attempted ransomware attack where the hackers tried to lock

computers of a children's hospital, and the FBI blamed Iran, which denied the activity.

But it's just one example of many where it's much easier and in some cases more deniable for someone behind a keyboard to try to cause some disruption

or damage, then firing a missile at U.S. facilities. So, now, that the kinetic, the physical attacks might be over in terms of Iran's retaliation

against the U.S., sources we're talking to, whether in the government or at big critical infrastructure operators here in the U.S. like you said,

water, electricity, hospitals. They're preparing for this because they know it's a very real possibility.

It's kind of similar, Max, to the environment we saw after Russia's full scale invasion of Ukraine and after the U.S. government slapped a flurry of

sanctions on Russia. Cyberspace is an easy way for these countries to retaliate in a sort of asymmetric way, in a way that that allows them to

not go up to the threshold of war, but also claim to deny what's going on, even though the fingerprints are pretty clear about who's behind the

keyboard, Max.

FOSTER: Yeah, it's easy to hide behind, isn't it.

Sean, thank you.

The New York City heads to -- well, New York City heads to the polls to vote in the Democratic mayoral primary. Still to come, we'll take a look at

two of the candidates who've become the favorites now to win.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:51:10]

FOSTER: Voters in New York City heading to the polls today in the Democratic primary race for mayor. Eleven candidates on the ballot.

However, this race may come down to just two, former Governor Andrew Cuomo and Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani. Both candidates have high profile

supporters, but no runaway lead.

The primary allows ranked choice voting, which may ultimately decide the race. The winner will face incumbent independent Eric Adams, who was the

previous Democratic nominee.

Joining us, CNN's Edward-Isaac Dovere.

How are things looking then in these final hours? I know it's a bit difficult to tell.

EDWARD-ISAAC DOVERE, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: It is difficult to tell. I'll tell you one thing, Max, for sure. It is very hot in New York City today,

and that may be affecting the turnout. We will have to see, but it is really an oven on the streets in that situation.

We've seen very little of Andrew Cuomo today. He voted at his polling place. As you said, New York City has ranked choice voting. And he decided

to only rank himself, not pick the second through fifth candidates that he could have picked there.

Whereas Mamdani, a younger guy, who's been campaigning on an idea of change and a new generation, has been popping over all over New York City today,

showing up with candidates that he has cross-endorsed and other supporters trying to hustle through in these last couple of hours.

FOSTER: When exactly will we get a winner? Or is it one of those that could rumble on if it's really tight?

DOVERE: Well, it's a little bit tricky. If one of the candidates gets over 50 percent tonight, then that's it. That person will be the Democratic

nominee. If not, it goes to this ranked choice voting system. There are seven rounds, and it all waits until next Tuesday, until July 1st for those

votes to be collected and tabulated.

And then it will happen very quickly on the first to see who gets their votes reallocated, how and who comes out ahead in that situation.

FOSTER: It's a massively high profile role, isn't it, when we look back at the people that have been in that position, biggest city in America. But

this race is getting so much attention locally, isn't it? Just explain why.

DOVERE: Well, for one thing, New York -- the mayor of New York is often talked about as being the second highest profile job in politics in

America, after the president. Of course, it is a job that's attracted a lot of really big characters and really big, influential people in politics,

whether it's Mike Bloomberg or Rudy Giuliani or Ed Koch and go all the way back, Fiorello LaGuardia.

In this race, what you see is the Democratic Party going through some of its evolutions and growing pains after last year's elections, trying to

figure out what it is. Andrew Cuomo is a very different kind of candidate than Zohran Mamdani is.

Cuomo is 67 years old. He had been governor three times, more of a centrist Democrat in very proudly the Bill Clinton mold. It talks about being a

progressive who likes to get things done.

Mamdani is 33 years old, has only been in the assembly for a couple of years in New York, hadn't been in politics before that in an elected

position. And he is a proud and clear Democratic socialist, member of the Democratic socialists of America and has been talking about a lot of things

that would change if they were to come to be how New York City operates, including a rent freeze or city owned grocery stores, those sorts of things

that he says are radical changes needed to address the affordability crisis in the city.

FOSTER: It would be fascinating if Mamdani did win, wouldn't it? Because as you say, it is one of the most high-profile jobs in America. He'll be

the most high-profile Democrat, and people will look to him as a counter to Donald Trump. And he is a completely different politician.

DOVERE: Yeah. And this race has been defined in some ways by people talking about how they would stand up to Donald Trump and how they would

lead the city in opposition to Donald Trump. For Mamdani, it would be a real difference from Donald Trump.

Cuomo -- and I have an article that ran about this over the weekend on CNN.com -- has a long relationship with Donald Trump, and they clashed in a

bunch of ways and also worked together in a bunch of ways in 2020, when Cuomo was governor and Trump was president the first time.

[15:55:12]

But whoever this is, this is going to be a situation where they're going to go up against Trump, if only because the president has said repeatedly now

that he wants to bring a lot of the sorts of things that happened in Los Angeles in recent weeks to other big Democratic run cities to see where he

can press his advantage, especially on immigration.

FOSTER: Okay. Edward-Isaac Dovere, thank you so much. It's going to be fascinating to see the high-profile figure emerge.

I'm Max Foster. That is WHAT WE KNOW.

I'll be back in a moment with "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS" after the break.

END

TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS