Return to Transcripts main page
What We Know with Max Foster
U.S. And Iran Agree To End War On All Fronts, Including Lebanon; Trump On Iran War: "Didn't Want To See Economic Catastrophe"; U.S. Releases Text Of Official Agreement with Iran; Makerfield By-Election For U.K. Parliament Set For Thursday. Aired 3-4p ET
Aired June 17, 2026 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[15:00:31]
CHRISTINA MACFARLANE, CNN HOST: The U.S. releases a 14-point draft agreement with Iran.
I'm Christina MacFarlane in for Max Foster, and this is WHAT WE KNOW.
The U.S. and Iran have agreed to end the war on all fronts, including Lebanon. That's the first of 14 points of an official document just
released by the Trump administration. Mr. Trump says the agreement has everything we set out to accomplish.
In closing remarks at the G7, he hinted that he may attend a signing ceremony with Iran scheduled for Friday in Switzerland. The deal includes
an Iranian pledge never to develop nuclear weapons, while the U.S. is offering sanctions relief and the unfreezing of Iranian assets and a
massive reconstruction fund.
President Trump suggested global markets impacted his decision to strike.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: So the one thing I didn't want to see is I didn't want to see economic catastrophe. If you kept this
going, that could have happened. But all I know is every time we talked about the possibility of peace, the stock market shut up like a rocket
ship. It never went down. They didn't like it.
The people -- you know, the stock market is more brilliant than anybody there is, including the people on this stage, other than me, of course.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MACFARLANE: CNN's Melissa Bell joins us now from the G7 in France, where she was there during that Trump press conference.
And today, Melissa, we've heard messages of support from G7 leaders for that U.S.-Iran deal to end the war. And then, as I said, from Donald Trump
himself at the end of the day, I mean, given how favorable this deal seems to be for Iran, I think we had expected perhaps to see the president
attempt to defend it, but that's not what we got.
What has been the reaction to President Trump's speech today?
MELISSA BELL, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: That's right. I think from the point of view of the G7 leaders, there's a great deal of
relief that there appears to be some movement on this, that the possibility that this thing is signed and unblocks the situation is now real.
To your question, though, Christina, about who benefits, clearly, what we've been hearing these last couple of days until the text had been made
public was from American officials saying, especially as they prepared, understood that it was going to be leaked and made public, be careful.
Don't pay too much attention to the language. This is about allowing the leadership in Tehran to get it past their public, to sell it to their
people, to get it past the hardliners.
But in a sense, there is also the question, Christina, of what the hardliners in the United States think, and those more hawkish within the
Republican Party who will see this as something of a sellout. So, it had been kept secret. It had been kept under wraps. We'd heard relief expressed
over the course of yesterday when people like Ursula von der Leyen, the commission president, Mark Carney, the Canadian prime minister, got eyes on
it, suggesting that this is what diplomacy does, it's a game changer.
But of course, there are many who are extremely unhappy with it. Those to the right of President Trump, the hawkish Republicans, the Israelis, who
only got eyes on it very late. They'd had an initial request to see it. It was denied precisely because I think it includes the kind of language that
is going to be very difficult for Benjamin Netanyahu to sell to his people. He's already come under a great deal of criticism for it. That is only
likely to get worse now that Israelis have eyes on the text itself.
Now, as for the Iranians, clearly, this is a text that will allow them to come back into the international fold, that would allow them to benefit
from this financing structure, the $300 billion of financing structure that is being put in place that would involve, we understand, money from Gulf
countries, for instance, it would get immediate sanction relief and money from the sales of oils as soon as the thing is signed.
Essentially, what it suggests is that by Friday, when this signing ceremony happens just across the border here in Switzerland, in Lucerne, that the
Americans will lift their blockade, that the Strait of Hormuz will reopen, and that this 60-day period will begin. It is an extendable period.
And I think that is very important when you consider the very difficult decisions and conversations and negotiations that lie ahead on everything
from fees on ships that go through the Strait of Hormuz to the nuclear discussions themselves, and there are those in the United States, critical
of this deal, who suggests that what leverage President Trump might have had going into those negotiations has been given up even before they begin.
[15:05:00]
Still, that negotiation, that document, to the relief of everyone, the other G7 leaders here, and I think a great deal of people in the world
who've been wanting this economic situation just deteriorating, the fact that it stipulates that from its signature, Iran has a 30-day period to get
the Strait of Hormuz flowing back to its levels of 30 -- within 30 days of pre-war levels, I think is something to be welcomed and that the whole
world gathered here at Evian has heaved a sigh of relief about.
The possibility that that might be the case is clearly the preoccupation of those who are not involved in the war. Those who are, you can see the
Iranians benefiting. You can see why they might jump at this proposal. But you can also see why President Trump is likely to come in for a great deal
of criticism about a deal that, in the end, will only take the world back to how it was before the war began -- Christina.
MACFARLANE: Yeah, Melissa Bell there from the G7 Summit. We appreciate it, Melissa.
And we're joined now by our international diplomatic editor, Nic Robertson.
Look, Nick, we've been hearing more, I guess, for want of a better word, carrot and stick from the president this afternoon, threatening the
president to resume bombing Iran if it does not comply. But what's also true is that Iran have learnt lessons from this. They know that they can
withstand the worst that the United States can throw at them militarily and survive, and they know that they have a very powerful form of leverage in
the form of the Strait of Hormuz should American hostilities resume.
So how is that going to shape the dynamic for these very difficult negotiations that still lie ahead?
NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: Yeah, look, it's certainly what President Trump has put forward is carrot and stick, isn't
it? There's money in it for Iran if it does what it's told, and a big stick bombing if they don't. But equally, as you say, Iran is actually carrying a
very big stick. It's called the Strait of Honduras, and they've learned that it worked very well.
Most experts in the region knew before President Trump began bombing that if he did that, Iran would immediately go to cut off the Strait of Hormuz
because they saw that as an economic pressure point on President Trump. They knew that he could not stand the domestic political pressure. And when
he took to the podium today, he sort of wore that almost as a badge of honor.
That's not something that's going to put the United States in good standing as a sort of a geopolitical power player in the way that it was perhaps
three months ago in the region. And there certainly will be those in the United States and many allies in the Gulf who are going to recognize that
this president has now, if you will, had to give up so much to get back to the status quo, and it's not clear it's the status quo, because if
President Trump can bomb again, although, you know, one of the paragraphs in the MOU says that both countries should respect each other's territorial
integrity and sovereignty, and the United States should pull its navies back from close to Iran, Iran can also go back and close the Strait of
Hormuz.
So what has happened here is the very beginning, it's the beginning of the second phase of negotiations, which have yet to work their way through.
We've yet to see how that goes. One shouldn't prejudge that. But it has really signaled to the United States allies in the region that the U.S.
security umbrella doesn't work. Iran has an answer for it, a stick, and that President Trump is vulnerable to economic influences back home. And
that puts him in a weak position in the eyes of Iran, and his allies now know that.
MACFARLANE: Yeah, and as you're speaking there, Nick, we are seeing images of President Trump, who -- let's listen in. He's now walking on the tarmac
in Paris.
TRUMP: But -- going well. Seems like the agreement's very well undertow (ph). Are you coming to Versailles with us?
REPORTER: Yes, sir.
TRUMP: I hope -- I'm going to try and get you to do the tour because, honestly, it's unbelievable.
(INAUDIBLE)
TRUMP: Say it?
REPORTER: Did you see the Fed decision? They held rates today. Did you see that?
TRUMP: It's all right. Whatever.
REPORTER: And it looks like they might even raise them later this year. It's not clear. Do you have any --
TRUMP: It could happen. I mean, I -- it's hard to believe. It just keeps the country down, you know, so -- it's so unusual.
But we have a very good guy over there now, so I'm guided by what he wants to do.
Was this his first time? Yeah, I don't know. I saw a statement. It just came out.
REPORTER: Do we have any clarity on when the deal will be signed, when the memorandum will be --
TRUMP: Over the next, I'd say 48 hours.
REPORTER: Forty-eight hours and --
TRUMP: I'd say 48 hours.
REPORTER: Is it still in Geneva?
TRUMP: We haven't -- we haven't determined yet. It's in final form. We haven't determined.
REPORTER: How long will you leave the U.S. military in the Gulf?
[15:10:00]
TRUMP: What?
REPORTER: How long will you leave the U.S. military in the Gulf?
TRUMP: It's a good question. We haven't thought of it. We're really probably a while. It's a good place to stay.
The question was, how long will you leave the military in the Gulf? I would say a little while. See how it all goes. I think it's going to go well, but
we'll see. So, I will see you guys at Versailles.
Can I follow up quickly on something --
TRUMP: Yeah.
REPORTER: -- you said at the press conference?
You said you don't mind Iran having ballistic missiles. Can you elaborate on that? I want to make sure we understand your decision.
TRUMP: No, I want to -- I'm saying that if other countries have them, it's a little bit unfair for them not to have some. A ballistic missile is not
the same thing as what we're talking about, when we talk nuclear. But if Saudi Arabia and Qatar, and they all have some, I would say, in relative
proportion, I think it's okay. That's what I mean. Okay?
REPORTER: Mr. President, how important is it in the MOU, which just came out, that Iran commits not only to not pursuing nuclear weapons, but also
resolve the nuclear dust?
TRUMP: It's great. Much less important, because it's very hard to get at that. Very -- I don't think anybody could get at it, and we could get at it
with great work and a lot of time. But the B-2 bombers and those great pilots, now you understand they did their job. So much less important than
not having a nuclear weapon.
REPORTER: Wouldn't you expect it tonight at the dinner? Is this kind of part of the long farewell to President Macron?
TRUMP: No, not really for that. It just -- I think he's just honoring our country. And you have the biggest people from Europe -- great people. You
might have a list. You have a list of the people? Very impressive group of people.
REPORTER: There was a hot mic moment at the G7 where the Canadian prime minister was talking to you about their Chinese car cap and he said you
said you like it. Can you comment to that?
TRUMP: I like what?
REPORTER: The cap that Canada put on Chinese car imports. You were talking about it with Carney.
TRUMP: I don't know that I said I like it, but I could understand that, yeah. A cap -- would I rather see a cap than no cap? Yeah, I would, on
Canada.
REPORTER: Would the U.S. ever consider allowing Chinese cars?
TRUMP: Well, we haven't. They pay over 100 percent tariffs, so we don't have the problems that Europe has, or Canada.
REPORTER: How long do you hope USMCA negotiations or reviews go on?
TRUMP: Well, it's not something that's -- to me, I think it's better without it, I mean, to be honest with you. I'm not a big fan of it. I liked
it because it got us out of NAFTA. In other words, after six years, you had a clause that got us out of NAFTA. That's the thing I liked about it. We do
better without an agreement.
REPORTER: Do you want to just leave it rolling --
TRUMP: I would rather leave it unsigned. I'd rather have it terminated.
REPORTER: Those are different things. I just want to become clear.
TRUMP: I would rather not have the agreement, but I may sign it, but I would rather -- we do better as a country if we don't have an agreement.
Yeah, I'm thinking about maybe we won't be able to make a deal. I would rather not have the USMCA. The primary reason I wanted it was because there
was no way out of NAFTA, which was the worst freight agreement ever made, like, ever. And they had no termination. And it was very hard to get USMCA
for that reason.
And I had a six-year close. Who would have thought I would have been here in the six years? They got it six years because they hoped I wouldn't be
here. My term was supposed to be over with.
So, on top of everything else that comes, I would prefer not having an agreement. But I'm open to doing it. We'll see what happens.
REPORTER: As of now, it's just going to stick around for 10 years.
TRUMP: We're not -- no, it's not sticking around. It'll be terminated. In other words, it expires.
REPORTER: After a decade, in a decade?
TRUMP: It expires. I prefer that. I view it as possibly expiring immediately.
REPORTER: In the first paragraph of the Iran memorandum, it says no use of force, but also no threat of a use of force. It talks about bombing Iran if
they didn't comply. Is that a threat? Would the Iranians see that as --?
TRUMP: If they don't -- if they don't come through, is it a threat that we bomb? You could call it whatever you want, but it'll probably happen. Thank
you.
I will see you at Versailles and you're going to go back and tell "The New York Times" you're going to change your whole way of life. Okay.
REPORTER: Did you see the 60 days as a hard deadline for a final agreement?
TRUMP: No, I don't. It could take long.
REPORTER: You could?
REPORTER: You could extend if this fails?
TRUMP: I don't view it as hard, no.
REPORTER: You don't think of it as a hard deadline?
TRUMP: No, just as long as they're behaving. I really don't care that much.
REPORTER: Did you talk the leader to Greenland, sir? Greenland, did you talk about Greenland?
TRUMP: No, we didn't discuss it.
REPORTER: Not at all?
TRUMP: I should discuss Greenland.
REPORTER: Does Ukraine now have the advantage on the battlefield? What's the situation?
TRUMP: Well, they're doing pretty well. Russia is a big country, big, you know, much bigger military, but they're doing pretty well. They're holding
their own. They have great equipment with our equipment, don't forget. But they're doing pretty well.
[15:15:00]
REPORTER: Are you going to send them any more U.S. military --
TRUMP: Well, they pay for it. I send it to Europe. Europe pays for it. NATO pays for it, unlike Biden, where he gave $300 billion worth of
equipment.
REPORTER: Sanctions on Russia, what are you going to do about that? Sanctions on Russia, like the oil waiver?
TRUMP: Yeah, I may put them back on. I wanted to make sure that oil stayed as low as -- now that the oil price is way down, Wait until you see those
numbers, but it's way down. I may put it back on.
Thank you.
REPORTER: Thank you, Mr. President.
REPORTER: Thank you, Mr. President.
MACFARLANE: That was President Trump speaking on the tarmac there in Paris as he heads to the Palace of Versailles for dinner with the French
president having just left the G7.
Nic Robertson is joining us to discuss.
It's interesting to say he mentions there, Nic, that he expects the memorandum of understanding to be signed in the next 48 hours. Well, we
will wait to see on that because as we know so much of the detail is still missing from this so-called memorandum and you know, it seems on the face
of it that the U.S. has, in the process of reaching this point, walked back on so many of its red lines.
And I just want to get your thoughts in particular there on what we heard President Trump talk about again there, of his support of Iran having some
conventional ballistic missiles. Can you just explain the logic that he's putting forward on that point?
ROBERTSON: Yeah, Iran has massively produced a vast number of ballistic missiles, ballistic missiles that can reach Israel, for example. They've
been fired even further. I think that during the war, there was an attempt to fire one even in the Indian Ocean to Diego Garcia. So President Trump's
putting an equivalency there on Saudi Arabia having ballistic missiles and Qatar having ballistic missiles. They don't have the numbers, as I'm aware,
that Iran has, and the perception has always been that Iran is using them as a threat and a tool, which is what it did.
Nevertheless, President Trump sees clearly what one can imagine is the Iranian argument. Why shouldn't we have, you know, defensive capability of
some kind? We're saying we're not going to have a nuclear weapon. Why can't we have these ballistic missiles to defend ourselves if our neighbors do?
Certainly, the region is going to be more tense than it used to be, and for so many sort of underlying reasons because of what has happened during this
war, because of the way that the situation has been resolved right now. But President Trump sees that equivalency and sees it only reasonable that Iran
can have a number of ballistic missiles. You know, he really goes in and stresses that point, that the only thing for him is that Iran can't have a
nuclear weapon, that they've agreed that they won't make one and they won't purchase one.
You know, he had made a lot of issue about what he calls the nuclear, the highly enriched uranium. There's even some new language that came through
today from the White House about what the discussion is around the highly enriched uranium, that there would be a dilution on site, that there would
be International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors there, of course, the U.N. body based in Vienna, that they would be there to oversee it.
But the president said, actually, you know, I really don't care about the highly enriched uranium. There's a level, really, of detail that the
president clearly is not caring about. That will be down to J.D. Vance. And as we heard him earlier today say, you know, if the deal goes great, then I
win, and if it goes badly, we'll blame J.D. Vance. I think that was a bit tongue-in-cheek.
But, look, he doesn't get into the detail. He certainly appears here not to be clearly across all of it, even measuring his words against what's
written into the MOU. But The president feels he's got what he's wanted. I think the rest of the world feels Iran has got a huge amount at the expense
of the projection and the reality of U.S. global power, and therefore its interests and assets of itself and its allies around the world come out of
this weaker.
MACFARLANE: Yeah, and interesting to hear him say there as well that he doesn't view this 60-day deadline as a hard deadline, which gives us an
indication of how the U.S. may be viewing this next stage.
Nic Robertson, always appreciate it. Thank you.
Now, President Trump's pick for Fed chair has made his first big decision as the head of the U.S. Central Bank, and interest rates are staying put.
The Fed announced last hour that it voted unanimously to keep rates on hold in a statement that cut out most of the detail we're used to. Half of the
Fed Committee is now predicting a rate hike sometime this year, but Kevin Warsh said you can expect to hear fewer predictions from the Fed going
forward.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KEVIN WARSH, U.S. FEDERAL RESERVE CHAIR: We've dropped forward guidance. Some along the committee, I think, dropped it, I suspect, from our
discussion the last couple of days, because they said at this moment in time, it doesn't feel as though providing forward guidance is right.
[15:20:10]
Others have, I'd say, different views and think as a general proposition, forward guidance isn't the business we should be in.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MACFARLANE: Paula Newton is standing by in New York.
And, Paula, I'm sure you were listening there as President Trump was questioned on the new Fed chair and the hold on interest rates, and he said
there on the tarmac in France, I don't care, but we've got a good guy, an indication, perhaps, of what's expected of Kevin Warsh.
But I know you're watching. What did you make of this first press conference from the new Fed chair and what was said?
PAULA NEWTON, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Getting to the president's comments first, though, when he was told that interest rates wouldn't be going down,
he said it keeps the country down. And then after that, he indicated, as you just said, Christina, that it is the man that he prefers right now, no
matter what he does. And with all of that confidence in the backing of the president behind him, despite the fact that this is a chairman that was put
in place in order to bring interest rates down. This chairman was actually quite a bit more hawkish just at the outset, saying that this Federal
Reserve will, in his words, unambiguously and unanimously keep to its 2 percent target of inflation.
And that is important, Christina, because that is, it's nowhere near that target right now. In fact, if we want to bring up consumer price index in
the United States, you will see it, that it is a little bit elevated, in fact, over 4 percent.
Exactly how this Federal Reserve is going to get to 2 percent, it could be bumpy. This is a very strong economy. And as we had indicated, right, a lot
of those people around that table believe there will be at least one interest rate hike, if not two, before the end of the year. I do want to
say it was quite a lengthy and fulsome press conference, despite the fact that this man has said that he doesn't want to over-communicate and will
not be forward guidance in terms of what his committee will be doing.
But to quote him now again, Christina, he says we've been given -- we're giving markets a new chapter for the central bank. And to that end, he
announced five task forces and made it very clear, Christina, that he intends to do things differently. One thing that really stood out to me --
well, I'll say two things. On the task force is he's really looking at the data as well. That is one of five task forces. And even if you look at the
data, Christina, you're kind of like -- it's kind of like driving a car without understanding the speed that you're going at.
I was shocked, actually, in the last year about the outdated mode of collecting some of the data that the American economy relies on. And he's
right to likely hit on that with a task force. He says it should all be wrapped up, these task forces, by the end of the year.
But the other thing, he was indicated, is in know policy speak are interest rates, quote/unquote, "restrictive". What does that mean? Is it holding the
economy back? He said probably only in one way and that is the housing industry here in the United States and we can bring up mortgage rates right
now. It's something that I watch very closely because it very closely links to affordability and you can see that mortgage rates are up again. Sure,
they had that spike a few years ago but again up again and affordability for new homes still a big problem in the United States.
A lot to look forward here to Christina in terms of being this new chapter, not just for American consumers, but I do want to make consumers all over
the world, you know, take notice of this chairman, because it will affect your own currency in your country and interest rates in your country as
well. So stay tuned here.
MACFARLANE: Yeah, it certainly did feel like a departure, at the very least, from Jerome Powell.
Paula, as you say, much to come. We will continue to watch. Thank you.
All right, coming up, Cristiano Ronaldo and Portugal's World Cup is off to a lackluster start. All the details ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[15:27:06]
MACFARLANE: Portugal and Cristiano Ronaldo's World Cup has gotten off to a rough start as the Democratic Republic of Congo pulled off a stunning 1-1
draw. The European power scored early through Joao Neves before Yoane Wissa leveled proceedings just before half time. And thanks to some brilliant
stops from its keeper, the Congolese beat some very long odds in their first tournament appearance in half a century.
But yesterday, it was all about one man. Lionel Messi, the Argentinian legend, adding to his remarkable World Cup legacy, scoring a hat-trick as
Argentina defeated Algeria three-nil. Well, that takes Messi to the top of the record books, equal with Germany's Miroslav Klose for the most World
Cup goals ever.
One man who could end up catching him, of course, is Kylian Mbappe, who scored twice, including a stunning long range goal as France beats Senegal
3-1 last night.
So what we want to know is, is Lionel Messi the greatest ever World Cup player? It's a toughie.
Joining me now to discuss this, "World Sport's" Patrick Snell.
And, Patrick, look, Messi certainly made his case last night, didn't he? At 39 years old, his first ever World Cup hat trick.
PATRICK SNELL, CNN WORLD SPORT: Yeah, absolutely incredible. He's right up there. Messi, no question about that.
In terms of the greatest step, I think he would probably be the first to say to some degree at least it comes down to how many World Cups you
actually end up with. And of course, the great Pele comes to mind, doesn't he? Winning three World Cups, the only man in history to win three World
Cups across three different decades as well.
But listen, Chrissy, last week, I had the privilege of watching Lionel Messi playing a tune up game in Alabama as Argentina played Iceland in that
one. Iceland were only one-nil down with about 20 minutes to go. Argentina look fairly ordinary, and then Messi comes on, recovering from injuries,
back on for the last 20 minutes -- and I just saw him first hand. He absolutely ran the show, turned the game, he looked as hungry as ever. And
that was just a warm-up game.
What we saw last night was absolutely brilliant. Again, it was that hunger. You can see how the other players just feed off his brilliance. And what an
achievement in his 200th game for his country, I thought he was actually going to shatter the record outright and go ahead of Miroslav closer. He
needed that fourth goal, didn't he, on the night.
But look, he'll be very happy with a hat-trick, I tell you, his first ever World Cup hat-trick. What a moment for Lionel Messi.
MACFARLANE: Yeah, and just so interesting to see how the team still build themselves around him.
Look, it's -- meanwhile for Messi's rival, Cristiano Ronaldo, it's not going to be such a happy start. I mean, it's on -- isn't it true, Patrick,
that the World Cup hasn't really been a happy hunting ground for Cristiano Ronaldo and Ronaldo? It's not going to be such a happy start. I mean, it's
on. Isn't it true, Patrick, that the World Cup hasn't really been a happy hunting ground for Cristiano Ronaldo, and it doesn't really seem to show
any sign of turning around, does it?
[15:30:02]
SNELL: Yeah, I think that's a very, very fair point indeed. You know, he is 41 now. Messi's about to turn 39. There is this rivalry between them.
They played it down, of course, over the years, these two icons of the sport.
But there's no question that Ronaldo would have taken the pitch today against D.R. Congo, absolutely fueled by trying to, in some way not be
upstaged too much by Messi. But look, he didn't have a good game by his own standards. He failed to score. I guess that's anytime he doesn't score and
hit the back of the net, he would deem it an unsuccessful outing.
But what's concerning, I think, for Portugal. Is the fact that, look, they've dropped points. They looked poor, I thought. And is it a question
of Portugal now, Chrissy, are trying to accommodate the 41-year-old Ronaldo? You know, is the manager, Roberto Martinez, is he, when called
upon, is he going to be brave enough to, if not drop him out right, maybe just take him off during a game. Fabulous point, first ever World Cup point
for D.R. Congo, but Ronaldo now has gone 10 straight games without scoring for his country in major competitions, so that's got to be a concern.
He's brilliant, though. On his day, he could give him a chance, give him the chances, and he'll take him. Portugal didn't do that, at least not
often enough on this occasion. And it's two drop points already for Portugal, who've never won the World Cup. They did win the Euros in 2016.
Ronaldo has seen Messi win the World Cup four years ago in Qatar. He wants to follow suit.
MACFARLANE: Yeah, it's such a cruel sport at times isn't it especially for the likes of Ronaldo but great to see the DRC do well the first time
they're back in the competition since 1974.
And, also we haven't got time to get to it, Pat, but we're looking ahead to that England-Croatia game as well which could be a tight one for England in
the next hour. Thanks very much, Patrick. We'll catch up with you on all that a little bit later. Thank you.
And we'll be right back after this quick break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[15:35:20]
MACFARLANE: Back to our top story now. Iran would get significant sanctions relief and a much-needed massive cash infusion under the terms of
its agreement with the United States. The U.S. released the official text of the 14-point memorandum of understanding a short time ago. U.S.
President Donald Trump says the deal has everything we set out to accomplish. It includes an Iranian pledge never to develop nuclear weapons.
A formal signing is scheduled for Friday.
Well, the reviews are in from some of Mr. Trump's Republican colleagues, and they are not good. The Republican senator, Bill Cassidy, posted,
"Reagan is rolling over in his grave and called it the worst foreign policy blunder in decades."
Well, Nate Swanson is a resident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council. He's also director of the Iran Strategy Project.
Nate, great to have you with us.
I mean, it's understandable, isn't it, those remarks, because it does appear here that the U.S. are giving away an awful lot for very little. So
let's just start there. How remarkable is it to you, looking at these 14 points in the MOU, that what the U.S. are proposing here is essentially
paying Iran off to open the Strait moves with this pledge of $300 billion development fund?
NATE SWANSON, RESIDENT SENIOR FELLOW, THE ATLANTIC COUNCIL: Right. I mean, it's extremely remarkable. I guess I would just put a couple of caveats on
that.
I mean, first of all, the focus on the $300 billion is probably misplaced. I think it's highly unlikely that there will actually be a second phase of
this deal. But even what's in the first phase, the MOU, what it delivers, is oil waivers, right, which is essentially the U.S.'s primary piece of
leverage historically for trying to get concessions from Iran.
So Iran's going to have indefinite oil waivers, which are in some ways more significant. So it's an incredible amount of leverage for a deal that
basically maybe opens the strait and maybe commits Iran to talking in the future. So it's an astronomical price.
MACFARLANE: Yeah, and you say, you know, you don't think we will get to the second stage of this deal. There's still a lot, of course, a lot of
detail to be ironed out here, including the mechanics of the Strait of Hormuz, Iran's nuclear concessions, Iran's sanctions relief, which is all
believed to be addressed in this second phase.
So how different do you expect the final deal to be to the aspirations of what have actually been outlined here in the MOU?
SWANSON: I mean, to be frank, I don't expect there to be a final deal. I think this is essentially it, right? I mean, I think the key phrase in MOU
is like clause nine, which talks about the status quo being in place. And so I think that is essentially what we're looking at.
The status quo is in place, and Iran will get oil relief, and I think that's it. There's just too many constraints to actually keep phase two
from happening. I think one of them is the U.S. is just not really interested in doing the details of what would be a very complicated nuclear
deal that would involve very creative solutions to sanctions relief.
But also, I'm not sure Iran really wants to do a transformative deal with the United States either. I mean, they don't trust President Trump in
particular, and, you know, the president in the United States and Israel literally killed the supreme leader's father, his mother, his wife, his
son. So I don't think they're looking to do a big deal the U.S.
I think they're looking for a deal that's transactional, that gives them some instant relief, and that's basically what the MOU is. But, you know,
it has the fiction of a second phase.
MACFARLANE: Yeah, and I think the vagueness of the deal sort of signals how much Trump really wants to just wash his hands of this and walk away. I
mean, another thing to mention, of course, is hanging in the background of this is Israel's reluctance to see any ceasefire deal on these terms reach
fruition. I mean, given the threat that they continue to pose, how unlikely is it for Iran to agree to a deal? And do you expect that threat from
Israel to continue for the duration of this 60-day negotiation period?
SWANSON: Yeah, I mean, it's a great question. It's hard to answer. I mean, Israel's in a very tricky position because I'm sure they're extremely
unhappy with the terms of this deal, and perhaps understandably so.
But the deal is ultimately an indictment on the war itself, right? I mean, this war wasn't going to get better with more time. And even if you kept
the blockade and kept fighting for another three or six months, there's no guarantee and probably would be very unlikely to get better terms.
So this war needed to end. We paid a dear price to do it.
[15:40:00]
And so Israel is not going to like these terms, but they violate it -- they also risk running the -- risk of crossing the president. And I think that's
a huge risk for Netanyahu to do. So they might undermine it, but they might also just have to sit this out for their own domestic politics. It's a bad
place for them.
MACFARLANE: Yeah, definitely. A divergence from where we were at the start of the war.
Nate, appreciate your analysis tonight. Thank you.
Now it's final moments of trade on Wall Street and stocks are down. The Dow moved lower when the Fed decision came out 90 minutes ago and has taken a
downturn during Kevin Warsh's press conference.
This is our Business Breakout.
U.S. President Donald Trump sat down with artificial intelligence leaders at the G7 meeting in a meeting described as surprisingly productive by one
of the attendees. Top executives of OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google were among the tech leaders at the working lunch. The CEO of Cohere told CNN
that he didn't sense any tension between the people in the room.
Two U.S. state Democrats are trying to persuade the U.S. government not to build an emergency oil reserve on the West Coast. In a letter to the energy
secretary, senators from California and Washington state say the plan would be illegal. It would expand the government's strategic petroleum reserve,
which currently sits at multi-year lows after the wars in Iran and Ukraine.
U.S. retail sales have grown for the fourth straight month. They rose by 0.9 percent in May, much better than economists had actually expected. With
spending up across nearly every category, it's an encouraging sign for a growth in the second quarter.
And just ahead, Thursday's crucial special election for parliament in the U.K. We'll hear from voters in the tiny Makerfield constituency who could
determine the prime minister's fate.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[15:45:06]
MACFARLANE: The U.K. is hours away from a special election that could determine the fate of Britain's prime minister and the Labour Party. Voters
from the Makerfield constituency will decide whether Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham will return to Parliament. If he beats far-right reform
candidate Robert Kenyon, he will likely challenge Keir Starmer for leadership of the Labour Party and the premiership.
Well, those votes, just 0.1 percent of Britons are now effectively the center of Britain's political universe.
CNN's Clare Sebastian spoke with some of them ahead of the votes, which has become very decisive.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CLARE SEBASTIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: So look, we've got Andy Burnham voters there, we've got Reform voters over there, and we've even got Restore
voters over there. What does this tell us about the mood here in this constituency?
CLARE HANNAH, JOURNALIST, "WHAT'S HAPPENING IN WIGAN": This is one of the most divisive by-elections I've ever seen, but visibly divisive. It's
become quite aggressive, to be honest.
SEBASTIAN (voice-over): Two days before one of the most consequential by- elections the UK has ever seen, this area that has voted Labour for generations is seeing neighbors at odds. At lunchtime, customers at the
Muffin Man Bakery split over who should get the biggest slice of the electoral pie.
SEBASTIAN: Do you mind telling us who you voted for?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Andrew Burnham.
SEBASTIAN: You have? Okay. Why is that?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It goes back to leader. I actually think Keir Starmer is doing a good job, but I think Nigel Farage is the most untrustworthy
politician since Boris Johnson.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Reform.
SEBASTIAN: You did? Why is that?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I voted for him last time.
SEBASTIAN: You did? Why?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Immigration. Big issue for me.
SEBASTIAN: Immigration for you?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.
SEBASTIAN: In this small collection of former coal mining towns in the northwest of England, around 75,000 registered voters may now decide the
political future for almost 70 million British citizens. And yet, the sudden spotlight on this area has highlighted divisions that could shape
national politics in the U.K. for years to come.
PAUL SPARKS, SCHOOL TEACHER: Ladies, who are you voting for?
SEBASTIAN (voice-over): An impromptu straw poll on the high street showing what's at stake.
SPARKS: So far this is what seems to be happening. We seem to be finding that Andy Burnham is winning narrowly and Reform and Restore are splitting
the vote, the right-wing vote.
SEBASTIAN (voice-over): Robert Kenyon representing Nigel Farage's far- right Reform UK has been a close second in polls here. Restore Britain's candidate, Rebecca Shepherd, even further to the right, is also gathering
steam. No sign on the high street poll of the Conservative Party, the official opposition in Parliament.
SEBASTIAN: Why are people not even voting Conservative? Why are they edging towards these far-right parties? What has happened to suddenly
create this splintering in terms of the public opinion here?
HANNAH: A massive issue on this is immigration. That's a massive issue. And people believe, you know, what they're told by people, look at what's
happening in the world and immigration has become the biggest issue, I would say.
I think some parties campaign on issues that make people angry. You know, they will campaign on things that make people angry. And, you know, this is
what happens. You know, we get all this division.
SEBASTIAN: But what is it about Reform that makes sense to you?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, they're going to get rid of stopping the boats coming in because that's ridiculous.
SEBASTIAN: Well, net migration has actually been coming down over the last couple of years under this government.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That's a lot of rubbish.
SEBASTIAN: What makes you say that?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Because it's proven that they're everywhere.
SEBASTIAN: Why do you think Burnham will be the one to?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Leave me (ph).
SEBASTIAN (voice-over): Almost everyone here agrees on one thing. After a month in the political spotlight, they've had enough.
SEBASTIAN: All right.
SEBASTIAN (voice-over): Almost everyone.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I've enjoyed it, really, being the focus for attention.
SEBASTIAN (voice-over): Clare Sebastian, CNN, in Greater Manchester, England.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
MACFARLANE: Well done, Clare. All eyes on Manchester tomorrow.
Now still to come, going green, Donald Trump's big renovation of the Lincoln reflecting pool couldn't keep it clean. So what will?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[15:51:38]
MACFARLANE: We are bringing you live pictures here from Versailles where President Trump is arriving in his motorcade for dinner with the French
president. You can see there alongside his wife, Brigitte. It's a very special dinner here. You can see the motorcade entering the grounds of the
Palace of Versailles.
Macron having chosen this venue for dinner between the two world leaders following the conclusion of the G7 summit to celebrate the USA's 250th
anniversary and perhaps, you know, in the hopes of patching up relations with the American president, too. It's uncertain whether the president will
get to hear what's said between the two leaders as he leaves the motorcade.
But, of course, these two leaders have just come from the G7, where the European leaders have been dissecting what was inside that 14-point
memorandum of understanding and trying more generally to get back many of them on good terms with the U.S. president on various issues ranging from
the war in Ukraine to oil and gas. And I'm sure there'll be much discussion ahead tonight on Iran.
So we're going to stay with these pictures here in the hope of seeing the president stepping out of the motorcade in just a few minutes. So -- and
this palace where they'll be having dinner tonight is a spectacular 2,300- room palace that Trump was already commented on saying it's not gold leaf, it's the real deal. And of course, we all know how much the president likes
a gold ornament. So it should be the perfect staging for dinner this evening.
Let's just have a watch here to see if the president will emerge.
Not quite yet. So, in other Trump-related news, we know that the president has promised the American people the famous reflecting pool at the Lincoln
Memorial would be a clean and beautiful blue in time for the 4th of July holiday. $14 million later, and it hasn't quite gone to plan. Just days
after being repainted and refilled with water, the pool has turned a murky green color full of algae. Workers have been sent to dump gallons of
hydrogen peroxide into the pool to try and clean it up.
Mr. Trump is not the first president to struggle with this. The Obama administration spent $34 million in 18 months trying to clean it in 2012,
and within a month, it was filled with bird poop, dead ducks and more algae.
So we don't know is can anyone fix the D.C. reflecting pool?
Well, if anyone's going to know it is Steve Goodale, a pool expert who posts on YouTube as swimming pool Steve.
Great to have you with us this evening, Steve.
So what do you think? Is there any chance that anyone can clear this pool up, given this algae just seems to keep resurfacing.
[15:55:05]
STEVE GOODALE, SWIMMING POOLL & SPA EXPERT: Definitely, it certainly looks like a problem, and it is to be sure. But this is a problem that can be
dealt with. You know, there's multiple systems in place for an open air environment like this that's intended to help inhibit algae growth, like
the nanobubblers that you might have heard of that add oxygen to the system to help keep the algae at bay.
But it's, with a large system like this and a complicated system like this, sometimes it doesn't go smoothly right away. And this is, often referred to
as new pond syndrome. And what's happening here is the reflecting pool has been cleaned and resurfaced. In this environment, this is nothing like a
swimming pool where we create a sterile environment with chlorine, that's not suitable for an environment like this.
So you can't compete and create a sterile environment. You have to create a natural equilibrium, so to speak. And when you have a fresh slate, like
what they've started with here with this refill, you can end up with -- you know, there's supposed to be competing algae that are self-limiting and
beneficial bacteria and biofilms which help to prevent phosphorus from releasing into the water. And in that case, it's --
MACFARLANE: I'm afraid, Steve, I'm going to have to cut you off because unfortunately, we've got to the end of the show. And this is the segment
I've been looking forward to the entire hour.
So I apologize to you, but I hope very much you'll come back when we do see this pool turn American flag blue. So you can explain to us how it's
happened in more detail.
Steve, thanks for your time.
GOODALE: I think we can still soon (ph) --
MACFARLANE: Yeah, oh, good. Okay, excellent. That was my final question. Is it likely? Apparently, apparently soon.
That's all we have for WHAT WE KNOW. Stay with CNN. We'll have much more after this quick break.
END
TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS
