Return to Transcripts main page
Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees
White House Shuts Down Report of Extended Ceasefire; Trump Says U.S. Blockade on Iran's Ports is Working; Trump Posts New A.I. Image of Himself with Jesus; Senate Rejects War Powers Resolution for Fourth Time; Trump Says War Close to Over After Hinting Second Round of Talks; White House Feels Good About the Prospects of a Deal With Iran; Washington Post Reports U.S. Sends Thousands More Troops to Mideast; Trump Says U.S. Blockade of Iran's Ports is Working; White House Unveils Plan for 250-Feet Tall Triumphal Arch; Chef Jose Andres Says Iran War Disrupting Global Food Markets. Aired 8-9p ET
Aired April 15, 2026 - 20:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
DANI BENSKY, JEFFREY EPSTEIN SURVIVOR: ...recalibrated me to come back to myself.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
M.J. LEE, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: And Erin, we did ask the Justice Department whether there is any footage from the cameras that were outside of Jeffrey Epstein's house, and a DOJ spokesperson told me that all of the footage, the camera footage that is in the Justice Department's possession has been released.
Now, meanwhile, the DOJ did not comment on my inquiries about Dani's name still appearing int the files but we will tell you that since the filming of this interview, her name no longer appears in the files -- Erin.
ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: Thank you very much, an incredible piece. Incredibly brave of Dani. And thanks so much to all of you for joining us. AC360 begins now.
[20:00:47]
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, "ANDERSON COOPER: 360": Good evening from the Newsroom, topping tonight's CNN Global War coverage, new reporting that more troops, thousands more are heading into the region, expected to arrive just as the cease fire runs out six days from now. "The Washington Post" has the story, here's the headline, quoting the key passage, "The forces moving into the region include about 6,000 troops aboard the aircraft carrier USS George H.W. Bush and several warships escorting it, said current and former officials, who, like some others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss military movements".
Now, according to this report, they get there just as the two-week truce expires on the 22nd. That is in addition to "Post's" report, of about 4,200 members of a combined Marine, and Naval group due in the area near the end of the month and those forces are on top -- approximately 50,000 troops already in the theater of operations, something presumably for Iran to contemplate is the ceasefire takes away or possibly contend with and face if fighting resumes.
Today, at the White House Press Secretary, Karoline Leavitt rejected for now the notion that a ceasefire would be extended.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: I saw some reporting again, bad reporting this morning that we had formally requested an extension of the ceasefire, that is not true at this moment. We remain very much engaged in these negotiations, in these talks.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: At this moment, as for those talks, she sounded an optimistic note.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LEAVITT: These conversations are productive and ongoing and that's where we are right now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: In related news, Pakistan's top military commander arrived today in Tehran, according to Iranian State Media, he's bearing a secret message for the Iranians from President Trump. Also, along those lines, Qatar's leader phoned the President today. According to the Emir's office, no comment from The White House. According to the Qataris, the two discussed the ramifications of the crisis on energy markets and global supply chains, and to that point, listen to treasury Secretary Bessent today on gas prices, which now top $4.00.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT BESSENT, U.S. TREASURY SECRETARY: I'm optimistic that during the summer we will see gas with a three in front of it sooner rather than later. So, I've been meeting with a lot of my Middle Eastern counterparts, the Finance Ministers, and they all say that once the Straits are open, they can start pumping again within one week.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: During the summer, he said, leaving himself a lot of room. Summer ends in September, more than five months from now. Today, gas prices dipped slightly to $4.10 a gallon, down by $0.06 from their peak, but still $1.12 more than they were at the start of the war.
Iran's chokehold on the Strait of Hormuz is not helping there, nor is Iran's threat to shut down passage through the Red Sea if the U.S. Blockade continues. As for Central Command, today they released a recording of the radio message that vessels trying to come or go from Iranian ports are hearing from U.S. warships.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The U.S. has announced a formal blockade of Iranian ports in coastal areas. This is a legal action. All vessels are advised to immediately return to port if leaving and discontinue transit to Iran if that is your next port of call. Do not attempt to breach the blockade. Vessels will be boarded for interdiction and seizure, transiting to or from an Iranian port. Turn around and prepare to be boarded. If you do not comply with this blockade, we will use force. The whole of the United States Navy is ready to force compliance.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: In the meantime, the message going out and that message that thousands more incoming troops is sending about American capabilities and fighting, if the fighting resumes. The President talked about the war to Fox's Maria Bartiromo, speaking of it, using the past tense, prompting this question from her.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARIA BARTIROMO, FOX BUSINESS NETWORK HOST, MORNINGS WITH MARIA": Is this war over?
DONALD TRUMP (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I think it's close to over. Yeah, I mean, I view it as very close to over. You know, what? If I pulled up stakes right now, it would take them 20 years to rebuild their country.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Well, there's more today. Senate Republicans, all but Rand Paul blocked a war powers resolution requiring congressional approval for any future military action in Iran. Democrat Chris Murphy said they're going to try again.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. CHRIS MURPHY (D-CT): We will be down on this floor week after week, every single week to force at least a short debate, to force a vote and my hope is that at some point, our Republican colleagues, besides one, choose to join us.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Well, that was Senator Murphy. He joins us shortly. With us now is "Washington Post" Pentagon correspondent, Dan Lamothe. Lamothe, who broke the story about thousands more troops heading to the region. So, walk us through your reporting, Dan, specifically the number, the type, the timing of these troop deployments, what it would give the U.S.
[20:05:17]
DAN LAMOTHE, "THE WASHINGTON POST" PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Yes, I think the most notable, most notable piece here is that as they continue to talk about some sort of peace deal, as they continue to negotiate, you're watching what they're saying, but you also have to watch what they do. And we're continuing to flow thousands of forces in, ground forces on that naval, Marine Corps task force. That's in addition to forces that already have been moved into the region. So, there's a lot left here, perhaps it's just pressure. Perhaps there's some sort of additional operation or mission if negotiations break down and we're kind of all left waiting to see where that goes.
COOPER: Is the Pentagon sending these troops because it believes the ceasefire is likely to expire? Or do we know or is it just a contingency just to give the U.S. options?
LAMOTHE: That's unclear at this point. I mean, I think in a negotiation and really with just, you know, over history dealing with Iran, the Pentagon has often tried to really make sure that there's a lot of muscle in the region to really make the point that they have the ability to inflict pain if things do not go the American way. That's particularly so with President Trump.
So, but were now in a spot in particularly in the next couple of weeks, once that third aircraft carrier arrives, that's more firepower than the United States has had in the region than at the height of the operation so far over the last six weeks.
COOPER: What are you hearing about potential U.S. Ground operations in Iran? I mean, what sources, what are your sources saying about what the American military might do if Iran doesn't willingly turn over or dilute its enriched uranium?
LAMOTHE: A couple weeks ago, we had a front-page story about there being weeks of operations planned should the President decide to approve that. I'm told more recently, in the last couple of days, that while the public discussion has shifted to negotiations, they continue that planning. They can continue that preparation that could take any number of forms. I think all of the discussions we've seen in public about potentially seizing Kharg Island, potentially putting Marines or other forces on the coastal areas to try and limit the ability of Iran to shoot at ships. And then the most risky of the missions is likely whether or not they would go in to get nuclear material. That is a very tall order.
COOPER: But I just want, you used the word weeks, those things would require weeks on the ground, correct?
LAMOTHE: That's really the question. If they're going to do weeks of operations, is it putting U.S. boots on the ground, U.S. personnel on the ground for a lengthy period of time? Is it something less than that? One option that would be on the table would be Marines or other forces doing raids where they're moving in there, perhaps taking weapons there, you know, blowing up Iranian infrastructure and then moving back out and continuing to move and trying to use speed and agility as a friend. Whether or not that's the course of action they choose, I don't know at this time.
COOPER: Dan Lamothe, appreciate it, thanks.
I want to go to CNN's chief White House correspondent and anchor of "The Source" Kaitlan Collins in Washington.
So, you hear the reporting, "The Washington Post" about more troops at the same time, White House talking about the prospects of more peace talks. Is it clear what outcome the administration believes is more likely?
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN'S CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT AND THE ANCHOR OF "THE SOURCE": I mean, clearly, they're preparing for both here, Anderson, because what we've been hearing from the President and what he said in that interview that he just taped last night, that that aired this morning, he sounded really optimistic about this nearing the end of this war, even though we know on these key sticking points, they've still been pretty far apart when it comes to what's going to happen to the enriched uranium that is in Iran? What's the agreement going to be on them trying to develop a nuclear weapon?
All of these things, including, you know, control of the Strait of Hormuz, which is actively affecting Americans and which is why the treasury secretary was asked multiple times inside the briefing room today, I was in there, about gas prices. And when Americans can expect them to come down.
But I think sending the more firepower to the region does show that the President is keeping those other options at his hand, because one thing that the White House came out today, and to actively refute was this reporting that there was an extension agreed to when it comes to the ceasefire that is set to expire next Tuesday.
They very clearly made obvious that that is not the case. They have not agreed to that yet, though they did sound optimistic about the way, the way and the direction these peace talks are going right now, even though we still haven't confirmed that there is going to be a second round of talks, it's still just an option. They are talking about talking basically still at this point.
One thing that, you know, we wanted to ask today that didn't get, didn't have the opportunity to do is that new message that we are told the Pakistani intermediaries have brought to Tehran today. It's not clear what that new message from Washington is and whether or not it's any kind of an offer or an agreement or what that looks like.
So, that is all still an open question tonight, despite the optimism that you are hearing from the White House, as we're waiting to see what's going to happen in less than a week from now.
[20:10:16]
COOPER: Yes. Kaitlan, thanks very much. We'll see you at the top of the hour with "The Source".
Joining me now is veteran diplomat Richard Haass, President Emeritus of the Council of Foreign Relations, he's also the author of the "Home and Away Newsletter" on Substack.
When you look at all the chess pieces that have been moving around, the statements from the administration, what do you think is happening?
RICHARD HAASS, PRESIDENT EMERITUS OF THE COUNCIL OF FOREIGN RELATIONS: Look, I hope it is simply a way to put some muscle behind diplomacy, but to actually use these military forces to try to spirit out the nuclear material. I can't think of an operation more difficult to carry out. We'll have enormous number of casualties. We don't need to seize Kharg Island. We control the Strait right now. We're blocking it through the blockade. We're not going to use military force to get regime change.
We're not going to use military force to get capitulation. So, quite honestly, a resumption of hostilities right now, I don't see an upside. Plus, there's a real danger if we ever did have a military breakthrough. Iran's one option is to level the region, to devastate the energy infrastructure of its neighbors, that would be the worst of all outcomes.
COOPER: So, if there's not regime change, if there's not seizing the enriched uranium, and now there's questions about who's going to control the Straits, is the U.S. whatever happens in a worse off position, did Iran win this?
HAASS: Well, Iran lost if you will, in the narrow calculation of military. But we'll see whether to what extent it wins strategically and politically. There's two big issues right here. One is the nuclear, one is the Strait.
I think the urgency ought to be on getting the Strait opened. That's time sensitive issue. And Iran can't control it, can't decide who gets to use it. The question is whether we can come up with an agreement there. I think they're under a lot of economic pressure. I actually think there's a chance there.
COOPER: Also, the Vice President has been saying, that he senses that they want some sort of a deal.
HAASS: I think so. We could possibly create some new governing authority for the Strait. They could have a voice in that, something you do with Iran rather than to it.
COOPER: But the idea of Iranian control over the Strait --
HAASS: Unacceptable, not going to, that can't be allowed to stay. That would that would definitely leave us much worse off, whether we get back exactly to where we were before. We'll see, but I think well get close to it.
COOPER: Is any kind of, whatever talks are going to be occurring, if they are in fact extended, would anything come out of it or not? I mean, is the Strait, I know you said that's the priority, in terms of time frame. But is that where a nuclear, the nuclear issue is also addressed or is that just delayed for some other talk.
HAASS: I think you have a choice there. The nuclear issue has to be addressed. I think it has to be addressed diplomatically. Ironically, it's going to be through some kind of a negotiated agreement, which is going to have certain bear certain similarities or resemblance to previous agreements. Hopefully, this would --
COOPER: This administration tore up.
HAASS: Tore up, but hopefully I think it would it would be better. And I think there's again, a decent chance of that. I don't feel quite the same rush. Don't get me wrong. It's important, it's vital. But I would simply tell Iran we can live with the current situation so long as we detect you are doing nothing to weaponize it or change the status of nuclear materials. But sure, we would like to get an agreement. We want to place a ceiling on what Iran's allowed to do. We want to have inspections that are really intrusive.
So, I do think there's the basics of a deal. I'm not sure we can ever get Iran to give up certain rights. I think it's more important to have an open-ended agreement that puts a really low ceiling on what Iran is allowed to do.
COOPER: You're saying that, you know, yes, nukes are a priority, but the Strait is the bigger priority. The reason given one of them, besides sort of head nods toward regime change, about launching this entire war was to deal with the nuclear issue because they said there was such an imminent threat. Does the fact that you don't think that's topic number one, say that you don't think that was as imminent a threat as the administration was saying?
HAASS: The administration has put forward no evidence whatsoever that it was an imminent threat. For the Israelis, by the way, the bigger threat at the time was not the nuclear it was the ballistic missiles.
The nuclear issue was largely taken care of for quite a few years through the June bombings, to use the Presidents word, obliterated and even if not quite obliterated, seriously scaled back. But there was no new intelligence that's been made public, that Iran was about to do anything to change the status.
So no, I don't think the nuclear argument holds water. Again, don't get me wrong, ultimately, we cannot allow Iran to get a nuclear weapon. But, you know, in the short run, I'd get the Straits open because the world economically is paying an enormous price. And then we've got time to negotiate again, some type of an agreement that would put a ceiling on Iran's nuclear capabilities that could be verified. So, we would have confidence both what they're able to do, but more important, what they can't do.
COOPER: How long -- the kind of negotiations to open the Strait, obviously less involved than the negotiations on a nuclear issue, which took a year and a half and years of that for planning. How long -- that could be done in a reasonable time frame, do you think?
HAASS: If it could? But if not, I would say fine. So long as Iran understood through signals from us, if you will, we would set red lines and say, you do this with the 400 kilograms, you've got of enriched material. If we detect anything that will break the ceasefire so they would be put on notice. But look, I would negotiate the nuclear thing as quickly as we could. A lot of it's on us, if we say Iran can never enrich uranium to any degree permanently, that might be an overreach at some point, negotiations have to reflect political realities.
So, I would say what might be most important is to have an open-ended permanent agreement. But maybe Iran could be allowed a certain face- saving amount of enrichment, a couple of percent that could be inspected very with great confidence. Those are the kinds of trade- offs we're going to have to think about.
COOPER: Ambassador Haass, thanks very much appreciate it.
Coming up next, President Trump continuing his critique of the Pope and his A.I. relationship with Jesus, the President reposting this A.I. image of a very much more youthful but bronzed image of him being embraced by the Son of God, or perhaps just a doctor. Reaction to it all from catholic writer and blogger, Andrew Sullivan.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ANDEREW SULLIVAN, CATHOLIC WRITER AND BLOGGER: Well, I think it's deranged, and I think it's irrational, and I think it's distressing to watch the President of the United States treat the Holy Father, the first American Pope, as if he were another competitor in a primary.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:20:37]
COOPER: President Trump's jabs at Pope Leo stretch into a fourth day today, when the President reposted this A.I. generated image of himself being embraced by Jesus. Not sure if the celestial light is Trumps, that he is shining onto Jesus, or if it's Jesus sharing his light with the man who is increasingly fashioning himself as America's Lord and savior and the image President Trump has his eyes closed, doesn't appear to be sleeping while he is cradled by Jesus.
The Presidential post that accompanied the image, "The radical left lunatics might not like this, but I think it is quite nice."
For sheer bizarreness, however, any dose of messianic madness is hard to beat. A.I. Jesus Trump, the golden, godlike celestial light pouring forth from his manly hands, healing the sick, answering prayers. It is glorious.
Hours later, he took it down, not because the radical left lunatics, but because some allies in Congress and people who do actually have faith were outraged. The President said he thought it was an image of him as a doctor, which then makes you wonder, who were those alleged doctors who allegedly administered him those alleged cognitive tests, which he allegedly aced?
This latest post of Trump with Jesus, not Trump as Jesus comes after his Vice President was giving advice to Pope Leo, the leader of 1.4 billion Catholics, including Mr. Vance, on religious doctrine. It was a Turning Point USA event in Georgia.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) J.D. VANCE, (R) VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I think it's very, very important for the Pope to be careful when he talks about matters of theology. I think one of the issues here is that if you're going to opine on matters of theology, you've got to be careful. You've got to make sure it's anchored in the truth. And that's one of the things that I try to do. And it's certainly something I would expect from the clergy.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: On the day the President was promoting the image of him and Jesus huddling the Pope on a trip to Algeria, referencing a visit to the great mosque of Algiers promoted the gospel of unity.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
POPE LEO XIV, BISHOP OF ROME, HEAD OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND SOVEREIGN OF THE VATICAN CITY STATE: Although we have different beliefs, we have different ways of worshiping, we have different ways of living. We can live together in peace. And so, I think that to promote that kind of image is something which the world needs to hear today.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Now, the editor of "The Daily Dish" and Catholic writer Andrew Sullivan, I spoke with him shortly before airtime.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
COOPER: Andrew, what's your reaction to President Trump continuing to attack Pope Leo? Depicting the images of himself as, you know, A.I. Jesus, and now Jesus embracing him?
SULLIVAN: Well, I think it's deranged. And I think it's irrational. And I think it's distressing to watch the President of the United States treat the Holy Father, the first American Pope, as if he were another competitor in a primary.
There seems to be absolutely no propriety, decency, restraint or moderation in this guy. It's not that this is new. I mean, I wish I could say that, but it's still depressing to watch.
COOPER: There certainly have been a number of American Presidents, Republican and Democratic, who have, you know, chaffed or perhaps not liked things a Pope has said. But obviously, this kind of a response and the, the fact that he is choosing to continue it, I'm not sure what that says, but, but it certainly doesn't seem like there's any sense of I mean, obviously, there's no sense of shame with him.
SULLIVAN: Well, what's fascinating is that J.D. Vance last year was lecturing the Pope on immigration. This is a man who converted like five minutes ago. J.D. Vance actually thought he could lecture the Pope on Saint Augustine on immigration. When the Pope actually was a member of an Augustan Order, and actually, this week is visiting Augustine's birthplace and where he was bishop, and this, and also last year, J.D. Vance said the Pope should only talk about morality. And this year, when he does talk about morality, J.D. Vance says this, that he needs to speak more carefully when he speaks about theology.
And at one point, you're just thinking, who is the Vice President of the United States, who's been a Catholic for five minutes to lecture a public figure on the manner in which they should speak? When he is the Vice President to the current President of the United States, and also, the Pope has been speaking very carefully.
[20:25:10]
He has laid out very clear principles here. You cannot, as a Christian, defend a war that is not defensive, that isn't responding to an imminent threat. You cannot, in conducting a war, say that your goal is to destroy a civilization, as the President has said, or as Pete Hegseth has said, to say that we seek their obliteration as part of God's will, or that he seeks to bring death and destruction to the enemy.
COOPER: It's curious to me that The White House chose to, you know, they took down the President or somebody told him to take down the post of him as the A.I. Jesus with the orbs of light coming from his hand and being bathed in celestial golden light healing the Jon Stewart like person laying in the bed. They took that down. They also took down a clip of the President's, I guess, spiritual advisor, she's often called comparing him on Easter to Jesus over and over and over again and the President is certainly not objecting to that comparison.
The White House, you know, kind of took that clip down, but again, he's now continuing the comparisons today.
SULLIVAN: Well, not just appropriating religion or appropriating a faith, by the way, he doesn't hold himself, but to present himself as the equivalent of Jesus or not be immediately repelled by the idea that someone would say that about you. I think it shows a level of narcissism that is clinically pathological and normal people, sane people would never do such a thing. And I think they realized by portraying himself literally as Christ, that he had gone a step which even those who were part of the very extreme religious right would not tolerate.
You can't criticize a theocracy in Iran while you're using the most recondite religious rhetoric to justify your war here, and never, ever fuse religion and violence that is the most terrifying and dangerous thing. It's what we saw on 9/11, it's what we've seen in Iran. It's what we America is supposed to resist for us to endorse it is to endorse some of the most dangerous elements on planet Earth.
COOPER: Andrew Sullivan, thank you.
SULLIVAN: You're welcome.
COOPER: Next back to the war, and Senator Chris Murphy, after a Senate Republican reject another measure to put limits on the President.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) SEN. CHRIS MURPHY (D): On this motion, the "Yea's" are 47, the "Nay's" are 52, the motion is not agreed to.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: And later, the White House announces a big step for the memorial arch that the President hopes will leave Paris' Arc de Triomphe in the shade.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:32:23]
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST OF "ANDERSON COOPER 360": -- The Capitol tonight, where the president again today avoided any congressional limits on how to wage war with Iran. For the fourth time so far, Senators rejected a War Powers resolution.
The vote, 52 to 47 against, with every Republican, but Rand Paul, voting no. Every Democrat, but John Fetterman, voting yes. House Minority Leader, Chuck Schumer today said the Democrats will force a War Powers vote every week for the foreseeable future.
Joining us now is Connecticut Democratic Senator, Chris Murphy, who sits on the Foreign Relations Committee and supported today's legislation. I assume you're not surprised the resolution failed. If Republicans didn't want to constrain the president after he threatened to kill Iran's civilization, what appetite would they have for that kind of move while the ceasefire is in effect?
SEN. CHRIS MURPHY, (D-CT) FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE: Well, that's true. Right now, Republicans are lining up behind the president. But this war is going to continue to get more incoherent and less popular. The fact of the matter is Trump can say all he wants about how well the war is going and how Iran is going to come to the table and sign a great peace deal. But the reality is the reality.
The Strait of Hormuz is closed. These negotiations are not real. And people are increasingly feeling the pain, right? Gas is creeping towards $5 a gallon. The cost of fertilizer is 30 percent higher. Grocery prices are soon going to start to rise. And I think it will be harder for Republicans to continue to support a war that is spiraling out of control, that is not achieving any of its objectives, and is really hurting normal, regular people back home.
The billionaire class around Donald Trump is not feeling the pain. But Republican and Democratic families all over the country are. So, yeah, that's why we're going to force this vote week after week, not just because we think it's our duty to debate the war and Republicans are refusing to do it, but because we think eventually we may actually get some Republicans to join us.
COOPER: You said that the negotiations aren't real. Can you talk more about that? Why do you think that?
MURPHY: Well, listen, I saw the vice president, who seems to be the head of our negotiating team, go to Islamabad for 24 hours before he got bored and left. That's not how you negotiate a complex end to a war. You've got to sit at the negotiating table for weeks, if not months. Our negotiating team is being led by amateurs, whether it's the vice president or the president's real estate developer friends. There just aren't serious professionals sitting at the negotiating table.
And the problem is, Iran has enormous leverage right now. They believe they're winning the war. The regime is not endangered internally. And they are able right now to control the Strait and ultimately toll the Strait if they want. So it just doesn't seem that anything our side is doing is going to lead to a diplomatic solution anytime soon.
[20:35:00]
I want the ceasefire to hold. I don't want us to start military operations again. I would love a good diplomatic deal. I just don't see any signs that we're anywhere close to that.
COOPER: You mentioned -- The Washington Post reporting the Pentagon is sending thousands of additional troops to the Middle East. Do you think that's more of a threat gesture to back up stuff in any negotiations? Or do you think it signals an administration expecting a fight?
MURPHY: Well, the administration has been clear in closed-door briefings with us to leave the option of ground troops on the table. Now, we've already lost over a dozen Americans for a war with no point. If there are ground troops in Iran, even on Kharg Island, you're talking about hundreds, if not thousands, of American casualties.
I think the president is desperate right now. And you see him sort of making up new tactics on a day-to-day basis to try to get the Strait re-opened. This blockade he has started outside the Strait is an example of that. I worry that he's just going to compound one mistake with another, and it would just be an absolute nightmare to have U.S. troops back on the ground in the Middle East, having refused to learn our lessons from Iraq and Afghanistan.
COOPER: If this ends with a deal to open the Strait of Hormuz, unclear what Iran's role, if any, would be, if they would have essential control over it, as they have during this war. If all that gets out of this war is a deal on the Strait of Hormuz, is that anything accomplished?
MURPHY: Well, what a disaster that would be. Again, I want the war to end. My advice to the president is, stop the war right now. Let's reopen the Strait. But he should not be congratulated for that. That would be, again, over a dozen Americans dead, billions of dollars spent. And for what? Just to get back to some version of where we were before the war? By the way, prices are not coming down the minute the Strait is opened again.
So much of the energy infrastructure in the Middle East has been destroyed. And frankly, a lot of shipping companies are just going to be nervous to set foot back in the Strait in the early months, that prices are going to stay probably at $4 or more for a while. So, no, he should have never started this war.
He should end it immediately. It's going to take a long time for the global economy to recover. But he should not be congratulated if all that ends up happening here is the Strait is once again reopened.
COOPER: Yeah. Senator Chris Murphy, thank you.
Next, more on the reported influx of U.S. troops to the war zone. We'll get our panel's take on that and on Iran threatening attacks in another crucial waterway if the U.S. doesn't relax its blockade.
And later, the next steps for President Trump's proposed arch. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:42:04]
COOPER: Again, our Breaking News from the top of the hour. The headline from the Washington Post right now. U.S. sends thousands more troops to the Mideast as Trump seeks to squeeze Iran. Now, according to the reporting by The Post, this includes just over 10,000 new troops while the administration considers the possibility of new strikes or ground operations if the ceasefire doesn't hold.
Lots to talk about. Joining me here back in the newsroom is Kian Tajbakhsh, a former political prisoner in Iran who was released as part of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal. Also with us, Senior Global Affairs Analyst and Senior Fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Karim Sadjadpour, and retired U.S. Army Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt.
General Kimmitt, let me just start off with you. On the military front, the Washington Post saying thousands of additional troops. How do you think the Iranians would interpret that movement? What do you think they're there for?
BRIG. GEN. MARK KIMMITT (RET.), FORMER ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE FOR POLITICAL-MILITARY AFFAIRS: Well, I think the Iranians are going to look at that as an additional capability for the littoral area, the beach area of Iran, for either Kharg Island capability or for going down into the islands that control the Straits like Larak and the Tunb Islands.
I think what's more significant is the additional 90 aircraft, fighter aircraft that the H.W. Bush would bring.
COOPER: Karim, I want to ask you about the social media post from President Trump. He said, China is very happy that I'm permanently opening the Strait of Hormuz. I'm doing it for them also and the world. This situation will never happen again. What do you think permanently opening actually means or looks like?
KARIM SADJADPOUR, CNN SENIOR GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Well, Anderson, Iran is a country deeply beholden to China. About 90 percent of its oil exports go to China. And so as a result of this U.S. blockade, China is going to be deeply hurt if Iranian oil can't get to them. And I think he wants to enlist China's support here in helping to open up the Strait and getting it back to status quo ante. So it's no longer an Iranian waterway, but an international waterway.
COOPER: Kian, we haven't talked since these talks this weekend. What stands out to you, especially about what the vice president is saying, who led these talks?
KIAN TAJBAKHSH, FORMER POLITICAL PRISONER IN IRAN, FREED AS PART OF 2015 NUCLEAR DEAL: Well, I was very surprised to hear the vice president relate that he felt that he was sitting opposite the person, in his own words, that is running Iran. And I found that disturbing or concerning because we know it's not true.
The people who are running Iran, we know, are the four or five people we can name that are part of the old guard. They're not a lower layer. They're actually part of the original layer. And so I think at a time when there are so many questions in the American public and in the world about this war and what its strategy is and what the next steps are, I was surprised to hear this from the vice president because either it means that he, in a sense, is naive and was on -- you know, was unaware of what the power structure inside Iran is, or it was misleading.
[20:45:14]
And I think that we have questions about that.
COOPER: Karim, let me follow up with you on that. What do you make of what the vice president said and is the old regime still in power? I mean, is the new regime kind of some of the old regime?
SADJADPOUR: You know, Anderson, I think the administration believes that there is this emerging competition for top dog in Iran after Ayatollah Khamenei was killed. His son obviously has succeeded him, but nobody has seen the son. And there's, from the point of view of I think the administration, two emerging camps, those who want to continue with revolutionary defiance and those who recognize that the country is in dire economic straights and it needs to do a deal.
The two camps are kind of the so-called principlists, those who want to remain loyal to the principles of the revolution, and the pragmatists. And I think they're trying to empower those who they see as more pragmatic, including Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and, I think as Kian alluded to, it's going to be difficult for anyone in that system to suddenly reverse 47 years of revolutionary ideology.
COOPER: General, the operational command for Iran's armed forces, they've warned Tehran will not allow exports or imports to continue in the Persian Gulf, Sea of Oman, Red Sea if the blockade continues. Do they have the power to do that? I mean obviously, we have seen strikes at a number of ports throughout the region by them.
KIMMITT: First, I would agree with Karim, the fact is between the pragmatists and those that still believe in the principles of the Iranian revolution. It's clear the IRGC still has a power structure to be behind the scenes and it could well be increasing in their power I think the thing we don't talk about a lot with regards to the military power is the speedboat capability that's basically hidden along the beaches, the littoral of the Persian Gulf.
Speedboat is what knocked out and killed Americans in the USS Cole attack. They have developed their capability. These are Boston Whaler- sized ships that can attack American ships as well. The important thing to remember is they've got a lot of them. So all of them will attack. Maybe only five percent will get through, but that five percent of the speedboat capability, all of them armed with anti-ship missiles can do a lot of damage to the American fleet.
COOPER: The folks, Professor, who are negotiating with the U.S., I mean, are they the decision makers in Iran? Are they -- I mean, the complexity of these negotiations is not just the issues involved, but even just the makeup of the regime and even, I assume, communications amongst the various arms of the regime in Iran have got to be difficult.
TAJBAKHSH: Right. I mean, I think that we should not underestimate the fact that the regime is made up of a number of organizations. We hear a lot about the IRGC being, you know, obviously more upfront now. But the fact is, it is important to understand that the regime is also the judiciary and also the supreme leader's office and his key foreign policy advisers. We know who they are, they've been around for many years.
So the regime is not just simply the military. It is this multi- organizational kind of oligarchy. I mean, I think the issue about the negotiations, first of all, I was a little surprised that the vice president -- the United States vice president would -- you know, that the American delegation would send a rank of so high to meet with someone who is really a kind of third- or fourth-level politician in Iran.
COOPER: That's who they were meeting with?
TAJBAKHSH: That's who they were meeting with.
COOPER: A third- or fourth-level politician?
TAJBAKHSH: Yes. He is the speaker. He is the speaker of a Majlis, which is just a rubber-stamp parliament. And so he really has no official position in that respect. Obviously, he's connected to the IRGC. He himself is a former IRGC officer. But the reality is that I think that it was a mistake or he was probably misguided to have this very high delegation of the U.S. vice president meet with someone who is way below their rank.
And his claim that I think -- I mean, I think what worries me is that when he claimed that I was sitting opposite the person who was running Iran, I wonder whether that reflects just signaling for the American public or where it reflects a, what I would say, is a kind of poor understanding of the power structure inside Iran. We've gone through these negotiations for decades, in which people have been sent on the Iranian side, who are not equipped to make decisions.
[20:50:00]
And so, I think that it just throws more ambiguity at a time when we need more clarity.
COOPER: Karim, is that a concern of yours? Is that what's happening here?
SADJADPOUR: I think, Anderson, we know President Trump likes to personalize international relations. So when he's dealing with China, he's dealing with Xi. When he's dealing with Russia, he's dealing with Putin. He wants to find himself a Delcy Rodriguez in Iran. They believe that Ghalibaf is that person. You know, I share Kian's skepticism.
But I think, ultimately, what President Trump is trying to do is sharpen the choices for Iran, to say you can either have a big war, continuation of a big war, I'll send more troops, or you can have a big deal. And you notice this when President Trump is speaking, when he's speaking to Maria Bartiromo, he's speaking to the markets. He says the war is over.
You know, at the same time, he's sending the signal to the Iranians that the war isn't over. But I think his instincts are to want to do a deal. And they're hoping that Ghalibaf is the guy who can be their partner in Tehran.
COOPER: That's interesting. Karim Sadjadpour, thank you. Kian Tajbakhsh, thank you. General Kimmitt as well.
Up next, what the White House revealed today about the president's proposed grand arch. Also, Chef Jose Andres' World Central Kitchen and how the war may be impacting efforts to feed the hungry in Lebanon, Gaza, and other places around the world.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:55:38]
COOPER: Tomorrow will be a big day for a big monument to the president's determination to surpass the Arc de Triomphe in Paris, he says, by a lot. The announcement came at the White House today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: As you know, this year, we celebrate America's 250th birthday. In honor of this historic occasion, President Trump and the Department of Interior will submit plans for the United States Triumphal Arch, which will be an architectural masterpiece to celebrate our history right here in Washington.
Long after everyone in this room is gone, our children and grandchildren will remain inspired by this national monument.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: The masterpiece will go to the Commission of Fine Arts which, don't worry, the president has talked with loyalists. They call for a 250-foot-tall arch across the Potomac from the Lincoln Memorial. Some veterans groups say it will loom over nearby Arlington National Cemetery. Even the architecture critic who urged the president to build it says it should stand no taller than 60 feet.
Finally tonight, something more down-to-earth, an essential food in wartime. Chef Jose Andres is calling attention to the potential impact the Iran War may be having on the global food supply, particularly for the world's most vulnerable. He's the Founder of World Central Kitchen, which provides meals in disaster and conflict zones around the globe. He joins me tonight.
Jose, what kind of an impact are you seeing the war having on the global food supply?
CHEF JOSE ANDRES, FOUNDER, WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN: Well, what is going on right now is that everybody is talking about, fuel. Everybody is talking about the Strait of Hormuz, what is going on in Iran. And what we don't realize is that what goes through there, all those ships that carry the precious fuel is not only fuel to move our cars, our industries. Also, the Middle East is a very big producer and the Strait of Hormuz sees a lot of ships and what they are bringing is fertilizer. Fertilizer in the form of nitrogen.
Nitrogen is vital. And between 20 and 30 percent of the nitrogen will go through the Strait of Hormuz. Without that nitrogen, we will have a lot of countries in the world, including the United States, that will have a very difficult farming season over this incoming year.
COOPER: You're working in a number of places all over the globe right now. You've been working a lot in Gaza. What's the situation on the ground there now for your teams?
ANDRES: Well, already we are seeing that, for example, the price of rice has increased 30 percent. Because sometimes the markets are very reactive for what they foresee there may be a shortfall of certain crops in the month and years to come. So already we are seeing that, for example, meats, proteins, chicken, beef is already increasing 10 to 20 percent. And what we are very afraid is that those increases are going to continue.
Therefore, already we are in a shortfall of what countries are investing in humanitarian aid. With this increase of food prices, already everyone, including World Central Kitchen, we're going to have to start cutting in the output of food. In the moment that we need more food at cheaper prices to feed the hungry of the world, in many events happening around the world, including Gaza and Lebanon and other places --
COOPER: The way your organization, World Central Kitchen, works is you're mobilizing local restaurants, kitchens that already exist in places where things have happened, disasters or wars, and you're employing local people, cooks, to make that food. So if the food prices are higher in the local markets, that directly impacts, or is going to directly impact how much food you can make for people.
ANDRES: The issue is that a three, four, five percent increase in rich countries, America, Europe, it's something like families will suffer, but they'll get by. The same increases in very poor communities, in very poor countries, has a much bigger impact.
And it's the difference between being able to feed your family or going hungry, where it takes a lot of time to put the systems up and running again, putting the farms up productive again.
[21:00:00]
And with lack of certain fertilizers, we're going to have less output of food.
COOPER: Chef Jose Andres, World Central Kitchen, thanks so much.
ANDRES: Thank you for having me.
COOPER: That's it for us. The news continues. I'll see you tomorrow. "The Source with Kaitlan Collins" starts now.
