Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Artemis II Crew Returning to Earth After Deep Space Mission; Vice President Speaks on Fragile Ceasefire with Iran; Trump May Discuss U.S. Exit from NATO as He Meets with Its Chief; Oil Price Plunge, Markets Surge Amid Fragile Ceasefire. Aired 3:30-4p ET

Aired April 08, 2026 - 15:30   ET

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

[15:30:00]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Later tonight, the Artemis II crew is going to speak to the media as they travel back to planet Earth, now just two days away from splashing down off the Southern California coast on Friday night. This morning, they woke up to the sounds of Queen and David Bowie's iconic song, Under Pressure.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(DAVID BOWIE'S UNDER PRESSURE PLAYS)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Not a bad way to wake up.

Miles O'Brien is CNN's aerospace analyst and a science correspondent for PBS NewsHour and joins us now. Miles, great to see you. So, I mentioned that the crew is going to speak with the media.

They're also going to be speaking with the Canadian Space Agency tonight. One crew member, of course, Jeremy Hansen, is a member of the CSA, the first Canadian on a lunar mission. Help us understand how these two nations work together and have come together for a moment like this.

MILES O'BRIEN, CNN AEROSPACE ANALYST: Yes, there's a lot of history here, Boris. The Canadian Space Agency was involved very early days in the shuttle program and developed and built the robotic arm, which was instrumental and actually essential to the shuttle as it deployed satellites, including the Hubble Space Telescope. Fourteen Canadian astronauts have served in the NASA astronaut corps over the years, Mark Garneau being the first of them, Chris Hadfield famously on the International Space Station a few years ago doing ground control.

[15:35:00]

Speaking of music, by, you know, Ground Control to Major Tom, which was a fabulous video. And so, that theme. But ultimately, they punch above their weight, Boris.

It's an agency, the Canadian Space Agency is kind of lean and mean and has made a huge impact. And here they are on this lunar mission. And it'll be interesting to see what happens at the encampment on the surface and what their role will be.

SANCHEZ: Yes, no doubt. That's still a few steps away for the Artemis program. Nevertheless, a big moment for space exploration altogether.

I do also want to get your thoughts, Miles, on this moment, because everything so far has gone spectacularly well. But the toilet on board the capsule has been a nagging problem. And today, we finally got some much needed relief. Let's watch.

Oh, it looks like we had a glitch and now we've lost Miles O'Brien, unfortunately. As I said a day ago when we lost one of the former astronauts. It's tough putting together live TV. Imagine how hard it is to go out into space and go around the moon. It's quite an achievement.

Stay with CNN NEWS CENTRAL. We're going to be back in just moments.

[15:40:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: Happening now, Vice President J.D. Vance is taking questions about the fragile ceasefire in Iran. He was just asked about the apparent confusion over whether Israeli strikes against Hezbollah in Lebanon were included in the ceasefire agreement. Let's listen to that.

J.D. VANCE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Let me say a couple of things. First of all, I actually think and there's a lot of bad faith negotiation and a lot of bad faith propaganda going on. I think this comes from a legitimate misunderstanding.

I think the Iranians thought that the ceasefire included Lebanon and it just didn't. We never made that promise. We never indicated that was going to be the case.

What we said is that the ceasefire would be focused on Iran and the ceasefire would be focused on America's allies, both Israel and the Gulf Arab states. Now, that said, the Israelis, as I understand it -- again, I'm supposed to get a fuller report when I get on the plane -- have actually offered to be, frankly, to check themselves a little bit in Lebanon because they want to make sure that our negotiation is successful. That's not because that is part of the ceasefire.

I think that's the Israelis trying to set us up for success. And we'll, of course, see how that unfolds in the next few days. But look, if Iran wants to let this negotiation fall apart in a conflict where they were getting hammered over Lebanon, which has nothing to do with them and which the United States never once said was part of the ceasefire, that's ultimately their choice.

We think that would be dumb, but that's their choice.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Mr. Vice President, Iran is continuing to block the Straits of Hormuz. Do you have an expectation of when that strait is going to be open? VANCE: Well, we've already seen an increase in traffic today. Hopefully, we'll see an increase in traffic tomorrow. We actually think that we are seeing signs that the Straits are starting to reopen.

I think you guys have probably seen oil prices have come down. So I think the oil markets, the gas markets are seeing the same thing. But the president's been very clear.

The deal is a ceasefire, a negotiation. That's what we give. And what they give is the Straits are going to be reopened.

If we don't see that happening, the president is not going to abide by our terms if the Iranians are not abiding by their terms.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Mr. Vice President, Karoline Leavitt said you played a key role in these talks. Could you help us understand some details about that role? And do you think your well-known opposition to foreign wars generally was a factor that made you a key player in this?

VANCE: Well, I appreciate Karoline saying that. I mean, you know, my key role was I sat on the phone a lot. I answered a lot of phone calls.

I made a lot of phone calls. And again, I'm happy about where we are. I think the president has struck a good deal for the American people.

But fundamentally, the Iranians have got to take the next step, or the president has a lot of options to go back to the war.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you know if the Iranians requested that you join the talks?

VANCE: I don't know that. I would be surprised if that was true. But you know, I wanted to be involved because I thought I could make a difference.

And obviously, I think the people really on the ground doing the day to day negotiating are I've been Steve and Jared. They've done a great job. But we're going to keep on working this as a team, as we always have.

You know, Pete's been very helpful of the various military elements of this. Marco's obviously been extremely involved. We work as a team.

We work effectively. And, you know, yes, I've been on the phone a lot the past couple of days, but we're glad to be where we are.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Mr. Vice President, how is the United States accomplishing its stated objective of ensuring Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapon ever if they still have highly enriched uranium? And what's the plan to get the uranium out?

VANCE: Well, look, I mean, this is one of the things is going to be one of the main subjects of negotiation is that we want Iran to not be able to make a nuclear weapon. We want the nuclear fuel, which is something the president has made very clear. And again, the way to think about this is the United States has certain demands and certain things that we want.

The Iranians have things they can get out of the negotiation. The more that they're willing to give us, I think the more they're going to get things out of this negotiation. The president's talked about sanctions relief.

The president's talked about economic partnerships and things like that. That's not going to happen unless the Iranians make a firm commitment to stop anything close to the development of a nuclear weapon. And frankly, the president has all the cards here.

We've got a lot of leverage. We've got a lot of things that we can do. But right now, I think that we're in a good spot.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is the threat to wipe Iranian civilization off the map still on the table?

[15:45:00]

And is it fair to keep 90 million Iranians under that threat for the actions of their leaders?

VANCE: Well, look, the leadership is really to blame for the condition of the country in Iran. The president of the United States has made very clear that the United States has a lot of leverage here. We have economic leverage.

We've got military leverage. What he's trying to do is make sure the American people are safe and strike a deal that's good for the American people. Look, I encourage the Iranians to come to the table seriously.

We've seen some signs that they're going to do that. We've seen some signs of bravado. Fundamentally, we're in a good spot.

They're reopening the Straits. We have a ceasefire. And frankly, if they break their end of the bargain, then they're going to see some serious consequences.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But wiping them off the map is different than an economic leverage or military leverage. Why is that kind of language useful in this kind of scenario?

VANCE: Well, again, the president of the United States is saying that unless the Iranians do the right thing, he is going to have some serious consequences for the regime. We obviously don't want the people of Iran to suffer, but we have a lot of leverage the president of the United States could use, and it's why I think it's so important for the Iranians to be negotiators in good faith.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: OK. X has been abuzz the last couple of days with a free press story saying that senior Pentagon officials in January, including Rich Colby, brought Cardinal Pierre into the Pentagon. VANCE: Brought who?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Cardinal Christophe Pierre --

VANCE: OK.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: -- into the Pentagon.

VANCE: I haven't seen this story, unfortunately.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And essentially, the reporting by the free press is that they told him that the American military has a lot of might and they can do whatever they want, and the church should get on its side. Does that message sound correct to you? Is that something you would sign on to?

VANCE: So one, I, with no disrespect to the Cardinal, I don't know who Cardinal Christophe Pierre is.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He's the ambassador to the Holy See in the U.S.

VANCE: Oh, OK, OK. I've met him before. Sorry, I just didn't remember the name.

I've never seen this reporting. I'd like to actually talk to Cardinal Christophe Pierre and frankly, to our people to figure out what actually happened. I think it's always a bad idea to offer an opinion on stories that are unconfirmed and uncorroborated.

So I'm not going to do that.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: On the question of Iran's enriched uranium --

KEILAR: We'll keep monitoring this. But right now, President Trump is set to meet with the NATO secretary general in the Oval Office after the White House press secretary said this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: I have a direct quote from the president of the United States on NATO. And I will share it with all of you. "They were tested and they failed."

And I would add, it's quite sad that NATO turned their backs on the American people over the course of the last six weeks when it's the American people who have been defunding their defense.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: She's talking, of course, about NATO members rejecting the president's ask of helping with the Strait of Hormuz.

Now let's talk with former U.S. ambassador to NATO, Ivo Daalder. He is now senior fellow at the Harvard Belfer Center. He hosts the World Review with Ivo Daalder podcast. Ambassador, thanks for being with us. What do you think about what obviously Karoline Leavitt is signaling

there ahead of this meeting and what this indicates for how this meeting is going to go?

IVO DAALDER, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO NATO: Well, it doesn't bode well. I mean, in one sentence, three mistakes made. The NATO countries did not turn their backs on the American people.

The United States under Donald Trump decided to go to war against Iran without telling or informing, let alone consulting, the NATO allies that they were going to do that. The U.S. used U.S. bases in Europe in order to conduct that operation without interference, without any issue. Without those bases, the United States couldn't have conducted the war in the last five and a half weeks.

And so the question of whether NATO is an institution, which is a defensive alliance that has only once invoked its collective security provision, which was to defend the United States after 9-11, there's just so much wrong in what the president says that it's deeply worrisome. I do hope that Secretary General Mark Rutte can put the president right that NATO actually has been an incredibly supportive alliance of the United States. Well over a thousand people fighting in Afghanistan in order to support American security, died as a result of that.

And for the president to continue to say that NATO is a one-way street, that somehow NATO does not serve American security, let alone that NATO -- that the U.S. tax paper is the one that is funding NATO, all of that's wrong and it's just not -- it just really doesn't help the situation that we're in right now.

KEILAR: Of course, you know, his reference point is normally himself, right? For his term in office and how he sees NATO serving that versus how NATO may have served America in the past. And Leavitt said that Trump may discuss withdrawing from NATO.

Are you seeing this as any different from past rhetoric that's anti- NATO coming from the Trump administration?

[15:50:00]

DAALDER: I do. I mean, clearly the rhetoric has ratcheted up. I mean, Donald Trump has never liked NATO for as long as he's been talking about NATO for the better part of three or four decades.

He believes wrongly that NATO is a burden rather than a benefit to the United States. All of his predecessors disagree with him, back all the way to Harry S. Truman, who of course was president when the North Atlantic Treaty was signed 77 years ago.

But the rhetoric has changed. The rhetoric is now talking about withdrawal in a way that even in the first term didn't happen, although there were internal discussions about this. And more worrisome even than what the president is saying, because we know the president's view, is that Marco Rubio, the Secretary of State slash national security advisor, is now also raising questions about NATO. The same alliance that in 2023 when he was in the Senate, he said, and got the Senate to agree, that no president should ever be in a position to withdraw from NATO, which is why he sponsored and got approved an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that says the president cannot withdraw from NATO without two-thirds of the Senate's approval. And yet this same Marco Rubio is now raising serious questions about NATO.

Secretary Hegseth, when asked whether the United States will fulfill its commitment, Article 5, which by the way, every NATO country did on 9-11, refused to answer that question. So yes, I think we're in a dire strait. We're in a situation which I've characterized as the worst crisis NATO has faced in 77 years.

KEILAR: Obviously a lot hanging in the balance for this meeting. Ambassador Ivo Daalder, thank you so much for being with us.

DAALDER: My pleasure, Brianna.

KEILAR: This just in, oil prices have just dropped below $95 a barrel for the first time since early March, but don't expect relief at the pump anytime soon.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: We're just moments away from the closing bell on Wall Street. Stocks surged today on news of this two-week ceasefire and hope that transit through the Strait of Hormuz would resume.

KEILAR: But major questions remain as Iranian state media reporting all oil tanker traffic through the critical waterway will be halted, citing Israel's attacks on Lebanon.

CNN's Vanessa Yurkevich is with us now. Vanessa, how are the markets reacting to all of the news today?

VANESSA YURKEVICH, CNN BUSINESS AND POLITICS CORRESPONDENT: Yes, well, U.S. markets have been really up for the whole day. If you look at the Dow right now, up above 1,000 points, closer to 1,200 points, 1,300 points there on your screen. This is investors breathing a sigh of relief.

Robert Edwards, the chief investment officer of Edwards Asset Management, put it this way in terms of where investors' minds are. He said, "Just the scent of thawing tensions is enough for forward- looking stocks to keep climbing the wall of worry." And that is what you are seeing right now on Wall Street.

As stocks move higher, oil prices move lower. Oil prices at their low, the single biggest day drop since 2020 in April. That is dramatic.

So we have oil markets down more than 15 percent on the news of this ceasefire. U.S. crude trading, last time I checked, about $95 a barrel coming off those triple-digit highs. There you go, 96, 96 for international and U.S. crude right there. That is good news. Oil prices, of course, though, it's 50 percent above where oil prices were at the start of the war.

Now, for gas prices, ticking up yet again, up 2 cents in just the last day, 4.16 a gallon, up 10 cents in the last week, up more than 70 cents from a month ago. The good news is that gas prices will fall eventually, just not as soon as many consumers would like. That is because gas prices lag oil prices anywhere from one to four weeks. So we could start to see a stabilization, then a 1 to 3 cent drop per day, and then ultimately there on your screen, a 7 cent to 15 cent drop per week, according to Patrick DeHaan at GasBuddy.

Of course, consumers want to be able to feel the relief right away, but at the pump, it's going to take at the minimum a couple of weeks for that to happen. As long as, guys, this ceasefire holds and there's no escalation.

SANCHEZ: And it's not just at the pump. A number of different companies in different sectors have put forward news that they were going to have to raise prices, including Delta's CEO today saying that ticket prices are expected to rise because of jet fuel costs. What more did he say?

YURKEVICH: Yes, so Delta says that already in the first quarter, airfares have risen by about 6 percent, and he does expect that they're going to have to raise prices through the end of the year as long as these higher prices in the oil markets and at the pump remain. That is because jet fuel prices have been double what they were before the war. Now they're about $4.81 a gallon compared to before the war, $2.50 a gallon. So JetBlue and other airlines try not to raise airfares, doing that a little bit, finding other ways, adding $10 fees to check baggage to try to make up for these price inconsistencies.

But JetBlue, but excuse me, Delta saying that they were expecting a $2 billion impact from fuel costs. That's before this dramatic drop in oil prices. So that could change. But it just shows you the direct impact, not just at the pump, but on these companies who are having to make major decisions about these price increases.

KEILAR: All right, Vanessa Yurkevich, thank you so much. And "THE ARENA" with Kasie Hunt starts right now.

END