Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Live Event/Special
CNN "Town Hall: War With Iran." Aired 9-10p ET
Aired March 20, 2026 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[21:00:50]
DANA BASH, CNN HOST: Good evening.
Three weeks since the United States and Israel struck Iran, Americans are grappling with the consequences of this escalating conflict.
Welcome to a "CNN TOWN HALL: WAR WITH IRAN." I'm Dana Bash in New York.
And, as we speak, thousands more American Marines and sailors are headed to the Middle East. Gas prices are surging, up almost $1 a gallon since the war began. And America's closest allies are concerned about the endgame.
Tonight, Americans will get the opportunity to directly question the Trump administration about the war, how it's being fought, and what it means for them. We will be joined by the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Mike Walz. He -- Waltz. Excuse me.
He is a decorated former Green Beret who previously served as national security adviser during the start of President Trump's second term. He's also a former member of Congress. Later in the hour, we're going to be joined by a panel of experts.
Now, to find our questioners, we reached out to political and business groups, universities and other civic organizations. Our audience is made up of Democrats, Republicans and independents, bringing a wide range of views about this war and how it's affecting their lives.
Tonight's participants will be asking their own questions. Now, you may see them holding a piece of paper with their question on it. It is a question they wrote, and it has not been edited in any way by CNN.
Now please join me in welcoming Ambassador Mike Waltz.
BASH: Hello.
MIKE WALTZ, U.S. AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED NATIONS: Thank you. Hi.
(APPLAUSE)
BASH: Nice to see you.
WALTZ: Good to be with you.
BASH: Please have a seat.
WALTZ: Yes, thank you.
BASH: Thanks for doing this.
WALTZ: Sure.
BASH: I do want to start with what today is. And today is Nowruz. It's the Persian new year. And there are about 300 million people who are celebrating and marking this day around the world.
In Iran, they're doing it in the shadow of war. What's your message to them on this day?
WALTZ: You know, it's interesting you ask that, Dana.
My wife, Julia, who's here with me tonight and also a combat veteran, and I just had dinner with a group of Iranian Americans just a few days ago. And to hear, one, them talk about their relatives, they all knew someone who had just been massacred in the recent protests, where the Iranian regime literally machine-gunned their own people in the streets, to the tunes of 20,000, 30,000, maybe even 40,000 people in the span of 48 hours.
So it wasn't a celebration, even though it normally is. But they all held up -- held out hope. They were nervously excited about the opportunity for Iran that sits before us, that this regime that they call the invaders -- and these were from across our political spectrum, but all Iranian Americans, this regime that has repressed Iran, repressed girls and women, exported terror all over the Middle East, killed Americans, held us hostage.
God forbid, I mean, these were Iranian Americans saying they could never, ever -- President Trump is absolutely right. These genocidal killers can never have a nuclear weapon, much less we see what the terror that they're reigning on the world today.
Here was the hope they held out. They all fought long and hard about the possibility of celebrating Nowruz back home, back in their homeland, in a free Iran, where they hoped that their relatives and the Iranian people have the courage, despite all that they have suffered, to once again take their own country back.
They also understood our limited objectives, in terms of they can't have a nuke. We have to destroy their missile capability. We have to destroy their ability to support terrorism. And so I was pleasantly surprised at the level of understanding, the level of hope, but also the real sadness, given what the regime has done to its own people.
BASH: Ambassador, let's get straight to the audience.
WALTZ: Sure.
BASH: Because we have a lot of questions tonight.
[21:05:01] I want to go to Michael Gianino -- Gianino. Get professional soccer player -- at least he was -- I think he's retired now -- from Staten Island, a member of the New York Young Republicans who currently works as a constituent liaison for a New York City councilmember. Michael.
Michael.
WALTZ: Hi, Michael.
MICHAEL GIANINO, CONSTITUENT LIAISON: Hello, Ambassador Waltz. It's a real honor to speak with you tonight. Thank you for taking the time to be here with us this evening.
WALTZ: No, thank you.
GIANINO: So, my question is, how does U.S. involvement in Iran correspond with stated commitments to prioritize national interests under the idea of America first and avoid entering new military conflicts?
WALTZ: Yes, thanks.
Oh, it's a great question. One of the things that we should be very clear on is how consistent President Trump has been in terms of Iran never having a nuclear weapon. He said it in his 2016 campaign, his 2020 campaign, his 2024 campaign.
I could tell you, having been in the Oval Office with him, he always seeks to give diplomacy a chance. He is a president of peace. He is seeking to end wars all over the world. In this case, this is the ultimate for endless war, in the sense that it's been going on for 47 years, since Jimmy Carter, where they attacked us and killed our Marines in Beirut.
They killed over 600 American soldiers, where my wife served, in Iraq, maimed and destroyed and killed so many lives, held Americans hostage until just recently, are actually holding Americans hostage right now as we speak.
So, he said, finally said, enough is enough, after giving diplomacy a chance both last year and this year. And when it became very clear that the ayatollahs were not negotiating in good faith, had no intention of giving up their aspirations for a nuclear weapon, I'm thankful he finally took bold action.
By the way, not only is he trying to end this forever war. He's trying to end the war between Ukraine and Russia. He ended a 30-year conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia, plus eight other conflicts, and now to represent us at the U.N., where it's completely within America's first principles to give diplomacy a chance, to try to resolve things peacefully, but also to back up that diplomacy with real strength.
Thank God he rebuilt our military in the first term.
BASH: Ambassador, I do want to ask about what the president just this evening posted on social media. He said the U.S. is considering -- quote -- "winding down military
efforts," but that -- quote -- "The Hormuz Strait will have to be guarded and policed as necessary by other nations who use it." And he added: "It will be an easy military operation for them."
So is the president now saying that it will be solely up to U.S. allies to protect the strait and the U.S. is not going to be involved?
WALTZ: Well, I think another key -- just going back to that first question, another key aspect of an America first principle is burden sharing.
We have seen the reforms that the president put in place with NATO, where you now have every country finally contributing the bare minimum. You have them actually looking to double that and go from 2 percent to 5 percent of their GDP towards defense.
So, I think what -- the point that the president is making there is, actually 80 percent of the oil that comes out of the Persian Gulf goes to Asia. The rest, almost all of it, goes to Europe. Only 7, 8 percent comes to the United States.
And thank God for his energy policies that are making us increasingly energy-independent, everything from a pipeline in Alaska that will be opening, to the exports of clean American gas that's going on...
BASH: That said -- that said...
WALTZ: ... to what's coming in from Venezuela, I just think it's -- the energy component of this, it's incredibly important.
BASH: Yes. No, you're right. I mean, the U.S. is probably in better shape than other countries, which I know -- understand is his point.
WALTZ: Sure.
BASH: But what I'm trying to understand is, what was he trying to say in this post?
Because he seemed to suggest that the U.S. is not going to be involved militarily in trying to secure the strait, that it's up to these other countries, even though the other countries were not involved in the initial role and operation.
WALTZ: I think, as he said repeatedly, that other countries need to help.
Thankfully, the Japanese prime minister, during her visit to the Oval Office, just offered the assistance of the Japanese navy. France, the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy and others just said that they're going to stay involved.
BASH: But the U.S. will stay involved?
WALTZ: And, I mean, we are pounding them. Our great U.S. military is pounding their missile and drone capability right now as we speak. And I do expect that the straits will clear up.
We always knew that they would try to hold the world's energy hostage with their drones and missiles. I think we just need to take a step back and think about what they would do with a nuclear weapon.
[21:10:12]
If they're doing this with drones and missiles, if they're hitting hotels, ports, resorts, airports, the civilian infrastructure that they are hitting and the civilians that they are attacking actually was just not only condemned in the United Nations by the Gulf Arabs, 135 -- that was a U.N. record, Dana; 135 other nations also joined the Gulf Arabs in condemning the Iranians.
And you know what? The Chinese and Russians could have vetoed, and they chose not to, because they know Iran is isolated, it's wrong, it's genocidal, it's terroristic. It can never have a nuke.
BASH: I want you to meet Hollie Mazzocchi...
WALTZ: Hi, Hollie.
BASH: ... who is a retired military officer from New York, a Democrat who is studying for a master's degree.
Hollie.
HOLLIE MAZZOCCHI, STUDENT AND RETIRED MILITARY OFFICER: Good evening.
I was wondering, what do you think that it would take for President Trump to agree to not put boots on the ground in Iran?
WALTZ: I couldn't quite hear you. What?
MAZZOCCHI: What do you think that it would take for President Trump to agree to not put any boots on the ground in Iran?
WALTZ: Well, look, we have the Marines that are out there.
The Pentagon's job -- and Secretary Hegseth is doing a fantastic job, along with Chairman Caine, Dan Caine -- is to provide all options to the president, a trained, ready and in-position force.
I don't think anybody should expect this to look anything like we saw in -- back in 2003, two decades ago, with a massive invasion. I think that's a lot of misinformation that's out there. But he could always retain a very limited capability.
I'm a former special operator. They have the capability to go and take WMD in a very targeted way. There are other options on the table. But I think, if President Trump could avoid that, he absolutely would. If we can do this and degrade those capabilities from the air and from the sea, that would be the preferred option.
BASH: But you're -- you're not ruling it out?
WALTZ: Oh, I'm not ruling it out. I would never be in a position to rule that out for the president.
BASH: Well, but you're...
WALTZ: But, as the commander in chief, he should always have all options on the table.
And I think, frankly, one of the flaws of the Biden administration is, he told the world and told our allies -- told our adversaries what he wasn't going to do.
BASH: The mission in Iraq versus what is happening now, there's a huge gulf between those. Isn't it possible to have boots on the ground in a way that is not as aggressive as what happened with the Iraq War, but still do it?
WALTZ: Look, I think the president could always retain the option to take very limited, very targeted actions.
If you look at how he has applied military force, whether it was Operation Midnight Hammer last year or bringing Maduro to justice, it has been in and out, lightning fast, and achieved immediate results. And that's been his -- I mean, that's been the way he has approached this since day one.
BASH: Yes, I understand, but you know better than I...
WALTZ: And I -- this is not the Bush administration, by any means.
BASH: Well, and you know better than I this is also not Venezuela.
WALTZ: Sure.
BASH: So, look, there are a lot of people probably in this room and watching around the country who are concerned that this is going to escalate, and boots on the ground is a big, big thing for them.
What is your message to them?
WALTZ: Look, here -- not only is that how President Trump has operated. This isn't just rhetoric from me.
This is the results he's achieved in multiple different operations, but you also have a Cabinet that is full of veterans of the wars of my generation, of our generation, the endless wars that my wife and I served in, Lee Zeldin at EPA, Pete Hegseth at Defense, General Caine and others, that understand that you have to have very clear objectives, that you can't have policy drift.
And I have zero doubt that this will be something that is targeted, focused and achieves the results, that what we have to have and what he has been clear about is, Iran will not have a nuclear weapon.
BASH: I just want to just push you on this...
WALTZ: Yes. BASH: ... because I want the Americans out there listening to you to really get a clear message about what the expectation should be about boots on the ground.
WALTZ: I think the message is and has to be that the president has all options as commander in chief. He has laid out very clear military goals.
And I would never be one to get ahead of him or get ahead of his options as commander in chief. However, he has a very clear record of achieving decisive results with decisive action.
[21:15:03]
And, in the case of all the rhetoric out there about endless wars, this is a war that has gone on, the Iranian regime has been at war with the the United States for nearly 50 years. And I'm thankful that he is no longer going to kick the can. He is not going to leave this for our children or grandchildren, that he's going to take care of this issue once and for all.
And we have to keep in mind, Dana, that this is the same regime that tried to assassinate him, that had terror cells right here in the United States. One of them was just convicted in Brooklyn, a Pakistani by the name of Asif Merchant, that were recruiting operatives to assassinate the president of the United States. And he was arrested the day before the Butler shooting. So this is a diabolical regime that -- that we have to take care of.
BASH: OK. I want to bring in somebody else from the audience.
WALTZ: Sure.
BASH: Sathvik Ganesh, who is an analyst at a bank here in New York and an independent.
SATHVIK GANESH, BANK ANALYST: Nice to meet you, Ambassador. My question for you is, as the Iran war continues, how will energy markets and crude oil prices be impacted?
WALTZ: Will be what, I'm sorry?
GANESH: How will energy markets and crude oil prices be impacted?
WALTZ: Well, look, we've seen those prices increase. It's the Iranian strategy to sow chaos in all directions, to attack its neighbors, to attack energy markets, to attack infrastructure, and try to hold the world hostage so that -- so that it can survive. What we have in a commander-in-chief is someone who weighed those risks. And we've seen our secretary of treasury announce a number of measures to bring those prices down and to keep that under control, but to weigh that risk versus the risk of Iran having a nuke that it could literally hold the entire world hostage.
And one thing that I think isn't getting fully appreciated, if Iran ever tests a nuclear weapon, then you're going to have potentially Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Turkey, the -- you know, in terms of how does this impact the security of -- of everyday Americans, if we have a Middle East awash now in nuclear weapons and a nuclear arms race, that's something that should scare every one of us. It can never happen. And President Trump's not going to let it happen.
BASH: His question was about the pain that Americans are feeling at the pump. Now it's almost $4 a gallon. It's up a dollar. Just...
(CROSSTALK)
WALTZ: No, I understand his question, Dana. But...
BASH: But -- no, no, but...
WALTZ: ... he's weighing that versus...
BASH: No, no, I understand...
WALTZ: ... you know, this nightmare scenario.
BASH: I understand, my question is -- is...
WALTZ: And as commander-in-chief, you have to weigh those risks.
BASH: My question is prospective, how much higher do you think Americans should brace for the price of gas to go?
WALTZ: Well, I think you can expect what the president has laid forward, that this is -- and the secretary of the treasury, this is going to be weeks, not months. We've had our energy secretary, our secretary of treasury, and others put measures like insurance for shipping in place so that they feel more comfortable putting those ships through. We'll continue to, as the president says, drill, baby, drill right here at home, unleashing cleaner American gas, an all-of- the-above energy strategy. We're putting nuclear in place.
There's no doubt Iran's strategy is to drive those prices up to cause economic pain so that they can survive and then continue their march towards terrorism and a nuclear weapon. We're going to defeat that strategy. And I think the -- the military is doing a fantastic job.
BASH: I have to ask about something that just happened tonight. The U.S. lifted sanctions on 140 million barrels of Iranian oil. The U.S. lifted sanctions on Iran. So just to be clear, the administration is now allowing Iran, the country that it is at war with to sell its oil, make money, and almost certainly use that money in its war against the U.S. Why?
WALTZ: Dana, I think you have to tell the rest of that story. That's a -- that's a little bit misleading.
BASH: Please.
WALTZ: The -- the measure is targeted towards oil that's already out there on ships, already out there in storage, and to the previous question, is very temporary to allow -- to basically defeat the Iranian strategy of driving energy prices so high, causing pain on consumers all the way, you know, all over the world so that...
BASH: And money will go into their coffers?
WALTZ: So that -- well, that -- that -- much of that oil and that illicit oil is already out there. It's already out there in the system. So we're going to allow it to go in a temporary basis to some of our allies like India, Japan, and others. So that this strategy from Iran, the Iranian regime, doesn't work.
And by the way, this is a president who put maximum pressure on the Iranian regime in his first term. It was lifted by Biden, in this, you know, Iran deal 2.0 attempt, that -- that Biden put in place. President Trump, as his second national security measure, put that maximum pressure back on. Their currency is tanking. Their foreign currency reserves are tanking. The thing the regime cares about the most is control and, you know, its money. And so no one can accuse President Trump of not putting maximum pressure on not only this regime, but on the Russian -- on the Russian economy as well.
[21:20:42]
BASH: Ambassador, we're going to sneak in a quick break.
WALTZ: All right.
BASH: More very soon here in New York, CNN's "Town Hall: War with Iran." Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BASH: Welcome back to our CNN "Town Hall: War with Iran." U.N. Ambassador Mike Waltz is back with us. And we're going to get straight to the audience.
I want you to meet Ismail Sharif, a labor and employment attorney, a Democrat from Philadelphia.
[21:25:02]
ISMAIL SHARIF, LABOR & EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEY: Good evening, sir.
WALTZ: Yeah, good evening.
SHARIF: After our initial strikes on Tehran, are we confident that Iran's nuclear program is substantially weakened or destroyed? And if not, what further actions is the administration willing to take to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran?
WALTZ: Yeah, great question. And we've all heard the president say we obliterated, our amazing B-2 stealth bombers, Operation Midnight Hammer, a year ago struck their underground facilities and did obliterate their ability to enrich uranium. So there's multiple components to a nuclear program. The key piece I think is important for everyone to understand, is that there is no reason to enrich uranium past 3 percent, essentially to the point where Iran had enriched it at 20 and even 60 percent, unless you want a weapon. There literally is no country in the world that enriches to that level, but doesn't end up having a nuclear weapon. And we know that they had every intention to move in that direction.
So that capability was obliterated, but they were seeking to rebuild it. They were going right back to their same old habit. So that piece, plus the ballistic missile piece, which we are now degrading, destroying not only the existing missiles, but their ability to manufacture. Here's the key piece, is some of their enriched uranium that was really ready to go, to the point of having 10 nuclear weapons, as -- as discussed with our special envoy and negotiator, Steve Witkoff, they refused to give up. They refused to ship it out to another country, to destroy it, to get rid of it.
And once that became very clear, President Trump decided that they are not negotiating good faith. They do not -- are not giving diplomacy a chance. And that's -- those are the pieces that we still need to take out. I've entered into discussions, as have Special Envoy Witkoff and others, with the U.N. agency, the IAEA, the International Atomic Energy Agency, that has specialists and technicians that can get in on the ground and handle this stuff. But we've got to create the military conditions that they can do that.
BASH: OK. Well, that's where I was going to go. Can the U.S. and Israel end this war as long as Iran even has the slightest possibility of access to supply of enriched uranium?
WALTZ: Well, that's ultimately a decision for the -- for the president. But he's been very clear that I think he just said it tonight. They can't even be anywhere close. So it's destroying all of those capabilities. But I think what we'd like to see is an Iranian government that swears off any desire to go to that, to go towards a nuclear capability and allows full verification, allows these inspectors to come in anywhere, any time, like many other countries do around the world, to ensure that if they have a peaceful nuclear program or whatever they have, that its not being weaponized to then terrorize the world.
And by the way, Dana, it's important, that's not just us. I'm at the U.N., and the entire world has been passing resolution after resolution, sanction after sanction for over 20 years, saying Iran can never have a nuke.
BASH: I want to go to Maribeth Affeldt-Smith. She is a retired Army colonel from Wappingers Falls, New York, who works at the Veterans Health Administration and is a Republican.
WALTZ: Fellow colonel.
MARIBETH AFFELDT-SMITH, WORKS AT VETERANS HEALTH ADMINISTRATION: Yes, sir. Good evening, sir. Thank you for being here and thank you for taking my question.
WALTZ: Sure.
AFFELDT-SMITH: So as ambassador, sir, I'm just wondering what you think is the greatest risk to our American interests right now. And I'm also curious to know, when you go to bed at night, what's the one thing that keeps you awake?
WALTZ: Oh, wow. Well, I'll say a risk that often gets overlooked is the risk and the cost of inaction. And I think we've seen too many administrations that have kicked the can on this problem. All things that have terrorized us and our allies in the Middle East have ultimately come from Iran: Hezbollah, Hamas in Gaza, the Houthis using our ships and global shipping as target practice in the Red Sea, the militias in Iraq that have attacked our soldiers, killed several, and attacked us to the tune of hundreds and hundreds of missiles and drones under the last admin -- under the last administration, all have emanated from Iran and from this regime that seeks to export its extremism and export its revolution, and importantly, has taken American after American hostage.
[21:30:02]
This president isn't going to send in pallets of cash. This president isn't going to enter us into a bad deal. He -- he did give diplomacy a chance. But he finally said, Dana, enough is enough. And so in terms of -- of keeping me awake at night, we have a young son. She let me name him Armie. So, "Go Army" has a whole new meaning in the Waltz household. I don't want to see these problems passed on to the next generation. I don't want to see, Dana, whoever replaces you one day, having this same town hall talking about these same problems over and over again.
And what I love about President Trump is he is seeking to end these wars, to tell the country and the world the hard truths, to demand that we share the burden with our allies and to finally bring peace.
And one can only imagine -- I mean, we just had dinner with a Venezuelan American who is so excited about the possibility, finally, of peace in Venezuela, a free Cuba, maybe even a free, but certainly a nuclear free Iran.
We have to think about the positives that that President Trump with his peace agenda can set for the world.
BASH: I would imagine -- 13 service members who lost their lives, 200 who have been injured. You're a combat vet.
WALTZ: Yeah.
BASH: You I'm sure think about that as well.
WALTZ: Absolutely.
BASH: There are thousands of marines and sailors headed to the region now.
WALTZ: Sure.
BASH: Does that keep you up at night as well?
WALTZ: Oh, look -- anytime we have another Gold Star family, it weighs on me. I know it weighs on the president. He writes everyone, as does the first lady, personally.
I wear one of these bracelets for one of my Green Berets that I lost.
I also think about the 600 American soldiers that were killed by Iranian-made IEDs and in Iranian attacks in the past, the 243 marines.
So, I know these brave men and women, if they believe they've got a mission to finally end this problem and prevent any future deaths, that they're going to -- they're going to do that mission to the absolute best of their ability. And they're willing to take that sacrifice.
And we all should be thankful for them.
BASH: We definitely are.
I want to turn to Santiago Porras Ruiz. He is a full-time college student who also works as a waiter here in New York and active in local Democratic politics -- Santiago.
SANTIAGO PORRAS RUIZ, WAITER AND COLLEGE STUDENT: Hi. Good evening.
I'm a waiter at a local restaurant in Queens, a full-time college student who sleeps an average of four hours a night and is still thousands in debt.
How is a war in a country half the world away funded by the taxes, pulled from my check, helping me in any way?
WALTZ: Yeah. It's -- look, it's a -- it's a valid, and it's a tough question.
I know for certain, and if we just look at the, the things the president has put in place in terms of housing and big corporations that are buying up whole neighborhoods, the tax cuts that he extended with the Big, Beautiful Bill, the energy policies that we're putting in place to not only make us self-sufficient, but to, you know, lessen these dependencies and lower prices, even lowering prescription drug prices -- the president's absolutely focused on what you're seeing day in and day out that's affecting your pocketbook.
At the same time, as commander-in-chief, he has to weigh the risks and make the tough decisions facing some hard truths. We cannot have a world with a genocidal terroristic regime that holds not only your generation, but the next generation hostage with nuclear weapons.
And, you know, those are the tough calls that the American people elected him to make. And I can tell you, having worked very closely with him, he doesn't back off his red lines, and he doesn't enter us into -- into bad deals.
But those are tough decisions, no doubt. And I know they're top of mind for the entire administration.
BASH: We're almost out of time.
My last question for you is, how do you define victory in this war?
WALTZ: Well, I define it the way the president, Secretary Rubio, Secretary Hegseth have defined it in that, you know, we have an Iran that cannot threaten its neighbors, and cannot threaten us with its nuclear weapons, with its terrorist proxies, with its ballistic missile fleet, with its drones, that it's not only using against us and our allies, but shipping to Russia that its been using against Ukraine.
[21:35:04]
We can't -- we can no longer tolerate an Iran that's terrorizing the region and terrorizing the world.
And what's been so interesting, being at the U.N., Dana, is we're seeing our Gulf Arab allies say enough is enough. And 135 nations join them. I think you're going to see additional action in the coming weeks.
They're just not going to put up with it anymore. And neither should we. And I think we should be grateful that President Trump's taking this decisive action.
BASH: Ambassador Mike Waltz, thank you so much for being here --
WALTZ: All right.
BASH: -- and taking these questions. Appreciate it.
WALTZ: Thank you. Thank you all.
BASH: And we're going to be right back with more from our CNN town hall, "War With Iran," next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BASH: Welcome back to our CNN town hall, "War With Iran".
We are joined now by our panel of experts: CNN global affairs analyst and former special presidential envoy for the Global Coalition to Counter ISIS, Brett McGurk; CNN national security analyst and former deputy director of national intelligence, Beth Sanner; and Lieutenant General Mark Schwartz, former deputy commanding general for the Joint Special Operations Command.
Thank you all for being here.
We have another several great questions coming your way. The next is from Jannelle Andes, who is a director of partnerships at a live event company, an independent from Metuchen, New Jersey -- Janelle.
[21:40:08]
JANNELLE ANDES, WORKS IN LIVE EVENTS: Thank you so much.
Which allies are likely to help the U.S.? And what type of support can the U.S. realistically expect?
BRETT MCGURK, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: It's a great question. It's a very fair question.
One thing about any endeavor like this is it's great to have partners and friends, and like the comparative advantage of the United States is that we actually have those partnerships around the world.
I've built coalitions. It is hard work. I thought Ambassador Waltz was a very effective spokesman for the administration position. He's been working in the U.N. to build out this potential coalition.
But here's why it's hard -- we went into this without building that groundwork with our partners and friends, and it's hard to kind of do it while you're in the middle of the mission.
But you asked what -- what countries? So, I'll just give you a very tangible example about if we have to build a naval coalition, say, in the Straits of Hormuz, Strait of Hormuz, which is in the news today.
We had a coalition in the Red Sea when Iranian missiles were closing down a very critical passageway there. We had Denmark, we had the U.K., we had the Netherlands. We had a number of countries with us.
And then in parallel, we had the E.U. and France, and working in parallel in a different mission.
So, I'm very hopeful that those types of allies can join this very important endeavor, because we're going to need them. We're really going to need them for the -- for anything that we gain here to be sustainable.
LT. GEN. MARK SCHWARTZ, U.S. ARMY (RET.): Yeah, I think you're going to see several European allies come to be part of this maritime coalition. What Brett's referring to is Prosperity Guardian, which was the task force that was put together to, you know, fend off the freedom of navigation and the Houthis' threat to freedom of navigation in the Red Sea and the Bab-el-Mandeb.
There's been other maritime task forces that U.S. Central Command that's in charge of this, you know, this theater of operations on behalf of the president and the secretary of defense. I think they -- because of the longstanding relationships, even though there is some, you know, tentative participation at this point -- I think we will see as we gain more effective targeting over the course of the next coming days into the Strait of Hormuz, we're going to see other -- other nations join.
MCGURK: I would just add, this is really hard work. Every capital, every country has to make their own political decision. They have their own legal standards.
It takes hard time staking -- painstaking diplomacy. It's very difficult to do.
BASH: Beth?
BETH SANNER, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Well, I think it's -- you know, no one's going to go in there until there is a much safer environment. There's a reason that the U.S. Navy also isn't conducting this mission right now, because they're busy doing other things.
So, we are not at this point. And I think that every day that ticks by, you add the weeks that it takes to put something like this together. We're talking, you know, quite a long time now before we will see this happening.
And the chances are that when it starts, something bad will happen and it will fall apart for a minute, and then we'll have to get it back going again. It's not going to be smooth.
BASH: General Schwartz this next question is for you. I want you to meet Jackson Cutrone.
He's a student at Fordham University from Ulster Park, New York, also a member of the Fordham College Republicans -- Jackson.
JACKSON CUTRONE, STUDENT: Thank you.
Good evening, General Schwartz.
You have recently cautioned that removing the Iranian leadership will not stop the regime's ideology. And if we are not aiming for regime change, but the current leadership is fundamentally hostile towards the U.S. and our allies, what is the middle ground for this situation? And are we prepared to live with a weak but still fundamentalist Iran?
SCHWARTZ: Well, first off, my -- one of my mentors in the military, John Mulholland, lieutenant general, retired, went to Fordham. So, when I heard you attend there, I immediately thought of him. So that's great.
So, I think that, given the fact that the religious ideology within, you know, the current regime in Iran, the depth of that ideology that runs through every part of their civil society and their security services, their intelligence services. I do believe it's going to be very difficult.
So, absent of putting a significant force presence on the ground to try to enable the removal of the current regime, I don't believe we can do it to -- even though we've been very effective at going after the top leadership thus far. And that's mainly been done by Israel, obviously with our intelligence community certainly enabling that as well. There's still a lot to go.
And I just think that it -- it's a -- it's a challenge that we have. I think going forward several weeks from now, what I've said all along that I think at some point, we're going to have to come to some form of negotiated settlement with, you know, whatever is left of the regime.
And also relying on some partners out there that may have influence with the regime that potentially we could partner with -- you know, with -- the United States could partner with to try to get to some type of a situation where there's not only tolerance for what -- who's in charge there, but also that we don't see the actions that have been taken against the population, the slaughter of thousands that we saw in January. And we want to prevent that from happening again.
[21:45:24]
BASH: Well, on that note, I mean, this, I think is -- is one of the areas where the U.S. goals and the Israeli goals really diverge. The prime minister of Israel said very clearly yesterday that the goal of Israel is to create a condition on the ground that would allow for regime change. And basically what he's saying is make them so weak that the people can rise up.
SANNER: Right.
BASH: How can they rise up without communications, without guns, without money?
SANNER: Without organization, without a leader, all of these things. I mean, I think this is the conundrum and it's such a good question because, you know, now that we're in this, like we're -- we -- I don't think any of us here would have gone in the way that we did. Not that we don't support this end goal. I mean, everybody wants Iran to be free, right?
But just like the -- the conundrum of like, oh, the middle ground is that we have to do a deal with literally the devil. These people who have mowed down their own population in order to check off the boxes, what did -- what did Ambassador Waltz say today? He said, we just want to make sure that they don't have these things, military, nuclear, you know, able to project this power. Well, how do you get there? Do you get there through decimating and making chaos or regime change, which none of us think is, you know, high on the likelihood or do you get there because you've gotten so far and then you have a negotiation?
So I think that all of us here are really struggling with this question on, what does this look like? How do we get there? Because it's not a straight line. And maybe, like a lot of revolutions, you don't get there in round one. That whoever takes over in Iran will be so weak and so beset with the economic problems that they had multiplied by God knows how much from all the destruction, maybe they will be too weak to survive in the long run. But I think it's a lot to expect in round one.
MCGURK: I have to say, I hope you saw the protests in January and December. The young -- the young population of Iran, they're inspiring, the women of Iran, the people taking to the streets. They want a new system. That is a critical mass of the population in Iran. And my heart is with them. And we want to see the end of this system. But I've also negotiated with the hard line of this regime. The Revolutionary Guards, I've been across the table from them, they are prepared to use force against their own people to stay in power. They say it.
And so unless you have a real unraveling, which you might have, I think they -- they are prepared to use violence against their own people. But I do hope eventually, as Beth just said, the forces of history, ultimately, regimes like this crack, and I'm hoping eventually we see that. But it is not going to come soon, in my view.
BASH: Yeah, and obviously the people who rose up in January, tens of thousands of them were slaughtered.
MCGURK: Exactly.
BASH: So...
SANNER: Mm-hmm.
BASH: Let's go back to the audience. I want you to meet Elizabeth Brady. Beth, this is for you. She's a paralegal and a member of the Manhattan Young Democrats. Elizabeth?
ELIZABETH BRADY, PARALEGAL: Hi, there. My question is, what measures do you anticipate the administration will take to insulate everyday Americans from the impact of this conflict? And what measures would you personally recommend.
SANNER: To insulate?
BRADY: Yes.
SANNER: At this point, the sad story is that there is not -- there aren't a lot of tools by -- that the administration has, that the president has to limit the amount of pain that we're feeling. I remember, I was giving a talk during the Biden administration when people were complaining about the high price of gas. And I said, you know, there's not a lot that the president can really do here. And I got a lot of frowns and -- and literally people shaking their heads no in the audience. But today, I think that perhaps they were on a different political spectrum and that's what they thought about Biden. But I think it's the same about Trump. I think it's about the same about all presidents.
So what they're trying to do right now, I think, are, you know, just like little, little, tiny things that, you know, make it seem like they're doing something. The Jones Act, you know, in order to improve shipping, this idea about the Iranian -- taking the sanctions off Iranian and Russian oil. But that is not going to increase the number of barrels really on the market. And so it won't significantly lower the price. And it's not enough. Just like the release of the Strategic Petroleum Reserves, it takes too long over too much of a period of time, and it's just not enough.
There's only one way to solve this, and that's opening up the Strait. And that's, I think, why all of us, you know, are talking about how can we figure out a path to that. But that really requires, in my mind, degrading Iran so much that they can't launch even an occasional drone and can't do the fast boats and can't do the mines. And honestly, I -- I have a lot of trouble thinking that it's not -- it's going to work.
BASH: We're going to sneak in a quick break. We're going to be back very soon with more from our CNN "Town Hall: War with Iran."
[21:50:34]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:54:28]
BASH: Welcome back to our CNN "Town Hall: War with Iran." We have a question that is for all of you. I want you all to meet William Atkins. He is graduating this spring from Seton Hall University and is chairman of the local Republican Group. William?
WILLIAM ATKINS, STUDENT: Hi, thank you all for being here. What would success actually look like in this war? And what evidence would show the U.S. is moving toward it, rather than just widening the conflict?
BASH: Yeah, go ahead.
MCGURK: I think -- it's a great question. And frankly, if you're going to go to war, and this is a war, I think you have to be straight with the American people and level on exactly what we're trying to achieve. And what is trying to be done here, and you heard it from Ambassador Waltz are -- you actually can measure it. You want to destroy the defense industrial base of Iran. That is what produces the missiles and all the component parts that has allowed Iran to develop a missile program that is a strategic game-changer in the region and even globally, and drone program. And they fire those missiles at us. They fired those missiles at our ships. They've killed American troops with this. They proliferate to Russia. So that missile and drone program has to be destroyed. That's a military objective.
[21:55:42]
The nuclear is a key military objective. But that, I'm actually unclear how they're going to do this, because there's about 1,000 pounds of highly-enriched uranium buried, much of it in Isfahan, which is in the middle of Iran. And how you actually get at that is still an unanswered question. You also want to go after the command and control so at the end of this Iran is a much weaker country, it's not able to project power outside of its borders.
And why that's important is that Iran has a philosophy. Its written into their strategic code. Not only do they protect the revolution inside, the Revolutionary Guards, they -- they expand the revolution. They export the revolution abroad. That's the Quds Force, which you might hear about. And if they are unable to do that and they're internally focused and weakened, I think you have potential here to come out of this in a better place. But that -- there's a long way to go from here to that point. And Iran has not given up.
SANNER: And let me add to that, one of the other things that Ambassador Waltz mentioned was the terrorist threat, right? That -- that Iran, you know, since really Beirut, I think, was the first huge thing. Of course, the hostages at the American embassy in 1979. But really this projection of terrorism. And now we also have cyber and other ways that they can project that. I -- I think that's much, much harder to get rid of. So it's an easy line, but it's a -- it's an important one. It's a fair one, right? That -- that the -- the administration is completely right in saying that Iran is this threat. I mean, the Iranians tried to kill President Trump twice. But will they stop at the end of this war? I would argue that actually that threat is one or that goal is one that actually could get worse in any case, because now its fatwa season, folks. I mean, this is...
BASH: It's not just about money and finances.
SANNER: This is about revenge. So we should...
SCHWARTZ: Yeah.
SANNER: ... be prepared for that...
SCHWARTZ: Sorry, Beth.
SANNER: ... as Americans. No, go ahead.
SCHWARTZ: Yeah, just on the -- you know, on the proxies that exist that are funded by Iran is, I think all of you know here, extremely difficult to continue to go after. And, you know, what I saw with President Trump when he came in, the decisiveness of which he, you know, went after the threat of Houthis, you know, in Yemen, going after our maritime shipping, the -- the decisiveness by which he supported the release of the hostages in Gaza. And now you can, you know, debate about Gaza and how the war, you know, played out, et cetera., and where we're at today. But that decisiveness, that leadership was -- was absolutely essential.
And one of the challenges I see as a national security, you know, career military person is that you've got to have consistent policy and action, not just yourself as the United States, but with your allies and partners in the region where those threats emerge. And so that's something I'm going to be watching even beyond this conflict, is, how do we -- how do we continue to keep the pressure on and working with our regional partners, our -- our Gulf allies, specifically, to address this threat that -- that exists now.
Because we're right now laser-focused on what's going on in -- going on in Iran and obviously in southern Lebanon with -- you know, with Hezbollah. But...
MCGURK: I'd add one thing...
SCHWARTZ: ... this -- this can continue.
MCGURK: If this ends with Iran in control of the Straits of Hormuz, which is the -- the artery of the global economy, that's a very bad outcome. Because then you have actually degraded everything they use for deterrence, but they've actually demonstrated that they can hold the whole world hostage. And that's why there's so much focus now on the Straits of Hormuz. But that is also -- to Beth's point, that is going to take a long time to resolve.
SANNER: Yeah. BASH: How long?
MCGURK: I mean, to build a coalition, to Beth's point, that's weeks at least. And militarily until you can actually degrade all that, I would assume we're talking a period of weeks. I mean, we...
BASH: So weeks upon weeks.
MCGURK: Well, we're four to...
BASH: Months.
MCGURK: They said four to six weeks in the beginning. We're at three weeks. I would -- I would assume, I'm just making an assumption of looking at this problem, at least three weeks. I just -- I hate to put -- I don't like putting time frames on these things, but...
SANNER: And the idea, too, what you're getting at, Brett, is that there are a number of analysts who have been looking at this for a long time, who are talking about the idea that Iran will control the Strait no matter what happens. And it will become kind of like the Houthis taking a toll, like if you want to, you know, get through the Strait. Because the idea that we're going to have military forces escorting ships in the Strait of Hormuz forever is, we can't do that. Other countries can't do that. It's too much to do it effectively.
And so Iran broke a protocol, a norm, and now the world will never be the same because of that. And so I think this is why this idea of, is it OK just to check off nuclear missiles or whatever, or, and this is where Israel and the Gulf states are, do you really need to try to have regime change? And this is why they're arguing for that. I think the problem that I have with this is I don't know how to do that. I don't know how that works. But I get the point.
BASH: Thank you all for being here. Thank you for answering questions.
Thank you.
And also, I should say thank you to Ambassador Waltz.
Thank you to our audience. "NewsNight with Abby Phillip" starts now.
[22:00:57]
