Return to Transcripts main page

The Brief with Jim Sciutto

CNN International: Trump Says Iran Has No Plans to Carry Out Executions; Some Personnel at U.S. Base in Qatar Urged to Leave; Denmark: Fundamental Disagreement Remains with U.S. on Greenland; Germany, Sweden and Norway to Send Troops to Greenland; Immigrant Visa Crackdown; Witkoff Announces Phase Two of Gaza Ceasefire Plan; Iran's Airspace Closed to Most Flights; ISS Astronauts Returning to Earth. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired January 14, 2026 - 18:00   ET

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

[18:00:00]

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR, "THE BRIEF": Hello and welcome to our viewers, joining us from all around the world. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington, and

you're watching "The Brief."

Just ahead this hour President Trump says Iran now has no plans to execute prisoners, but he'll watch and see before taking military action off the

table. Denmark's foreign minister says there is still a fundamental disagreement with the U.S. over Greenland after a visit, an intense meeting

at the White House, and four astronauts are on their way back to Earth from the International Space Station because of a medical issue with one of

them.

We begin though with the unrest in Iran. President Trump says he was told that Tehran has, quote, "no plans for executions of protesters." The State

Department had previously announced that Iran could execute Iranian protester Erfan Soltani. You see him there today. A family member and a

rights group based in Norway say the authorities have postponed his execution.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: We have been informed by very important sources on the other side and they've said the killing has stopped and the

executions won't take place. There was supposed to be a lot of executions today and that the executions won't take place and we're going to find out.

I mean, I'll find out after this, you'll find out. But we've been told on good authority, and I hope it's true.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Trump cautioned he has not taken military action off the table just yet. Just a few hours earlier we learned that the U.S. is evacuating

some personnel from U.S. base in Qatar, it's the largest in the region, as a, quote, "precaution."

A U.S. base rights group says that at least 2,400 people have been killed, more than 18,000 arrested since those protests began some two weeks ago. A

nationwide internet blackout has now entered its seventh day. It's made it hard to get information from the ground including on casualties.

Kristen Holmes is live at the White House. Kristen, I wondered, did the president explain who convinced him that executions have been postponed and

should we look at this just as a temporary delay then in U.S. military action?

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, and from talking to White House officials, they are saying that right now it's wait

and see. They are of the mind that this could not be an end to the killings, as President Trump said, that he heard on, quote, "good

authority." That was President Trump's word.

Now, he was asked specifically multiple times as to how exactly he knew that these killings had stopped, yet there was not going to be an execution

or any executions today, and he said that he heard it from good sources on the other side. As you noted, it's hard right now, particularly for media

organizations and really anyone who's trying to follow this, to get correct information out of Iran because of this blackout that we've seen.

So, unclear who exactly it is that President Trump and his team are talking to. I will note that on Tuesday of this week, President Trump seemed to be

ruling out any kind of diplomatic relations with Iran at all. At one point, he said that he was canceling any meetings that he might have had with

Iranian officials because of the continuation of the killing of protesters. So, again, that part is unclear.

Now, when it comes to military action, we know President Trump and his team have been considering a wide range of options, and one of the things that

we were reporting earlier today, this is what we were told by U.S. officials, is that President Trump felt that he had some obligation or an

obligation to make a decisive choice on taking action when it came to Iran because of the fact that he himself had set a red line, and he is very

aware of what we have seen in the past when presidents set a red line, that red line is crossed, and then they don't actually act.

Now, this, of course, will give President Trump some space to determine what exactly he wants to do, despite this red line theory going on, saying

that they've stopped the killing, so now they're taking a breath to wait and see what action they're going to actually take.

One of the things that they've considered, of course, is these kinetic strikes. In addition to that, they were talking about potential strikes on

security groups that were helping kind of enforce the crackdown on protests. They were talking about cyber-attacks, and this has been an

ongoing conversation. President Trump's team had been really split on the idea of kinetic attacks -- or kinetic strikes.

[18:05:00]

And one of the things that we have been assured by the administration from top to bottom is that any kind of action that the United States takes will

not include boots on the ground. But of course, you're already hearing a lot of pushback from President Trump's base and from Americans in general

who don't want to see the United States involved in another country, in another country's issues.

They want President Trump to be focusing here at home, which, of course, again, is something President Trump himself ran on when he ran for

president.

SCIUTTO: Let me ask you this, though, Kristen. Has the administration made clear or even attempted to explain whether military action would be

intended just to somehow punish the Iranian regime, or is the intention to somehow bring it down? And if it's the latter, have they explained how it

would do so exactly?

HOLMES: No, they haven't. And it seems as though, from President Trump's rhetoric, that the idea of a military strike or military action would be

some kind of punishment to Iran for the killing of protesters, which President Trump has repeatedly warned against. In terms of what this would

look like down the road, that is why people have a lot of concerns about getting involved.

And one of the things that they are weighing, and of course is going to be incredibly important for the U.S. troops and for Americans abroad and for

Americans here at home, is this idea if the benefits outweigh the risks. Because we've already heard from U.S. intel, or at least it's been

indicated, that the Iranians are coming up with their own options to retaliate, to strike against U.S. troops in the Middle East.

So, that's, of course, one of the things that they're weighing as well. Are we going to get into a back-and-forth of strikes with the Iranian regime,

which is not something anyone wants?

SCIUTTO: Kristen Holmes, we know you'll keep watching closely. Thanks so much.

Well, in 2009, Iranian-American journalist Roxana Saberi was jailed in Iran on alleged espionage charges. International pressure led to her release

after some 100 days behind bars. She continues to follow events in Iran very closely, and she joins us now. Roxana, thanks so much for taking the

time.

ROXANA SABERI, IRANIAN-AMERICAN JOURNALIST AND JAILED IN IRAN IN 2009: Thanks for having me, Jim.

SCIUTTO: So, first, I wonder, what's your best sense as to what protesters in Iran think of the possibility of U.S. military action? Do they support

it? And if so, to what end? Do they believe it might help bring down the regime?

SABERI: All of the Iranians I've been in touch with, Iran would support some kind of U.S. military action in Iran at this point. I've heard that

there are a minority of Iranians who do not want such a thing. And of course, the elite Revolutionary Guards, the hardcore supporters of the

supreme leader would not want that. But the Iranians that I've been in touch with say, what is taking so long? We need help. We can't stand up to

this regime on our own.

So, many people went out into the streets to protest peacefully after President Trump warned the regime leaders that he would take action if they

killed peaceful protesters. People -- many people took that warning seriously, and they went to the streets, and they said these people were

massacred.

And what do they want to happen? You know, Jim, I don't know if a lot of Iranians have thought through, like, analytically or clinically, what kind

of strike is necessary to happen. But what they want, what many of these people agree on, is that they want the end of this regime and the overthrow

of the supreme leader and the opportunity to choose their own government and live in a free and democratic society.

SCIUTTO: As you know, it's not the first time Iranians have taken to the streets, often at great risk to themselves. There were protests in 2009,

which I covered. There were, of course, the protests more recently after Mahsa Amini's death.

One of the protesters that you spoke to in one of your pieces on Iran said, we didn't stay in the streets, but this time we will. Why is it that they

believe this one will be more lasting, that this protest movement will be more lasting?

SABERI: You know, that was shortly before the blackout began in Iran. The regime imposed this communications blackout last Thursday, and she was one

of the people we spoke with. That night was the bloodiest night that we know of in terms of regime repression and the killing of protesters.

A lot of Iranians have felt that this time would be different because they feel their regime is weaker. After the 12-day war with Israel last year,

they feel their country is more isolated than ever. Across socioeconomic classes, you've seen people going to the streets, the protests starting

with the Bazaari merchants who are traditionally hardcore regime supporters, but spreading to the middle class and the upper classes, and

across the country to all 31 provinces.

[18:10:00]

I think a lot of people also, as I mentioned, had faith that President Trump might actually, or his threats would mean something to the regime,

that maybe they wouldn't kill so many people if they came out to the streets because of these threats from President Trump.

SCIUTTO: You've heard from doctors that there is pressure on them not to even treat injured, wounded protesters. There's, of course, the media

blackout, which is quite deliberate, right? Because they don't want these images of the dead to make it out of the country. Is that crackdown

working?

SABERI: It is, to some extent. Of course, I talked to one Tehran doctor. He said, you know, doctors are still going to do what they have sworn an

oath to do. They're going to treat people who need it. But there are doctors who have been intimidated into turning away patients.

I mean, hospitals have actually been given orders not to treat wounded protesters, and some protesters have reported being turned away, trying to

get treatment on their own, in their own homes, or going across the border if they can. There have been also makeshift hospitals, like secretive

hospitals. For example, one doctor made one in a garden, and they brought in their own surgeon and equipment to try to treat patients, because some

have been detained. And we've also heard reports of corpses of protesters being confiscated.

SCIUTTO: Good lord. I mean, you even shared how there were folks just reaching out to doctors to get advice on how to treat the wounded

themselves. I wondered, given that you were wrongly imprisoned by this regime, as you watch this now from outside the country, how do you feel

personally, to see people rising up in the streets now against the Iranian government?

SABERI: It's so many different emotions, because I've been trying to report on it as much as possible and share stories and these graphic videos

of these piles of bodies of protesters of all ages killed at the hands of the regime. I've kind of tried to keep my emotion out of it, but it's very

difficult, of course, because these are, you know, people from my father's homeland, a place where I lived for six years, a place where I still

identify with, and I hope I can go back to one day.

And they're human beings, and they just want the same kind of freedoms that many of us enjoy, and they can't do it. Many of them feel they can't do it

on their own anymore. They've tried, they've died, they've been massacred, and they say they need help.

SCIUTTO: They do indeed. And the death toll rising. Roxana Saberi, thanks so much for sharing accounts from the ground.

SABERI: You're welcome.

SCIUTTO: Well, top Trump officials met with the foreign ministers of Greenland and Denmark today, even as the U.S. president continues to ramp

up his aggressive claims on the island.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: If we don't go in, Russia is going to go in and China is going to go in. And there's not a thing that Denmark can do about it, but we can do

everything about it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: It was a tense meeting, a lot of anticipation and build up. A Danish diplomatic source told me that behind closed doors, officials were

actually cautiously optimistic that the meeting could have gone a lot worse. Publicly, however, those two ministers struck a hard line.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LARS LOKKE RASMUSSEN, DANISH FOREIGN MINISTER: Ideas that would not respect territorial integrity of the Kingdom of Denmark and the right of

self-determination of the Greenlandic people are, of course, totally unacceptable. And we therefore still have a fundamental disagreement, but

we also agree to disagree and therefore we will, however, continue to talk.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: European leaders don't appear to be taking any chances. Germany, Norway and Sweden all announced that they would send military forces to

Greenland for what they called an exploratory mission.

Nic Robertson joins us now from Greenland's capital city, Nuuk. First, Nic, as you speak to members of the public there, are you finding that the

president's harsh rhetoric and repeated demands are solidifying Greenlanders' opposition to whether it's annexation, invasion or even just

a closer association with the U.S.?

[18:15:00]

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: There's a definite sense in Greenland, and we got this from the prime minister of Greenland

yesterday, that's existed from Greenland, from Denmark towards the United States. There's a definite sense in Greenland, and we got this from the

prime minister of Greenland yesterday, saying that Greenland is part of Denmark and there's no need to think about it any other way.

There is an independence movement here. They are divided about how to handle this current situation. They are united in their decision, though,

to handle it one way, and that is very clearly to say that they do not want to be part of the United States. They do and see their best option with

Denmark at the moment.

So, I think in that sense, you know, what President Trump has done is accelerate perhaps the narrative of independence, but solidify that

independence does not involve the United States. So, he's pushed them away economically, he's pushed them away emotionally, and I think that's

significant.

I think what you heard from the Danish foreign minister today was an annunciation of the deep gulf that remains, this significant disagreement

that exists that has pushed the can, if you will, a little bit down the road. So, these exploratory missions by the German military, the Swedish

military, the Norwegian military coming here.

What the Danish foreign minister has been able to do is buy diplomatic time to begin to solidify how NATO, how its European allies should respond to

President Trump. I think it is significant, however, that -- this big difference and gap -- clear difference and gap remains. I think the foreign

minister has been very articulate. He's a well-respected diplomat, a tough negotiator. He clearly will have put his views across and heard the views

from J.D. Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, but he's also very skilled in explaining to journalists the best sort of picture, and I do get

that sense from Danish diplomats that they are putting a good face and picture on this but the hard reality is nothing significant has changed

other than at least Greenlanders don't have to fear, in theory, for the next couple of weeks, a possible hard option, as President Trump has termed

it, and Denmark gets time to bed in and align with allies and find a more coordinated NATO position.

SCIUTTO: Yes, we'll see. Nic Robertson in Greenland, thanks so much. Well, joining me now is a former prime minister of Sweden, Carl Bildt. Thanks so

much for taking the time.

CARL BILDT, FORMER SWEDISH PRIME MINISTER AND CO-CHAIR, EUROPEAN COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: Pleasure.

SCIUTTO: As I speak to Danish diplomats and Greenland diplomats, they are hoping for some sort of off-ramp, but I think it's fair to say they don't

have a lot of hope, right, that at least for now there is an off-ramp, that they're aware that the president's position, at least, is a line in the

sand here. Do you see any potential off-ramp?

BILDT: I don't see anything of that sort at the moment, and no one expected that either. There was fundamental disagreement, as was said at

the meeting today, hardly surprising, but they are buying some time. They're trying to take down the temperature of the conflict, because it is

a conflict, take down the temperature somewhat, and then hope that there will be some sort of opening or some sort of change in the U.S. position.

I don't think there will be any movement on the Red Lions that was set down very firmly from the Danish and the Greenland side, but whether that will

happen, that is anyone's guess, uncertain at best.

SCIUTTO: So, you have several European nations now sending some forces to Greenland, sort of an exploratory force. What is the function of that? Is

the function of that to show that NATO is taking Greenland security seriously?

BILDT: Well, I think the function is more to demonstrate support for Denmark. It is individuals, it is small units, it is not something that is

of a sort of forceful military character, but it's a demonstration of also military support for the Danish position, and should be seen as such.

I think we should see more of that. I think that will be the intention to move this into the discussion more and more into the sort of framework of

NATO, also in order to be able to diffuse some of the wild rhetoric from the American side on the Chinese and Russian ships all around Greenland.

There's nothing of the sort.

But if you take people who actually know the issues and have them sit down and discuss the issues, there's a hope that that will bring somewhat more

of a sense of reality to the discussion on the American side.

[18:20:00]

SCIUTTO: One thing that's quite clear when I speak to Danish and Greenland diplomats, and you heard it quite clearly from the Greenland prime minister

yesterday, is that their answer to American acquisition of Greenland is a flat-out no, that it's a non-negotiable position for them. Now, Trump is

saying quite the same thing, at least from his perspective here.

What are potential outcomes then? Can you see a situation where Trump just claims it somehow by, who knows what, executive order and deploys some

forces, and then Denmark deploys its own and says no? I mean, what are the -- where can this end, eventually?

BILDT: Difficult to see, but I hope that one in Washington will start to think through the consequences. I mean, in terms of security and military

arrangement within NATO, virtually everything can be done in order to beef up together, with Americans and with Danes and with others, the defense of

Greenland as far as that is needed.

But then, I mean, this is a small, fragile society. It is highly integrated with Denmark. A third of the Greenlanders are living in Denmark. The entire

economy, I think 90 percent of their foreign trade, is with Denmark and the European Union. The Greenlanders are citizens of the European Union. They

have all of the rights. They have the welfare states of the Nordic states.

I think the Americans or the White House need to think through the consequences of unravelling all of this, how it could be done. I think it

would be a nightmare, even apart from the very profound international ramifications it would have.

SCIUTTO: As you know, Sweden and Finland recently made the decision to join NATO, you know, after years of holding deliberately -- quite

deliberately, to some neutrality, with the expectation that this would protect theirs and Europe's security better from the threat from Russia,

China, et cetera.

Given that now you have a U.S. president, in effect, threatening a NATO ally and perhaps the alliance itself, is NATO not fulfilling what Sweden

hoped for by joining the alliance?

BILDT: It was certainly not on their map when we joined NATO, they thought that the U.S. president was going to sort of threaten our neighbor with

invasion. That was not foreseen, to put it in the very, very mild ways.

And the fear we have is, of course, not only the fear for the consequences of cooperation within NATO. The fear is, of course, that this might, of

course, give an idea to President Putin. He has already said that he has violated the territorial integrity of Ukraine. He might well feel tempted

to grab some territory in the Arctic. And there are places more adjacent to Russia that he might be tempted to grab. I don't think there is any

possibility or any capability even for neither the Russians or the Chinese to invade Greenland. But there are other areas that he could certainly feel

that he can grab. If Trump can do it, Putin can do it.

SCIUTTO: Where exactly? Where might those territorial targets be?

BILDT: Well, Svalbard, which is part of Norway and not that far away from Norway is an obvious example. There are -- if you want to really speculate

the position of Iceland, I don't think it's going to happen, but I mean Iceland. Iceland has a far more strategic position than Greenland, by the

way, also from the Russian point of view. Also part of NATO. Doesn't have any defense forces, by the way, at all. All the defense commitment by NATO

is there.

So, if you start to play around with sovereignty and territorial integrity in the Arctic, nasty things could start happening. And so, far, it's a

stable place. So, far, it's a fairly low-tension place. So, play around with this, I think is unadvisable, to put it in the mildest possible ways.

SCIUTTO: Yes. Quite diplomatic language. Prime Minister Carl Bildt, thanks so much for joining.

BILDT: Thanks.

SCIUTTO: Still ahead, the Trump administration's new push to further limit legal immigration to the U.S. People from dozens of countries will soon

find it harder to get a U.S. work visa or even to join their family in the U.S.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:25:00]

SCIUTTO: Welcome back. In today's Business Breakout, a second straight day of losses on Wall Street with tech falling 1 percent. Mixed earnings from

major U.S. banks weighed on sentiment. Along with brand new U.S. inflation data, the U.S. reported that prices on the wholesale level rose at a

greater than expected 3 percent annual rate in November. Prices rose on a month-over-month basis as well. Also, today, gold and silver prices hit

fresh records due to geopolitical uncertainty, including the crisis in Iran.

The Trump administration announced today it will stop processing immigrant visas from 75 countries. Citizens of Brazil, Nigeria, Pakistan, Russia, and

dozens of other countries are affected. This is just the latest move by the Trump administration to limit legal immigration into the U.S. It comes

after the administration enlarged the list of countries affected by its travel ban late last year. Look at the map there.

Today's action does not include student and tourist visas. That said, the American Immigration Council says roughly one in five people seeking to

immigrate to the U.S. are now barred from doing so.

Jennifer Hansler joins me now. Jennifer, of course, the administration ran on stopping illegal immigration, but what we're seeing here is a broad stop

from dozens of countries of legal immigration. What justification is the administration providing?

JENNIFER HANSLER, CNN STATE DEPARTMENT REPORTER: Well, Jim, they are doing this under what was not a very commonly used part of the immigration laws

here in the U.S. It's called the public charge provisions of the INA. Basically, they accuse immigrants coming from these 75 countries of being

more likely to become a burden on U.S. taxpayer resources. The administration has not given any data to back up these claims that these

immigrants from these countries are more likely than any other immigrants to become public charges. However, this is the rationale they are using for

this massive expansion of this list.

We heard from State Department spokesperson Tommy Pigott, who said that they were going to be using their longstanding authority to deem ineligible

potential immigrants who would become a public charge and, quote, "exploit" the generosity of the American people. So, this is part and parcel of this

administration's anti-immigrant policies and anti-immigrant rhetoric.

This is a significant expansion, though, Jim. I mean, 75 countries is a huge swath of the world, and this applies to immigrant visas. So, people

who might be coming here to join family members, coming here from jobs in these 75 countries, their applications are no longer going to be processed

for the indefinite future.

[18:30:00]

This is going to go into effect, according to a U.S. official, next week on January 21st. And they said this is going to remain in effect as they

continue to re-evaluate their processing of these immigrant visa applications.

Now, this, of course, comes amid a broader swath of other policies that have stopped people from coming to the U.S. However, this does not apply to

tourist visas. There was a lot of concern, for example, that this could hit people trying to come to the U.S. for the World Cup this summer. This would

not apply to applications to come here for that event. But this is going to keep even more people from coming and immigrating to this country.

SCIUTTO: Reuters reporting some countries are announcing now reciprocal travel bans on U.S. citizens. Right now, the countries of Mali, Burkina

Faso. Does the State Department affect this to expand more broadly?

HANSLER: They haven't really given a thought on this, but I don't think they're overly concerned when they're making this policy. You know, they

are looking to have people facilitate travel for people that they think are useful or eligible for coming to the U.S., but they have not really talked

about facilitating travel for American travelers abroad here, Jim.

SCIUTTO: Thanks so much, Jenny. Appreciate it. Well, checking some of today's other business headlines, U.S. retail conglomerate Saks Global has

now filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. The firm, which includes Saks Fifth Avenue, Neiman Marcus and Bergdorf Goodman, has had a hard time paying back

its debt. It's one of the largest retail failures since the pandemic. Saks says all its stores will remain open for now.

Dozens of U.S. advocacy groups are demanding that Apple and Google pull Elon Musk's X and Groc from their app stores. The group's expressing

outrage over a flood of sexual images of women and minors produced and posted online by xAI. X has limited its image generation tools to paid

subscribers and appears to have put in some further privacy guardrails.

China announced today that its trade surplus with the rest of the world hit a record last year. It soared 20 percent to one point two trillion dollars,

the largest such figure ever recorded by any country. China's trade with the U.S. has fallen due to the president's tariffs, but Beijing made up for

it by shipping more to other countries.

Trump administration has now unveiled what it says is phase two of the Gaza ceasefire plan. We're going to have the latest on Steve Woodcock's

diplomatic drive, his expectations for Hamas and what's actually moving forward.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:35:00]

SCIUTTO: Welcome back to "The Brief." I'm Jim Sciuto. And here are the international headlines we're watching today.

U.S. President Donald Trump says he was told that an Iranian protester the regime was holding will no longer be executed. For now, the president said

the killing is stopped in Iran. He did not provide any evidence as to how he made that judgment. Earlier, the U.S. State Department had said Iranian

authorities planned to execute 26-year-old Erfan Soltani on Wednesday. A family member says authorities have postponed the execution, not canceled

it.

Denmark's foreign minister says there is still a fundamental disagreement with the United States on Greenland. He and his counterpart from Greenland

visited the White House today, meeting the U.S. vice president and secretary of state. President Trump continues to insist that the U.S. must

and will take over the island. Now, Denmark, Germany, Sweden and Norway are sending troops there.

At least 32 people have died, dozens injured after a construction crane fell onto a moving train in Thailand. The train derailed after impact and

then caught fire. The crane was being used as part of a high-speed rail project in the country's northeast. An investigation is now underway.

The Trump administration has revealed what it says is the second phase of its plan for Gaza. On X, Special Envoy Steve Witkoff wrote that the U.S. is

moving from ceasefire to demilitarization, technocratic governance and reconstruction. He added that Hamas is expected to comply with its

obligations, including returning the final deceased hostage that it holds.

On the ground, the numbers are telling a tragic story. The U.N. says at least 100 children have been killed in the enclave since the ceasefire went

into place. Close to 100,000 children are suffering from malnutrition.

Joining me now is Aaron David Miller, senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, longtime diplomat in the Middle East.

Thanks so much for joining, Aaron.

I wonder, Steve Witkoff says we're into phase two, but there are a lot of elements of phase two that just frankly haven't happened yet, one of which

is one of the more difficult ones, disarming Hamas. But also, where is the International Stabilization Force? I mean, is this an announcement or is it

actual progress?

AARON DAVID MILLER, SENIOR FELLOW, CARNEGIE ENDOWMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL PEACE: Thanks for having me, Jim, and happy new year. Look, I think Gaza

is a heavy lift. I think this is largely performative, and it's colliding with two or three basic realities on the ground. Jim, Gaul may have divided

-- may have been divided into three parts, according to Julius Caesar, but Gaza right now is divided into two. The Israelis control 53 plus percent,

Hamas the rest.

And this -- as long as there is no demilitarization, decommissioning of weapons in the Hamas zone, then the odds of moving this forward are slim to

none, and slim, I think, frankly, had already left town. If there is activity, and there will be, it will be in the Israeli zone. I wouldn't be

surprised if some International Stabilization Force, at least numbers of certain countries, end up deploying into that Israeli zone. Maybe the

Israelis can undertake some performative withdrawal. The Emiratis have stepped up and wanted to basically create a 20,000-person Palestinian model

community in Rafah.

So, yes, we're in phase two, according to the Trump administration. According to reality, however, we're still very much in phase one.

SCIUTTO: What -- who's going to disarm Hamas if the International Stabilization Force is on the Israeli side of the line inside Gaza?

MILLER: Only two possibilities, Jim. Number one, the Israelis do it. And remember, now they do not have to deal with the entire Gaza Strip. Gaza is

only 360 square kilometers, roughly twice the size of the District of Columbia.

[18:40:00]

The Israelis could do it, it would take months, if not longer, or Trump administration could deploy 20, 30, 40,000 American combat forces into that

zone, they could do it, but then again that's politically unrealistic and probably not practical. So, the reality is, no one's going to do it, Jim.

SCIUTTO: The other issue, of course, is a path to some sort of Palestinian state. The U.S. says that this will lead to a, quote, "credible path" to

Palestinian self-determination. As you know, Israel has flatly rejected a Palestinian State. That's yet one more issue that, at least today, is a

fudge. Is there any progress there or even any path to progress on that issue?

MILLER: No, and the reality is we lack the one thing we need, and that is leaders, leaders who are masters of the politics, not prisoners of their

ideologies. We do not have them in Israel, I think that's unmistakably clear, and among the Palestinians, you know, if I were an Israeli and I

don't play one on TV, I would demand, if I were seriously interested in making significant concessions on issues like borders, Jerusalem, refugees,

security, I would demand that the Palestinian national movement come up with one authority, one gun, and one negotiating position. And we are a

long way away from a Palestinian leader or leaders who is capable of creating that sort of consolidation of power.

SCIUTTO: Aaron David Miller, familiar discussion. Thanks so much.

MILLER: It is indeed, Jim. Thanks for having me.

SCIUTTO: Well, this just in to CNN. Senate Republicans have blocked an effort to curb the Trump administration's ability to carry out military

action in Venezuela. Voting wrapped up just moments ago, a victory for President Trump. Some Republicans had tried to tie his hands, at least on

military action in Venezuela. Two senators, Josh Hawley and Todd Young, had originally sided with Democrats to advance the bill last week, well, they

reversed course after an intense pressure campaign from the president. As you'll remember, the U.S. captured Venezuela's Nicolas Maduro in a

complicated, expansive U.S. military operation earlier in January.

Still to come, FBI agents have searched the home of a journalist for the raising serious concerns about press freedom. We're going to have the full

details coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:45:00]

SCIUTTO: We're just learning that the airspace over Iran is now closed to most flights. Have a look. This is what air traffic looks like right now

over Iran, that blank area in the middle roughly matching the borders of Iran. The Federal Aviation Administration says Iran's airspace is closed to

all flights except international civilian arrivals and departures. This comes as President Donald Trump has threatened potential military action

over Iran, not clear if and when the president will make such a decision. You'll note we reported earlier, he says that because an execution of a

protester has been delayed there, he may not take action now. We'll continue to watch this closely.

Well, the FBI is searching a Washington Post reporter's home, setting off alarms about press freedom. A person familiar with the matter says FBI

agents seized the reporter's phone and two computers. Attorney General Pam Bondi alleges the reporter had obtained classified information from a

Pentagon contractor.

Joining me now with the details, Brian Stelter. Brian, first, before we get to the bigger picture press freedom issues here, explain what we know about

this particular story and case.

BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST AND AUTHOR, "NETWORK OF LIES": Right. Number one, Hannah Natanson had been working on reporting inside the

federal government for many months, soliciting tips from staffers all across the federal government about changes and cutbacks. She described

herself in a column before Christmas as the government whisperer and said she had more than a thousand tipsters reaching out to her throughout the

year 2025, providing information.

She also co-bylined a story less than a week ago, an exclusive Washington Post story about Venezuela. And that report cited government documents

obtained by The Washington Post. Those were secret documents. And it is possible that that particular story is what has set off all of this,

because President Trump this afternoon made reference to an arrest of a leaker involving Venezuela.

Again, he didn't get specific either and he didn't reference The Washington Post. But we do know there was a government contractor in Maryland who was

arrested last week and charged with retaining government secrets. So, it's possible all these puzzle pieces might connect, although we don't know for

sure.

What we do know is that it's highly unusual for a reporter's home to be raided by FBI. It basically never happens in the U.S. and it has caused a

lot of concern.

SCIUTTO: Should we, given the president's frequent attacks on stories that he doesn't like and stories by institutions that he doesn't like, should we

brace ourselves for this being the first potentially of many such investigations?

STELTER: I would say yes, Jim. And I would say newsroom leaders and media lawyers have been wondering if this was going to happen for the better part

of a year. You know, once Trump returned to office, especially in this unrestrained way that he has been behaving, there have been growing

concerns about whether reporters' records were being pursued secretly, whether the FBI and DOJ were going to pursue these kinds of avenues, rather

than what's happened in past administrations in the U.S., where there'd be a subpoena process, there'd be a lengthy court fight in order to get

reporter records.

Now, we're in a situation where a reporter, you know, has the FBI show up at her doorstep early in the morning and has her phone and computers taken

away. Now, she says she used the encrypted messaging app Signal to protect her sources. So, we don't know really how exposed her sources might be at

this point, nor do we know if this is the first of many of these kinds of raids. But that's exactly what press freedom groups are warning about.

And including The New York Times, you know, one of the Washington Post's big rivals, The New York Times, the top lawyer there, David McCraw, coming

out tonight saying this is a stark threat to free press rights.

SCIUTTO: Yes. We know you'll watch it closely, Brian Stelter, thanks so much. Just ahead, four crew members are returning to Earth now from the

International Space Station ahead of schedule. We'll tell you why right after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:50:00]

SCIUTTO: Four crew members are on their way back to Earth after a medical issue aboard the International Space Station forced them to return early.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Undocking confirmed.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: The crew consists of two astronauts from the U.S., one from Japan, and a Russian cosmonaut. NASA is not revealing which crew member has

a medical problem or exactly what that problem is. They say it's private. However, NASA did say the person is in stable condition and could get

better testing back down here on Earth. Crew 11 is set to splash down in the Pacific early Thursday.

Leroy Chiao is a retired NASA astronaut, former commander of the ISS. Thanks so much for joining, Leroy.

LEROY CHIAO, FORMER COMMANDER, INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION AND RETIRED NASA ASTRONAUT: My pleasure. Great to be with you.

SCIUTTO: So, there have been a lot of folks up in space, including at the ISS. How rare is it to see a medical emergency?

CHIAO: It's very rare. I mean, we've had medical incidents during all phases of flights, you know, during ascent and liftoff and ascent, during

entry and landing and, of course, on-orbit operations, too. But this is the first time that we've had to end a mission early because of medical

concerns.

Now, that sounds kind of ominous, but NASA has emphasized that the condition of this patient is completely stable, and they're doing this out

of an abundance of caution because they would like to do a full workup here on the ground on this person to make sure that they didn't miss anything

or, you know, something else might be going on.

So, not the immediate emergency it may sound like, you know, it's just NASA being extra cautious and making sure that -- like I said, that nothing is

going to get by them.

SCIUTTO: And would it be normal protocol, even if it's an issue with one of the four, for the whole crew to come back?

CHIAO: Yes. The reason that we do that is because the vehicle you go up in is your lifeboat. You know, if you have to evacuate the station because of

fire or pressure loss or something like that, everybody gets in their own vehicle that they came up in and you come down. So, if one person has to

come down, then the entire crew of that ship needs to come down so that everyone has, you know, a lifeboat seat, if you will.

SCIUTTO: Makes sense. And listen, of course, I know crews, they're good teams. They work together. I'm sure every member of the crew wants to keep

everybody safe. What does it mean now for that crew and for the next mission? Because these things are highly coordinated and highly

choreographed.

CHIAO: Sure. So, this is disruptive to operations on board. There's no danger or anything because the three remaining crew members on board can

easily run the station and do all the maintenance work and things like that. But what will suffer are experiment operations, because there aren't

enough people up there to do all the planned research experiments, right?

So, those will have to be postponed. Some other things will have to be postponed. We saw that one of the spacewalks they were about to prepare to

go do was postponed. So, that will be picked up by future crews. And we have excellent planners, of course, both here at NASA and over in Russia on

their side. And so, they will be able to reschedule everything that didn't get done this time. They'll be performed by, you know, upcoming crews.

SCIUTTO: Makes me think of that "Apollo 13" scene, right, where one of the crew members gets sick up there and they got to deal with that. Of course,

they had other issues while they were in space. Leroy Chiao, thanks so much for joining.

CHIAO: My pleasure. Thank you.

SCIUTTO: Well, new data shows that 2025 was the third hottest year on record. That news comes as Copernicus, the European service that monitors

climate change, released its final climate data for last year. We're also learning the last 11 years have been the warmest on record, with the past

three years being the worst as average temperatures have exceeded 1.5 degrees Celsius.

[18:55:00]

That's key because that was the limit set by the Paris Climate Agreement to permit prevent the climate from worsening even more dramatically.

In today's Good Brief, and we need it, a million-dollar payday for an amateur tennis player from Sydney, Australia. He won a million Australian

dollars, about $660,000, in a special tournament ahead of the start of the Australian Open, the showdown called One Point Slam pits amateurs and

celebrities against elite professionals. Jordan Smith beat world number two Jannik Sinner before facing Taiwan's Joanna Garland in the final. It all

came down to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh, my goodness. He's won a million dollars.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: It's a nice shot. Clearly elated. Smith said he planned to buy a house with his winnings. Big congratulations to him.

Thanks so much for joining us today. I'm Jim Sciuto in Washington. You've been watching "The Brief." Please do stay with CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:00:00]

END