Return to Transcripts main page

What We Know with Max Foster

Intel Director Gabbard Questioned About Reasons For Iran War; Trump Mulls Handing Off Hormuz Responsibility To Allies; Iran Vowes Retaliation After Several Senior Leaders Killed; Powell: Too Soon To Tell Impact Of Iran War On Economy; U.K. Lawmakers Question King Charles Visiting The U.S. Aired 3-4p ET

Aired March 18, 2026 - 15:00   ET

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

[15:00:31]

MAX FOSTER, CNN HOST: The U.S. intelligence chief refusing to be drawn on what led President Trump to strike Iran.

This is WHAT WE KNOW.

Donald Trump says he attacked Iran because Tehran posed an imminent threat to the United States. But Democrats today grilled the U.S. president's top

intelligence official on whether that's really true. Director of intelligence, national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, testified to the Senate

about her worldwide threat assessment and Democrats cited her own reports that said Iran's nuclear capabilities had been obliterated by previous U.S.

attacks.

But Gabbard refused to contradict Mr. Trump's statements about the war.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JON OSSOFF (D-GA): Was it the intelligence community's assessment that nevertheless despite this obliteration, there was a, quote, "imminent

nuclear threat posed by the Iranian regime"? Yes or no?

TULSI GABBARD, DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE: It is not the intelligence community's responsibility to determine what is and is not an

imminent threat. That is up to the president based on --

OSSOFF: Here's the problem --

GABBARD: -- on a volume of information that he receives.

OSSOFF: No, it is -- it is precisely -- it is precisely your responsibility to determine what constitutes a threat to the United States.

This is the worldwide threats hearing, where as you noted in your opening testimony, quote, "you represent the I.C.'s assessment of threats".

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FOSTER: Well, let's go to Capitol Hill, CNN chief congressional correspondent Manu Raju. I mean, watching that moment, you felt that she

wasn't really speaking her mind, but she can't contradict the president either, can she?

MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, that's absolutely right, because she was being pressed repeatedly about some of the decisions

that had been made in the run up to this war. And she had been a longtime skeptic of going to war with Iran before she joined the Trump

administration, but very clearly trying to not align herself with her past statements, but not also anger the president of the United States.

And notably, repeatedly being pressed about whether this was an imminent threat against the United States, whether Iran was which we heard from

President Trump, who has said repeatedly that he believes Iran was right to strike the United States without, you know, if the United States had not

acted first, she said that was an assessment that the president had to make it was not an assessment that the director of national intelligence or the

intelligence community at large had to make.

Now, one other point of contention that got a lot of attention from the Democratic side of the aisle, in particular, was her role in overseeing the

elections here in the United States. Whether she sees she has a role in that, and particularly in the aftermath of what we saw the FBI raiding the

Fulton County offices pertaining to the 2020 election down in Georgia, Democrats have raised enormous concern about the fact that Gabbard was

present during that FBI raid and the fact that the FBI raid happened at all.

But the fact that she was there, what was her role in all of that? She said that she simply was overseeing it, but did not have any law enforcement

objectives. She was also asked repeatedly about whether there was foreign interference, that about the that is expected to happen in this year's

election. And one Democrat in particular was concerned about her answer about that. That was Senator Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the

committee, who. I asked him about concerns about foreign interference in the 2026 midterm elections.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Is there evidence that you've seen, though, that there is foreign interference in this year's midterms?

SEN. MARK WARNER (D-VA): We have not seen any decline in efforts of foreign parties to interfere in our democracy. And what is almost equally

concerning is the idea that at some later date, the administration may gin up intelligent, real or not, to be used in an excuse to bring in federal

forces.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: And one of the reasons why Gabbard's role in this has been controversial is that if there was foreign interference that the

intelligence community suspected in the 2020 election, and that's why she was present in Fulton County, Georgia then she would be required to brief

the Senate Intelligence Committee, something that did not happen, which is why Senator Warner, there, raising concerns about her role in all of this.

She said she simply asked by President Trump himself to go down and observe this, but she would not explain how that message was conveyed to her.

So, a lot of questions about the interactions he had with the president over a number of controversial issues, whether it's from Iran or the

midterm elections, and oftentimes not answering the questions to the Democrats' satisfaction.

[15:05:09]

FOSTER: Okay. Manu, I appreciate it. Thanks for joining us from Capitol Hill.

We'll go from there to the Middle East and what some analysts say could be the opening salvo in the battle over the Strait of Hormuz. The United

States says it dropped bunker busting bombs on Iranian missile sites along the strait today. But even if that air campaign is successful, experts say

Tehran may still have thousands of options to threaten those ships. President Trump is taking another shot at allies who rebuffed his calls to

send warships to police the Strait of Hormuz.

In an online post, the president said American allies should take sole responsibility for the security of the waterway in the U.S. finished off --

if the U.S. finished off, what left -- what is left of the Iranian regime. Now, many European leaders say they'll join a coalition to patrol the

strait once active hostilities end, though,

CNN's Alayna Treene is with us now from the White House.

And we were talking about this rift with the rest of NATO, weren't we, yesterday? But, you know, it's clearly something that he didn't predict

that how the Strait of Hormuz would play out. And he's -- he hasn't got a plan for how to get out of this one. Does he?

ALAYNA TREENE, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: No, and that's really been the reporting that we've had now, Max, this idea that the United States and

the Trump administration has been unprepared for this issue and part of that, from our reporting, is about the mines that we know Iran has been

laying in the Strait of Hormuz, even though we've heard the president say that they've been -- you know, the United States military has been blowing

up some of the ships Iran has been trying to use to lay those mines.

We did also hear from the president just yesterday saying that he had wished he had requested specifically that the U.K. prime minister offer to

send minesweepers to the Strait of Hormuz to help with that issue. And of course, this is something, as you mentioned, a lot of them are trying to

stay out of this while the hostilities are ongoing.

But one of the things that they have done, and we've seen the Trump administration act today, which also kind of contradicts what we're hearing

from the president, this idea that this is an issue that will get solved or is an issue, at least that he thinks allies should be the ones to solve. We

saw the Trump administration take a big step toward trying to help what we've seen with the volatility in the oil markets thus far, and that was

with the White House temporarily lifting key limits on its shipping of oil gas and other commodities and this is really, you know, it's the waving of

what we call the Jones Act, which is allowing, again temporarily. They said it will be for the next 60 days that the United States will allow foreign-

flagged ships to transport these commodities to different U.S. ports.

So, this is a way to try and alleviate a lot of the pressure we've seen with these, you know, supply issues with oil. And so that's one step that

they are taking. Obviously, this is not going to be enough, and the Strait of Hormuz is such a crucial problem that this administration is facing and

despite what we've now heard from the president repeatedly trying to argue that this isn't an issue that he believes that they will be able to get it

solved quickly. It is a persistent one that they have not yet been able to solve.

And part of the reason it's been such a problem as well is one of the big concerns this administration has been facing, and its growing by the day,

is this idea that many Americans were not sold on this idea of going to war with Iran in the first place. And the higher oil prices tick, the higher

we're seeing gas prices in the United States, the more pressure that puts on the U.S. to do something about this.

So as much as the president is trying to say this is a problem for other countries, of course he wants their help. It is not something that this

administration, of course, is going to try and leave the responsibility with them they know they need to solve this issue and try to do so as

quickly as possible, Max.

FOSTER: Alayna, thank you.

Well, as Iran holds a funeral procession for its slain security chief, Ali Larijani, Israel says it has also killed the Iranian intelligence minister.

Esmail Khatib's death announced by the Israeli defense minister after an overnight strike in Tehran. A top Israeli intelligence official says

Israels campaign of targeted killings is creating, quote, "chaos in the Iranian regime".

Iran is vowing to take revenge for the killing of Ali Larijani. Overnight, two people in central Israel were killed in an Iranian ballistic missile

attack. Multiple locations in Tel Aviv struck by falling debris. And now, Iran's Revolutionary Guard warns of, quote, powerful action after what it

describes as an attack on their fuel and energy infrastructure.

Joining us now, Jeremy Diamond, live from Tel Aviv.

I mean, whatever people think of the Israeli operation here, these very targeted assassinations are proving highly effective.

JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN JERUSALEM CORRESPONDENT: Well, there's no question that Israel has killed a large number of Iran's senior leadership.

[15:10:01]

And we are watching as this assassination spree is certainly continuing and likely to continue even further. The latest is, of course, this

intelligence minister in Iran who was assassinated in an Israeli strike overnight. The news of that killing came the same day that Iranians buried

Ali Larijani, that senior security chief. Of course, before that, there were dozens of other senior Iranian officials, including the former supreme

leader, Ali Khamenei, in that opening wave -- wave of Israeli strikes.

And in fact, today, the Israeli defense minister, Israel Katz, said that the prime minister has now authorized the Israeli military to effectively

jump through fewer hoops in order to be able to pull the trigger on additional assassinations of senior Iranian officials, as soon as the

intelligence and operational window opens for those strikes to take place.

FOSTER: Okay. Jeremy Diamond, appreciate it. Thank you.

Lebanon says nearly 1,000 people have been killed in the country since Israel began attacking it on March the 2nd, including 116 children. This is

Israel continues to strike at Hezbollah targets there. It carried out an overnight airstrike in central Beirut, destroying a high rise building near

the Lebanese government headquarters. Israel says it also blew up gas stations in southern Lebanon, claiming they supported Hezbollah. And

Lebanese state media say Israel has begun attacking crossings on the Litani River.

Israel had warned it would do so to prevent Hezbollah from transferring weapons to into the south.

While crowds gathered today in Tehran for the funeral of Iran's national security chief, Ali Larijani. He was killed on Tuesday as we were hearing

there by an Israeli strike. His death marks the highest-level assassination since Iran's supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, was killed on the first day of

the war. Larijani is thought to have played a key role in suppressing anti- regime protests in January and led the government transition following Khamenei's death.

Now, the Fed Chair Jerome Powell says the U.S. could be headed for higher inflation because of the war in Iran. The Federal Reserve voted to keep

interest rates on hold around an hour ago. Jerome Powell says higher fuel prices could push overall inflation higher. The Fed board says the overall

economic impact of the war is uncertain speaking to reporters in Washington a few minutes ago. Jerome Powell said it's just too soon to tell.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JEROME POWELL, FEDERAL RESERVE CHAIRMAN: The implications of events in the Middle East for the U.S. economy are uncertain. In the near term, higher

energy prices will push up overall inflation, but it is too soon to know the scope and duration of the potential effects on the economy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FOSTER: Anna Cooban is here.

I mean, to be fair, the war hasn't been going on quite long enough for him to figure it out. But, you know, the -- you know, if you just look at the

gas prices, everyone's assuming there's going to be something feeding through here.

ANNA COOBAN, CNN BUSINESS & ECONOMICS REPORTER: Yes. I mean, diesel is a key fuel that goes into trucks. It's used by lots of businesses for

transporting, you know, goods from ports to shelves. That's now past $5 a gallon, which is the first time it's really hit that $5 mark since

December.

FOSTER: That's a psychological point, isn't it, for many drivers?

COOBAN: Yes. And then that will be felt most likely further down the line with higher grocery prices, as businesses will pass on those costs to

people.

The question really is, Max, how long is this going to go on for? Because if there is a sustained escalation or a sustained blocking of the Strait of

Hormuz and global oil prices up around $100 a barrel, then we can imagine that feeding through to the wider U.S. economy and, you know this lack of

rate change was expected, but it was expected under entirely different circumstances. People were thinking about tariffs, thinking about the

economic impact of Trump's clampdown on immigration.

But now, it's all about the war. It's all about energy prices and also many of the commodities, other commodities that aren't getting through that

Strait of Hormuz, like aluminum, like fertilizer, for example.

FOSTER: And tariffs presumably are less of a threat on one level because you can just get rid of them and then you can get the flow of product in

more quickly. But haven't we got this massive problem that, you know even if they do clear the strait, you've got to restart all of that energy

production, which is currently offline.

COOBAN: Yes, exactly. There's been these massive infrastructure attacks, you know, a key oil field oil terminal in the UAE was attacked earlier this

week. And so, that's going to take time to repair. It's also around confidence of shipping companies. Are they going to send their seafarers

through when there's a huge level of risk? Even if the conflict was to end.

Trump's tariffs as well -- you know, there was a lot of talk about a lot of talk this time last year around the impact on inflation in the United

States and where are some imported goods has have seen inflation. The overall impact has actually been muted compared with expectations. But one

of those reasons, one of the reasons for that, Max, is because energy prices have been relatively low. Now energy prices are higher. The question

is what's that going to do for overall inflation?

FOSTER: Okay. Anna, I appreciate it. Thank you.

Volodymyr Zelenskyy says that Russia wants the U.S., Iran and Israel involved in a long war. The Ukrainian president is raising fears that

Ukraine will face a missile shortage as critically needed U.S. support and resources are diverted to the Middle East.

[15:15:09]

He's previously offered to send interceptor drones to allies facing Iranian attacks in the gulf. In exchange for U.S.-made Patriot missiles.

Now, 250 years ago, America told England it was no longer welcome on its side of the pond. Considering recent events, is the special relationship

heading back to that point? We'll take a look.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

FOSTER: There is growing concern here in the U.K. over plans for King Charles to visit the U.S. this spring. A member of parliament brought up

the possibility of President Donald Trump embarrassing the king in some fashion. President Trump has been frequently critical of Prime Minister

Keir Starmer's leadership.

On Tuesday, he was asked if his opinion had changed at all.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REPORTER: Has your opinion of Keir Starmer changed because of this?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, he hasn't been supportive and I think it's a big mistake. I think he's a nice man, but I'm

disappointed.

REPORTER: Mr. President -- Mr. President --

TRUMP: Did you see that man right there? You know who that is?

REPORTER: Churchill. Winston Churchill.

TRUMP: The late, great Winston Churchill, Winston Churchill. And, you know, unfortunately, Keir is not Winston Churchill.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FOSTER: Joining me now, Leigh Turner. He's a former British ambassador.

You would have been dealing with this situation, you know when you were in office and it's hugely delicate, isn't it? Just explain to us, you know,

what the considerations are in the foreign office because obviously this hasn't been announced yet. The palace aren't, you know, dealing with it

yet. The foreign office has to give it the go ahead.

LEIGH TURNER, FORMER BRITISH AMBASSADOR TO UKRAINE: That's right. Officially, it hasn't yet been confirmed that any visit is taking place,

but people have been talking about this for months and it certainly comes at a time of immense U.K.-U.S. tension over Iran.

[15:20:03]

We've got the U.K. public very lukewarm about the war, sort of feeling that the U.S. didn't consult its allies before going to war, and people aren't

quite sure what the reason is. And conversely, as you were just mentioning, President Trump keeps abusing Sir Keir Starmer.

We also had -- President Trump's a bit in the nation's bad books for his comments about the U.K. and other allies not fighting on the front lines in

Iraq and Afghanistan. So, all this is going on in the background.

And then we have Emily Thornberry, who's a Labour MP, so a member of the governing party who is chair of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee,

urging caution and the -- about the visit. And the idea is that having the king and queen visit the U.S. with this war in the background would somehow

imply endorsement both of the war and of President Trump himself.

FOSTER: So, if you were U.K. ambassador in Washington right now, trying to negotiate this, how would you play it? Because as you say, this is the

balance. You know, would the king be embarrassed on one side, but on the other side, are you going to infuriate President Trump? Because it will be

seen as a slap in the face if the king didn't go for what clearly is a planned visit, even if it hasn't been announced.

TURNER: Yeah. That's right. It's a very delicate thing. And I think when Emily Thornberry, this this Labour MP, said this on Radio Four. So

mainstream British radio channel she was really flying a kite to try and assess the public mood. It's become quite party political in the U.K. We've

had the leader of the opposition, Kemi Badenoch, saying the visit should go ahead. Nigel Farage, the leader of Reform, said the same.

And it does seem to be pretty finely balanced in terms of public opinion. There's been a survey saying 46 percent of Brits think that the visit

should be canceled, 36 percent think it should go ahead. I mean, I've seen the king obviously in action on the international stage very often. And

he's immensely experienced. There's no risk whatsoever that he will somehow act the supplicant or bend the knee to President Trump.

So there's a decent argument to be made that his presence wouldn't really risk being seen as endorsing Trump or his war, as you say, cancellation

would be a major step, but it may be that the government will just choose to delay a decision. I think that's what I would be advising if I was

ambassador in Washington. Not have had that pleasure. And if they delay this decision, the problem may solve itself. If public opinion swings

strongly one way or the other, or maybe the war might come to an end.

FOSTER: I guess, you know, the ambassadors role in the U.S. right now is trying to get both sides to agree that a delay is better if the White House

doesn't, then that's when it starts getting really tricky, doesn't it?

But are people missing the point here? Because isn't that the whole point of our system that you have the prime minister representing the government

and the ups and downs in the relationship, but the king is there to represent, you know, the deeper ties between two nations, not necessarily

even with the president of the United States. And to show that over time they are long-term allies, particularly in a year when they're talking

about kicking the brits out and showing the healing off the back of that.

TURNER: Absolutely right. I remember King Charles giving a speech once in which he -- when he was prince of Wales in which he talked about his

recollections of meeting J.F. Kennedy and Nixon and he's met probably all the U.S. presidents that of living memory. And he is really a symbol, if

you like, of obviously of sovereignty, but also of continuity. So, it's not impossible that you can separate out the role that the king plays in terms

of the long-term relationship between the U.K. and the U.S. which I think most people in both countries would agree is important and should continue.

And arguments about President Trump and his things, he says, and about the Iran war.

FOSTER: Well, it'll probably be great TV if he does go over and as you say, the king is pretty experienced at this sort of thing, so I'm sure he

can handle it.

Leigh Turner, appreciate it.

Still to come, the intel behind the U.S. war with Iran. We look at why Democrats didn't like what they heard from Donald Trump's intelligence

chief.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:28:09]

FOSTER: We're turning now to our top story. The tough questions asked on Capitol Hill today about why the U.S. is attacking Iran.

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard was hammered by Senate Democrats who say their own intelligence reports show Iran was not an

imminent threat to the U.S., but Gabbard refused to agree with that and said only President Trump could determine what is and what's not a threat

to the country.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MARK WARNER (D-VA): Even in your printed testimony today on page six, and your last paragraph on page six, as a result of Operation Midnight

Hammer, Iran's nuclear enrichment program was obliterated. There's been no effort to try to rebuild their enrichment capability. You omitted that

paragraph from your oral opening.

Was that because the president had said there was an imminent threat two weeks?

GABBARD: No, sir. I recognize that the time was running long, and I skipped through some of the portions --

WARNER: You chose to -- you chose to take -- omit --

GABBARD: -- of my oral delivered remarks.

WARNER: You chose to omit the parts that contradict the president.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FOSTER: Well, let's get more on this now from Shawn Turner. He's the former director of communications for U.S. national intelligence.

Thank you so much for joining us, Shawn.

Just clarify for us, who is the person that makes this determination? Would it be Gabbard or is it -- would it be the president?

SHAWN TURNER, FORMER DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS FOR U.S. NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE: Well, you know, the role of the intelligence community and

these are all the people who work for DNI Gabbard, they're responsible for gathering and analyzing the intelligence that helps the president and

officials at the White House determine whether or not there is a threat to U.S. national security. So, it's really important that people understand

this process, that you have professionals who collect, who look at the intelligence, who determine whether there's a threat, and then it's the

role of the White House -- it's the role of White House officials to determine whether or not there are actions that should be taken to deal

with that, with that threat.

[15:30:06]

So, you know you really have two parts here, and it certainly is the case that occasionally there are disagreements as it relates to how aggressive

or how alarmist the intelligence community is being regarding those threats, but it is -- it is different for the intelligence community versus

the White House, the intelligence community collects and analyzes, the White House makes the decisions as to whether or not action should be

taken.

FOSTER: Yell, yeah. And that's how everyone imagines it would be, you know, he's not the expert. He gets the experts in, and they say whether or

not there is an imminent threat, and then he decides whether or not to go to war as commander in chief. But isn't that what's worrying about this

appearance? Because she's saying the expert -- you know, she's the expert, but she's saying she isn't the one determining whether or not it's a

threat. She's allowing the president to, who isn't an expert and hasn't, you know, seen all the intel.

TURNER: Yeah. And this is what's what I think so many of my former colleagues in the intelligence community are understandably concerned

about. Look, you know, there are instances in which there are disagreements between the White House and the intelligence community regarding whether or

not the analysis of, of threats is, is accurate and should be taken and should be acted upon. That's why we have a system in which the White House

can go to other intelligence agencies within the United States and ask whether or not they or not -- they concur with the analysis that's in the

presidents daily brief in some instances, we can actually talk to our allies around the world and understand how they're seeing the analysis. But

at the end of the day, what -- what's different here is that the intelligence community and officials at the White House come together and a

decision is made and that decision is made behind closed doors among officials. And what we see in the public is we see a unified position, a

unified voice as it relates to the nature of the threat and what the United States is or is not going to do. And what's concerning in this instance is

that we're seeing this all play out in public.

FOSTER: Yeah. But you know, you're a security expert, but you're also a communications expert because you're in that business. What do you think

was happening here today? Was it -- did you see someone who doesn't believe there was an immediate threat, trying to just not contradict her commander

in chief?

TURNER: Yeah, it's a great question. And I think this is what concerns me at the highest levels with regards to what we saw today. Look, as a

national security professional, as a communication professional, the facts are the facts as it relates to national security. And one of the things

that you never want to see is an attempt to communicate in a way that supports or defends decisions that have been made for the wrong reasons.

And I -- what I saw today was a director of national intelligence who was trying very hard to not upset officials at the White House, perhaps not

upset the president with the way that she was communicating. But I want to be very clear here, when it comes to the way that we communicate about

intelligence and the way that we communicate about national security issues, it doesn't -- it does not matter if the story is not something that

we all want to hear or something that we feel good about. What's most important is that we communicate the information fairly accurately and

factually, even if sometimes that means that those who are in power are not happy with the outcome of that.

FOSTER: Okay. Thank you so much, Professor Turner. Fascinating insight from you on what happened today.

Now in the Middle East, it's a tense situation in Riyadh right now. Sirens blare just as top ministers from around the Arab world gathered in the

Saudi capital. There were loud explosions in the city and Saudi civil defense said they dealt with a ballistic threat. This comes after Iran

vowed to retaliate for reported attacks on its oil and gas production sites. A U.S. official says it was Israel who struck Iranian gas fields.

Our international diplomatic editor, Nic Rrobertson, is in Riyadh.

Just explain to us how serious this is, Nic because it feels like a massive escalation for, you know, this to hit Riyadh.

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: The targeting of Riyadh by ballistic missiles isn't something we've seen if it's been

happening it has not been reported by officials here. Certainly lots of drones have been fired in the vicinity. Riyadh. And I just that looked like

the alarm going off. We just had an all clear that's the alarm going off again. We're inside. We're in the venue where the foreign ministers are

meeting. There are dozens, perhaps 20 of them here.

And I think this just reflects this siren going off now. And when I heard the sirens going off about an hour and 20 minutes ago, literally stepped

outside of the building that we're in here, and I could see an illuminated piece of debris or missile crashing down to the floor about a mile away

from where we were standing.

So, the intercepts that have been going on from these ballistic missiles over Riyadh, the sirens themselves are unusual. And this, of course, is the

first meeting face to face of foreign ministers from the GCC and other Arab and other neighbors in the region. This is the first time they've been able

to sit down together and have a high level meeting to discuss how they respond to Iran's war. We know that the GCC has already called Iran out

over attacking its facilities, attacking facilities in the region breaking the norms of international humanitarian law is what they say.

But this is the first face to face meeting. And there was another round of ballistic missiles incoming for intercepted over Riyadh about three or four

hours ago. There again, we heard the explosions we could see the interceptors flying up again, just to restate, although that's become the

normal in Qatar, in the UAE, in Kuwait and Bahrain, it's been absent from the capital here of Saudi Arabia, Riyadh.

So, a very unusual that we get this sudden spike of intercepts, alarms, ballistic missiles. Just when the foreign ministers are having a key first

face-to-face meeting, Max.

FOSTER: Okay, Nick thank you so much for that. Stay safe.

It is the final moments of trade on Wall Street. Stocks are lower. The Dow has been firmly in the red all day, falling even further after the Fed

decision around an hour ago that we're hearing about from Anna.

This is our Business Breakout.

Oil price is approaching $110 a barrel now after U.S. Israeli strikes hit Iranian energy facilities. Iran's semiofficial news agencies said that the

world's biggest natural gas field, which it shares with Qatar, has been hit. It's the first time that production facilities have been attacked.

The White House will temporarily allow foreign flagged ships to transport oil, gas and other commodities to the United States in an attempt to keep

prices down. It's waiving the Jones Act, which requires any goods transported between the U.S. ports, to be carried by U.S. ships the act

will be suspended for 60 days.

More than 1,000 employees of the Voice of America network are set to return to work after a judge said they must be reinstated. U.S. President Donald

Trump had moved to dismantle the news agency, placing staff on paid administrative leave. Now, a court order has said its reporting and

programming must be restored.

Europe's trade commissioner says the E.U. can seal a trade deal with the United States before the summer. He was speaking to Richard Quest, who was

in Brussels. For us tonight, engaging the transatlantic rift -- Richard.

RICHARD QUEST, CNN BUSINESS EDITOR AT LARGE: It's very interesting when you're here at the European Commission, how they're responding at different

levels to the -- to what's going on with the United States. They don't want to be open and sort of say that how difficult it is.

But on every single issue, for example, when it comes to trade, they've done a deal that's the Turnberry agreement Donald Trump is berating the

Europeans, saying that they haven't implemented it fast enough. They've got problems, of course, with supply chains and oil and gas and gas

particularly from Qatar.

So, when I sat down with the commissioner, I put it to him that basically the U.S. was beating up on the Europeans and saying they weren't keeping up

to their half of the bargain.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MAROS SEFCOVIC, EUROPEAN TRADE COMMISSIONER: I believe that very soon we will have a vote in the parliament. So will, I believe, be done before,

before the summer. And I hope that also the United States of America will be done before summer, because they also have to respect their part of the

bargain.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

QUEST: The difficulty is, Max, no one really wants to presage a full scale argument with the United States at such a difficult time when you have for

instance, the ongoing war. And that in itself creates vast challenges for the E.U. Everywhere you look in the building behind me, they are sort of

saying, we don't really know what comes next.

FOSTER: Richard, what should we be looking at with the oil price? It's up and down. But you know, these, you know, the way this war has expanded into

energy infrastructure must be quite worrying.

QUEST: Absolutely. If you show the energy price, just look at the price of oil. Am I surprised that it is at $110 or whatever it is, a barrel?

Absolutely not. It could go to $90. It could go back. It could go up to $130.

This is completely and utterly dependent on external, exogenous facts, particularly, of course, the Iranians attacking Gulf shipping and how long

this lasts.

[15:40:07]

I met a, you know, when I was coming over here to Brussels today, I met one of the professors from one of the institutes on the train, and I asked him

-- we were talking about how long this could last. First of all, he said, it's anybody's guess, but then he said and that's the economic future. The

longer this lasts, the worse it gets, and all you need, Max, is one or two really nasty events, like the largest gas field being hit, and suddenly the

market falls very sharply. None of this is surprising.

FOSTER: Okay. Richard, appreciate it. More from you on "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS". Thank you so much.

Now still to come, the nominee for U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security faces tough questions for his confirmation hearing, not just about

immigration policy. We'll listen to one heated exchange.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

FOSTER: One fifth of the world's oil supply has to pass through the Strait of Hormuz. So, with that waterway bottled up during the war, it's no

surprise that energy costs are surging and the impact is already stretching across the globe.

CNN's Ivan Watson now with a look at the type of tanker Iran has been targeting.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

IVAN WATSON, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: We're getting a close up look at the kinds of ships that are being impacted by this war around

Iran. This is an LPG tanker. It's 159 meters long. That's longer than a football field, worth tens of millions of dollars and this very ship was in

the Gulf last month and transited the Strait of Hormuz before the war broke out. And it's shipping like this that Iran has targeted since the joint

U.S.-Israeli bombing campaign of Iran began.

And this is what has been driving up fuel prices around the world, because 20 percent of the world's oil is in the Gulf and has to go out on tanker

ships through this narrow channel, the Strait of Hormuz.

[15:45:10]

If you look at the statements coming out of the Iranian government, they're basically saying that shipping can all be targeted. The speaker of the

Iranian parliament, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, writing on X, quote, the Strait of Hormuz situation won't return to its pre-war status Iran has

claimed responsibility for using underwater vehicles to hit tanker ships off the coast of Iraq. Since the start of the war, there was a tanker ship

anchored off the coast of Fujairah in the UAE that was hit on Monday. There's a cargo ship from Thailand that was trying to transit the Strait of

Hormuz last week that was hit, and three of its Thai crew members are still missing. And we don't know what's happened to them.

Now the Trump administration has demanded to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and has called on countries like China, Japan, South Korea, NATO member

countries to help. No one has volunteered. In the interim some countries have been working out side deals. India and Pakistan have gotten tanker

ships out safely over the course of the last week, but it is a trickle of the amount of traffic that we've seen prior to the eruption of the war.

So, as long as ships like this are coming under attack, were likely to see energy prices continue to stay high, meaning you're paying a lot at the gas

pump for your car, meaning things like plane tickets are going to cost a lot, too.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

FOSTER: Ivan Watson, they're on a boat in Hong Kong. We'll be back in just a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

FOSTER: In Washington today, President Trump's pick to lead the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Senate Republican Markwayne Mullin, made

clear that if confirmed, he will run things differently than Kristi Noem. She was fired two weeks ago, but the hearing was not all about immigration

policy. During a heated exchange with Senator Rand Paul, Mullin refused to apologize for saying he understood why Paul's neighbor violently attacked

him in 2017.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. RAND PAUL (R-KY): He offered no apology.

SEN. MARKWAYNE MULLIN (R-OK): Sir --

PAUL: And you offer no apology today and no regrets.

[15:50:02]

Haven't heard the word apologize. Haven't heard the word regret. Haven't heard "I misspoke and it was heated. And I made a mistake". I haven't heard

any of those words, sir.

MULLIN: Sir, actually, it wasn't heated and I'm not apologizing for pointing out your character.

PAUL: Good, good. So, you're jolly well fine. And you want the American public and the people up here to vote -- that may or may not vote for you -

- to know that you supported the felonious, violent attack on me from behind.

MULLIN: I did not say I supported it. I said I understood it. There's a difference.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FOSTER: Lauren Fox joins us to explain the difference between what he was saying there.

LAUREN FOX, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, I mean exactly. I think one of the challenges for Markwayne Mullin is that he is largely well-liked

here in the United States senate but those relationships really matter. And the relationship with the person who is going to be overseeing your

confirmation hearing, in this case Chairman Rand Paul, is a really critical relationship to maintain.

Now, here's what we expect could unfold in the next day or two. We know that tomorrow, this committee is supposed to be voting on getting Mullin's

nomination out of the committee. We expect at this point, Rand Paul is not going to be voting for Markwayne Mullin. That means that he is going to

need to get a Democratic vote.

Now, John Fetterman on this committee, he's a Democrat. He has suggested he has an open mind. He is potentially open to voting for this nominee. And

yet that is not exactly the way that you want to go into a critical vote like this, right, with the chairman of the committee frustrated with you,

with the chairman of the committee vowing that he's not going to support you.

Rand Paul said that he just overall has concerns about Markwayne Mullin's temperament. At one point, actually, he played a clip in this hearing of

Markwayne Mullin challenging Sean O'Brien, the president of the Teamsters, to a physical altercation during the course of another hearing. Now they

have since made up. Sean O'Brien was actually sitting behind Markwayne Mullin today in support of his nomination for the homeland security post.

But that just gives you a sense that in Rand Paul's mind, this is a pattern, not a one off and it's something that he's concerned about. Now,

Mullin is really close to the president. Mullin is really close to even Democrats in the Senate.

It is unlikely, given the politics of immigration at this time, that he's going to earn any other Democratic votes on the floor but again, this is a

major flashpoint given the relationship between Rand Paul and Markwayne Mullin.

FOSTER: Okay, Lauren, I'd appreciate it. Thank you so much.

Now, the highly anticipated match up for the championship game of the world baseball classic lived up to all expectations.

Tuesday night in Miami is where Venezuela took on Team USA. At one point, it seemed like the U.S. might have enough to win, but ultimately, Venezuela

captured its first ever world baseball classic championship.

Don Riddell joins us now.

Don, I mean, we often say historic, but it felt historic.

DON RIDDELL, CNN WORLD SPORT: I mean it was. It was a first for Venezuela. And it was certainly an epic occasion, Max. There is a huge Latino

population in Miami and especially Venezuelan and their fans turned out in force for this occasion on Tuesday night.

The World Baseball Classic over the last few weeks really has been, well, a classic. It's been great. Venezuela got on the board. First up, one

nothing. And Wilyer Abreu kept the party rocking in the fifth inning. The Boston Red Sox's two-time gold glove winner hitting the solo homer that was

the 12th home run given up by the Americans in the tournament the second most of all time.

The USA's much vaunted offense, somewhat subdued at the business end of this tournament. But there was no shortage of drama at the end as Bryce

Harper made it interesting in the eighth two run homer tying the game. He went two for four, but all the other U.S. hitters went one for 26, and so

it all came down to the ninth. Eugenio Suarez smacking an RBI double to left center, putting Venezuela three two ahead. And then as you've just

seen in the bottom of the ninth, Daniel Palencia striking out the Red Sox rookie Roman Anthony to settle it q the most emotional of celebrations

Venezuela, the first ever South American country to win the world baseball classic by 3-2.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

EUGENIO SUAREZ, DROVE IN WINNING RUN FOR CHAMPIONS VENEZUELA: We are together the whole time. We're not just teammates, we are family. This --

this team is awesome. We are family here. That's why we play with passion. We love, because we -- we feel that the jersey, we feel our country in

front of us. That's why this is a lot for us as players, as a people, as a human being, and as a Venezuelan. Now, we are the champion.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RIDDELL: The World Baseball Classic is relatively new as a competition.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

EDUARDO RODRIGUEZ, VENEZUELA PITCHER: To get here, to get to this moment. And we win it all -- you know, this is just for our country, you know, to

every one of them.

[15:55:05] There was just -- I mean, pushing us helping us, to get over here.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RIDDELL: You know, the World Baseball Classic is relatively new that was only the sixth time it has been played, but for different teams have now

won it. And the last four teams have all been different. Huge, huge night for Venezuela there.

And if you enjoyed that, if you enjoyed the baseball over the next couple of weeks, well, it's going to continue because the new Major League

Baseball season starts next week and a lot of the stars that we've all been enjoying in this competition are all going to be back again in MLB -- Max.

FOSTER: Imagine those guys going home. It's going to be incredible, isn't it?

Don Riddell, thank you so much.

I'm Max Foster. That's WHAT WE KNOW. Do stay with CNN.

END

TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS