Return to Transcripts main page

WOLF

Hawaii Prepares for North Korean Missile Strike; Lawmakers Weigh in on North Korea's Nuclear Threat; Kim Jong-Un's Nuclear Power; Scandal Plaguing Israel's Netanyahu & Wife Intensifying; Interview with Rep. Brendan Boyle. Aired 1:30-2p ET

Aired August 9, 2017 - 13:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:32:04] WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: Twenty minutes, that's the time it would take for a missile launch from North Korea to hit Hawaii. And that's why Hawaii is the first state to prepare the public for that scenario.

CNN's Sara Sidner is joining us now. She's an emergency management in Honolulu.

Sara, walk us through what would happen if officials there receive what is certainly a very unlikely but could be a very dreaded warning call.

SARA SIDNER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's a good way to put it. I mean, Hawaii just wants to be prepared, Wolf.

I want to give you an idea of where I am. There's six feet of concrete above me, six feet of concrete in the walls. And we're at the Diamond Head crater as well. So there's dirt and rock over us.

Let me tell you what would happen. The call would come in from Pacific Command. That call would come into this phone, which is a secure line. And today, Jeff Wong, who is sitting here, would pick that phone up if the warning came today, and he would know right away that it's time to sound the sirens for the people out on the beaches, living in Hawaii. But at the same time, this phone will be picked up by someone sitting here. It's called the Hawas (ph) line. They pick it up, and it goes immediately to all of the counties to let them know that they need to make sure and start warning their citizens.

And really what Hawaii is doing, they have been preparing for this for several months, more than seven months now, and they're trying to get people just used to what might happen. Yes, it's a remote possibility. But they are saying, better to be safe than to be sorry.

They are also going to put out a warning that they have not done since the end of the Cold War, in the 1980s. And it's a siren that will sound on the beaches, in the business districts, in the neighborhoods, they have put all over this island. Very similar, though, to what they would hear, for example, if a hurricane was coming. So that tone is a little bit different. And then they will try testing, in November, this new attack tone -- Wolf? BLITZER: Hopefully, they never have to really go forward with that

ominous, ominous development.

Sara Sidner, in Honolulu for us. Thanks very much.

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are weighing in on the North Korean nuclear threat.

Earlier today, Republican Senator Lindsay Graham offered up two reasons why the U.S. might, might, go to war.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM, (R), SOUTH CAROLINA: There are two scenarios where we would go to war with North Korea. If they attack Guam or some other American interest or our allies or if they try to keep developing a ICBM with a nuclear weapon on top to hit the homeland, we would act. President Trump has basically drawn a red line, saying that he will never allow North Korea to have an ICBM missile that can hit America with a nuclear weapon on top. He's not going to let that happen. He's not going to contain the threat. He's going to stop the threat.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Let's get perhaps a different perspective.

Democratic Congressman Brendan Boyle, of Pennsylvania is joining us. He is a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Do you agree with Senator Lindsey Graham?

[13:35:08] REP. BRENDAN BOYLE, (D-PA), FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE MEMBER: Wolf, to put this in context, we are now in the most dangerous situation since those 13 days of the missile crisis in October, 1962. What President Trump

BLITZER: You're talking about the Cuban Missile Crisis.

BOYLE: The Cuban Missile Crisis, yes. What President Kennedy observed then was that, if you put an opponent with his back against the wall, and you give him no option except to fight, that's what he's going to do. The brilliance of what Kennedy did during the Cuban Missile Crisis was pushing back against the initial recommendations he received from the supposed wise men, and he decided let's negotiate and let's try to give them a way out. I believe the way out for Kim Jong-Un and the North Korean regime would be the preservation of that regime.

Here's the challenge with what I just said. Libya, we said to Moammar Gadhafi, a number of years ago, if you give up your nuclear program, we guarantee we will not invade. We kept out word up until we didn't. And then we proceed with regime change, we in the West. So we're now living with one of the unintended consequences of our Libya policy some years ago. And Kim Jong-Un, rightfully, understandably, looks at that and says, well, it's better to be a nuclear power and not believe the word of the West.

BLITZER: Yes, the U.S. did launch a lot of cruise missiles against Gadhafi's regime in Libya. And North Koreans have not been shy in saying, you know what, we don't want to wind up like Moammar Gadhafi and that Libyan regime.

BOYLE: Yes.

BLITZER: So realistically, are they ever going to give up their nuclear capability.

BOYLE: This is a problem that has been through four presidents now, President Clinton, President Bush, through Obama, and now Donald Trump. You're assuming there's a certain rationality of Kim Jong-Un, which is not necessarily 100 percent safe assumption. But assuming he is a rational actor, if we could go into a direct bilateral negotiation and guarantee that we would not pursue regime change, it seems to me that we should give that a shot before we would have to pre-emptively strike their ICBMs.

BLITZER: A pre-emptive strike would result in enormous casualties --

BOYLE: Enormous, yes.

BLITZER: -- south of the Demilitarized Zone --

BOYLE: Right.

BLITZER: -- and potentially in Japan. Tens of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of people within a day or two could be killed.

BOYLE: Right. Which is exactly why I think we still need to give negotiation a chance, recognizing that it may not work. I hope, by the way, that some of this rhetoric, while President Trump was clearly speaking off the cuff, which is quite dangerous in and of its own right, I do hope that they're trying to raise -- that they at least be logic behind it, is trying to raise the rhetorical stakes to drive Kim Jong-Un to the bargaining table and finally do a deal that would enable us to avoid war.

BLITZER: Should the U.S. have direct negotiations with North Korea?

BOYLE: I think we should. I think that Kim Jong-Un -- look, when we have before us in the Foreign Affairs Committee experts, they are all over the map in terms of their assessment of Kim Jong-Un and this regime. But the best analysis that I have read and that I have heard, is that Kim Jong-Un, more than anything, wants legitimacy. We could legitimize his regime, which has been in existence for 60 years now, but as an awful dictatorship and a cultive personality. But they're there. They've been there for over 60 years. I think it's time to enter into bilateral negotiations. And if that helps us get to the point where we recognize the regime, we guarantee that we will not pursue regime change, in exchange for a freeze in their nuclear technology, that would be worth it. And that's a deal most Americans would take.

# A freeze is one thing, but you're not realistic that the elimination of their nuclear program is going to happen.

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: Maybe they would just freeze it the way it is now?

BOYLE: Well, initially a freeze, before you would get to a roll back. But there's no question that the critical point would be breached and would be passed when they would have ICBMs with nuclearized warheads that could reach the continental United States.

BLITZER: Or reach Guam, a U.S. territory --

BOYLE: Yes.

BLITZER: -- or Hawaii, which is --

BOYLE: And reaching Guam is very serious. Let's not forget, when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, that wasn't a U.S. state either. It still caused us to enter World War II, rightfully so. So I don't make any distinction between Guam and the rest of the United States.

BLITZER: Brendan Boyle, Congressman, thanks very much for coming in.

BOYLE: thank you.

[13:39:32]BLITZER: Appreciate it.

We'll have more on the North Korea threats unfolding right now, including a closer look at a miniaturized nuclear warhead. Is it ready for a launch by North Korea? And where could it realistically strike? We're going to break that down for you when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: The war of words between President Trump and North Korea comes as U.S. intelligence officials conclude the North has crossed a major threshold on the path to becoming a full-fledged nuclear power.

CNN's Tom Foreman has details on Kim Jong-Un's arsenal -- Tom?

[13:44:23] TOM FOREMAN, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, this photograph purports to show Kim Jong-Un with a miniaturized nuke. And if it's the real deal, this is what we would know about that. It's about two feet across. Some analysts say it may be several hundred pounds, maybe 500 or 600. And it would have the kind of punch, based on their earlier tests, as the nuclear weapons that the United States dropped on Japan 72 years ago this week. But look at the difference in size. Each of these was around 10 feet long, weighed somewhere around 10,000 bounds, and had to be carried in by a heavy bomber. Something like this would much more neatly fit into the nose cone of one of those missiles they have been testing recently. And that makes all the difference.

Their latest test saw the missile go 2,300 miles into space. That's way above the space station, way above many satellites out there. It only went 621 miles land distance, but that's because it went straight up and came straight down. If you flatten that trajectory out, some experts say that actually reaches Guam, Hawaii. And depending on the weight of the payload, some scientists think technically it could reach the center of the country and some cities there. And I say some scientists and technically, because there may be some big challenges out there. Let's look at where they stand. Give them range. Let's say they worked out the thrust enough -- we'll put a green light on that -- maybe they have the power to get there. That does not answer the questions that remain about accuracy. Can they get a missile up on that flatter trajectory back into the atmosphere without tearing apart and deliver a war head to a target? Do they have that mechanism? And do they have the reliability? Those are still huge questions. That's a yellow light at best.

But bear in mind, we have this one about the nuclear warhead and miniaturizing it, and we had been red just a few weeks because so many scientists thought they were incapable of miniaturing one enough. Now more are saying they thin, yes, they are. You move that to yellow. And you can see the steady march towards what North Korea wants and nobody else wants them to have -- Wolf?

BLITZER: Tom Foreman, thanks very much.

Very worrisome developments, indeed. More on that coming up.

Also coming up, bribery, fraud, and a breach of trust, the scandal plaguing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his wife intensifying right now, just as thousands of Israelis are rallying to try to show their support. We're going live to Tel Aviv. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:51:20] BLITZER: To Israel now where a political scandal may soon be reaching a tipping point. Right now, a crowd has gathered in Tel Aviv to show their support for the Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Israeli Police say they suspect Netanyahu to be involved potentially in bribery. They're also investigating alleged elicit ties to executives in the news media, international business, and even Hollywood.

CNN's Ian Lee is joining us from that rally in Tel Aviv.

I understand the prime minister just spoke.

IAN LEE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Wolf. He's still on stage behind me. He gave a fiery and defiant speech against this investigation, which he's been questioned in. He said that this is a ploy by the left, by the opposition, and by the media to try to get him out of office because they can't beat him at the ballot box, to try to go through the courthouse. But leave no doubt, this is an embattled prime minister.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

(SHOUTING)

BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER: (SPEAKING FOREEIGN LANGUAGE)

LEE (voice-over): Benjamin Netanyahu has dominated Israeli politics for years. Only the founder of the state, David Ben Gurion, has led the country for longer.

But Israel's prime minister is in a fight, and it's getting serious. Police have been investigating him for months in what we now know are cases of suspected bribery, fraud, and breach of trust. He has been questioned as a suspect on four occasions.

So what are the cases about? The first, case 1000, involves allegations that Netanyahu received gifts inappropriately, including cigars and champagne from overseas businessmen. The second case, 2000, involves allegations that Netanyahu agreed to a deal with the owner of a major Israeli newspaper, which would see the paper tone down its attacks on Netanyahu. In exchange, the prime minister would ensure a cut in the circulation of a rival paper.

NETANYAHU: (SPEAKING FOREIGN LANGUAGE)

LEE: Last month, Netanyahu's former defense minister was removed from his post by the prime minister, gave this prediction to CNN of how it would end.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MOSHE YA'ALON, FORMER ISRAELI DEFENSE MINISTER: By indictment. That's my assessment and belief. Too many issues under investigation and questions, and I believe that, in the end, we will witness indictment.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEE: And that was before the dramatic news that a former close ally of the prime minister was turning state's witness. Ari Harow, a one- time Netanyahu chief of staff, had cut a deal with prosecutors. He would plead guilty to entirely separate offenses and would avoid prison in exchange for telling investigators everything he knew about case 1000 and case 2000. Netanyahu denies any wrong doing. "We flatly reject the false claims made against the prime minister", a spokesman told CNN. "The campaign to replace this administration lies at its heart. But it's doomed to fail for the simple reason that there will be nothing because there was nothing."

NETANYAHU: (SPEAKING FOREIGN LANGUAGE)

IAN: The prime minister himself took to Facebook, as he often does, to address Israelis.

NETANYAHU (through translation): I do not pay attention to background noise, and I continue working for you.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Ian, what happens next in this investigation? [13:55:02] LEE: Well, Wolf, once the investigation concludes, the

police then will hand the matter offensive to the attorney general. It will be up to the attorney general to decide whether or not to move forward with it, if he beliefs that there is enough evidence to indict, which is still likely months away. But if the decision is made to go forward and to indict the prime minister, it will be politically difficult for him to stay in power -- Wolf?

BLITZER: And his wife, Sara, is facing potential legal problems as well. The Israeli news media is full of reports. What's the latest on that front?

LEE: That's right. There are four cases that it's believed that she could possibly be indicted in. But Wolf, right now, there is still isn't any indictment on that and the investigation continues, but it's expected, possibly, sometime soon -- Wolf?

BLITZER: Ian Lee, reporting for us from Tel Aviv. Thanks very much to you.

And thanks to our viewers.

The news continues right after a quick break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:00:13] ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.