CNN "The Lead With Jake Tapper" - Transcript "Interview with Sen. Chris Murphy"

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Joining me now is Democratic Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut. He serves on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Senator, thanks for joining us.

A U.S. official tells CNN that they have imagery showing weapons used in the attack being staged in Iran. Have you seen this intelligence? Are you convinced Iran is responsible?

[16:05:01]

SEN. CHRIS MURPHY (D-CT): I have read some limited intelligence that was provided to the United States Congress.

Upon reading it, it seems to me there was likely Iranian involvement in this attack. But I think the details are still to be decided. And I would like the chance to be able to talk to those who have interpreted the intelligence we have.

That is an important question. But this idea that the administration has that we have some secret defense treaty with Saudi Arabia, I think, is really dangerous. Ultimately, this was not an attack on the United States. This was an attack on Saudi oil assets. And this administration is acting as if we are the security guarantor for all of our friends and allies in the Middle East.

That is never how we have conducted our business, in part because we know that, when the United States gets militarily involved in the Middle East, more things go wrong than go right. So this is a moment, I think, for very careful consideration of what we do and what we advise the Saudis to do.

TAPPER: The argument would be, I think, Senator, that the attack on the Saudi oil field is an attack on the world economy, not just on one country. Do you disagree with that?

MURPHY: Well, let's just remember how this all started, Jake. It started because the United States pulled out of the Iranian nuclear agreement and then started sanctioning the Iranian economy, limiting their access to the world oil market as well.

And at some point, there has to be an adult who is going to start a de-escalatory cycle. We are caught in escalatory cycle in which each side decides to respond in kind. It will eventually get us into a war.

And so what I would recommend to this administration is that they find a way to start talking directly to the Iranians about how to get us out of a pattern that is headed towards a place where no one wants.

TAPPER: It seems as though the U.S. government takes very seriously the intelligence and information being provided to the U.S. government, to the Trump administration by the Saudi government, the Saudi foreign minister and others.

Why should the U.S. believe a word they say, given how they blatantly lied about how they murdered "Washington Post" columnist Jamal Khashoggi?

MURPHY: Right.

Remember, for 20 days, the Saudis told us they had nothing to do with Jamal Khashoggi's murder. And, in fact, they had not only murdered him, dismembered him, and knew about it for those entire two weeks.

Add to that the fact that they have been misrepresenting the nature of their military involvement in Yemen for years, intentionally targeting civilians, when they told us they weren't.

I just find the whole nature of the relationship to be preposterous. The Trump administration acts as if we're the inferior partner. When the Saudis need our help, we go to Saudi Arabia, instead of the Saudis coming here. We decide that we are going to wait until the Saudis tell us what they want to do.

That is not how this relationship works. The Saudis need the United States much more than we need them, especially when today their oil isn't as important to us as it used to be.

And I wish that we would act start looking we are what we are, which is the dominant partner in this relationship.

TAPPER: Let's say that the Iranians did carry out this strike, not just the Houthi rebels who are allied with Iran, but actually Iran.

What do you think would be the appropriate response, if anything?

MURPHY: So, the response would be to try to convince all parties in the region to stop this series of escalatory measures.

I get it that it would probably make a lot of Americans feel good if we responded tit-for-tat. But if that gets us into a shooting war with the Iranians, that is not good for anybody.

So, at some point, there has to be a movement to end these escalations. And so, even if the Iranians were directly involved, it may be that the Saudis decide to take action themselves.

Why on earth have we sold the Saudis hundreds of millions of dollars worth of weapons if they can't defend their own territory? The United States should be playing the role of the de-escalator here, the force for peace and for a reasonable outcome to what is an unreasonable escalation of actions right now.

TAPPER: Would you support President Trump meeting with Iranian President Rouhani at the U.N. General Assembly, given what has occurred over the last several days with Iran, or even, independent of that, just to try to improve relations?

MURPHY: I think that we should start talking to the Iranians right now about how to stop this crisis from getting any worse.

My only worry about the president talking to Rouhani is that it might make things worse, not better. If there is no exchange of diplomatic priorities ahead of that meeting, I'm not sure we come out better at the end of it.

So how diplomacy normally works is that you actually have mid-level bureaucrats and diplomats talking to each other before the principals get together. That is not how this administration has worked. And we see how it has gone in North Korea.

So I generally don't have any problem with talking to our adversaries, but, in this situation, I think it might be better for Secretary Pompeo or people that work for him to do some outreach ahead of a meeting between Trump and Rouhani.

[16:10:01]

TAPPER: Senator Chris Murphy, Democrat from Connecticut, thanks so much for your time, sir. Appreciate it.

MURPHY: Thanks.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source