CNN "The Situation Room"- Transcript:

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

REP. ADAM SCHIFF (D), CALIFORNIA: You bet.

BROWN: My first question to you is about what we just heard about, this new alliance, this announcement from Ayman al-Zawahri about the new Taliban leader. Do you think the U.S. has any actionable intelligence about where he may be?

SCHIFF: We're trying to, first of all, verify the authenticity of that tape.

But I don't have any reason to question that that's him and that's his message. It makes sense for Zawahri both to show himself, but also to align himself again with the Taliban. Particularly after Mullah Omar was revealed to have been dead for a couple of years, the fact that Zawahri is not seen or heard of very often may have people calling into question whether he's really leading the organization, whether al Qaeda can really compete with ISIS, which seems to have the momentum in terms of the terrorist world.

And aligning once again with the Taliban that has given al Qaeda sanctuary makes sense I think for Zawahri and for al Qaeda to avoid a splintering of the Taliban. The Taliban are fighting among themselves over succession right now. And in that fight, they have the risk of losing territory and personnel to ISIS.

So it makes sense for Zawahri to do that, and it doesn't surprise me that he has.

BROWN: Do you think that Zawahri's concerned about the split and how that could impact al Qaeda?

SCHIFF: Absolutely. Well, concerned for a couple reasons, concerned because if the

Taliban disintegrates over internal conflicts, that might mean that it's less of a sanctuary, they provide less of a sanctuary to al Qaeda. It also means that they may lose their members to ISIS.

[18:10:06]

And al Qaeda is really at war with ISIS in terms of the jihadi battlefield. ISIS has been on the ascendancy. Al Qaeda looks very much like a relic of the past, and Zawahri himself looks like a relic of the past. They're very much I think concerned with the stability and the long-term prospects for the Taliban.

BROWN: Zawahri has been in the shadows for quite some time. In fact, I think the last time we heard from him was last September. Why did he decide to surface after this long period of silence, do you think?

SCHIFF: Well, I think it really has raised questions within al Qaeda about the fact that Zawahri is heard from so seldom.

And, as I mentioned, I think particularly coming after it was revealed that Mullah Omar had been dead two years, I think that al Qaeda is worried that if its leadership doesn't show itself, its members are going to start questioning whether the leadership is really operational enough or whether they need to look for either new or different leadership or go to the rival terrorist power, that being ISIS.

So I think that's why Zawahri finds it necessary to take the risk. And there is a risk when they reveal themselves. But doing so, I think, was very important to them at this key time.

BROWN: Zawahri clearly feels threatened by ISIS. And there is a sense that perhaps he's losing power. But this is someone who played a key role in 9/11. Why hasn't the United States been able to get to him? Is he even a priority to capture?

SCHIFF: Well, he's absolutely a priority to take off the battlefield.

He's, as Barbara mentioned, a big part of the unfinished business in terms of going after and eliminating that leadership that was responsible for 9/11. So, we have never lost focus, I think, on the imperative of finding him and going after him. And, you know, I think he has seen just about everyone around him over the years, these other high-value al Qaeda targets, taken off the battlefield one by one.

But, no, we won't rest until we can remove him as well from the long history of these deplorable figures involved with 9/11.

BROWN: And we're just getting in some breaking news on ISIS.

Stand by, Congressman Schiff. We're going to take a quick break and we will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:17:14]

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

BROWN: We're back with Congressman Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee.

Congressman, please stand by, because we are getting some breaking news into THE SITUATION ROOM.

The U.S. is investigating credible reports that ISIS terrorists recently used an outlawed chemical weapon.

Our Pentagon correspondent, Barbara Starr, is here, along with our chief national security correspond, Jim Sciutto.

First to you, Barbara. What are you learning?

STARR: Good evening.

CNN's entire national security team bringing this information to THE SITUATION ROOM. Tonight, U.S. officials, multiple U.S. officials are telling CNN the Obama administration is investigating credible reports that ISIS in Syria and Iraq is in possession of mustard gas, a chemical weapon.

What they are investigating is that the latest use of this may have been earlier this week in a town, a Kurdish town in Northern Iraq. There are reports, credible reports, people there fell ill with symptoms that are very much identified with mustard gas.

The belief broader than this one attack in this town in Northern Iraq is that ISIS may have come into possession of mustard gas at some time before the attack earlier this week. Now, any question of chemical weapons in the Middle East obviously very politically fraught.

A lot of history there. What officials are telling us is they are investigating it, they believe the reports are credible, they will not tell us the exact intelligence that leads them to believe the reports are credible, but they also are saying mustard gas. Low concentrations.

It is kind of an initial sense that they have of it. Nobody has been killed by it. Actually, mustard gas is not all that lethal. How could ISIS have gotten mustard gas, though? It's very serious that they would have it. There are three basic options, mustard gas from Syria not declared by Bashar al-Assad when he was supposed to give up all his chemical weapons, hidden stockpiles that ISIS came across, old stockpiles in Iraq, or, even perhaps more troubling, has ISIS figured out how to make mustard gas on its own and fill rocket or artillery shells with it and then use it on the battlefield?

All of this being investigated by the U.S. at this hour -- Pamela. BROWN: And I'm going to bring in my colleague Jim Sciutto now,

because you have been talking to your sources in the intelligence community. How are they reacting to this new report?

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Enormous concern, because no matter how ISIS got this, if it is confirmed that this is indeed mustard gas, it's not a good thing, as Barbara was just referencing there.

[18:20:00]

If they have developed the ability to make it themselves, that's, of course, enormously concerning. But even if they didn't, it's been of great concern for some time. This is basically a treasure trove of weapons, Iraq and Syria. A great deal of effort was expended during the Syrian chemical weapons deal. You remember when the U.S. decided not to pursue military action after the government of Assad used those weapons.

The presumption had been, the claim had been, in fact, that they'd cleared Syria of these chemical weapons stashes. Is it possible that there were stashes that the U.S. and the West does not know about? That's possible. Did ISIS come into possession of them before that chemical weapons accord took place? Or did they find them in Iraq? All these scenarios are not good.

Chlorine gas had been used before, but mustard gas is more complicated to use. And that would be a step up in terms of capability. Again, these are questions being determined right now. But they are considering these reports credible. And, really, if they do confirm them, however ISIS got their hands on them, this would be a significant development.

BROWN: Do we know exactly how it was administered, how many people it impacted potentially?

SCIUTTO: This is what they're investigating right now. They do believe that it was a shell that was used to deliver this. That takes some skill as well to operate that shell, to use it correctly. So that's something that they're trying to determine right now.

But if it is determined that -- that would be a worrisome development. In terms of, as Barbara said, no one was killed, but they did have symptoms, respiratory symptoms, that did not indicate chlorine gas, which is severe in its own right, but mustard gas also severe, but those symptoms specific enough that they made the conclusion -- not the conclusion, rather -- they made the supposition at this point that it was something more significant.

BROWN: OK, Jim, stand by, because I want to bring in Congressman Schiff to get your reaction.

Congressman, how concerning is this to you?

SCHIFF: It's very concerning. And for really the whole length of this conflict, we have been

following closely any allegations of the use of chemical weapons. You know, I think it is fairly easy to conclude with respect to the regime that the regime did use chemical weapons, that in fact they continue to use chlorine weapons. Some of these chlorine barrel bombs are dropped from the air.

And the regime is the only one that has that air capability. But in terms of ISIS, there have been public reports of ISIS using chlorine in the past. This would be a new and worrying report if it's accurate. I have no doubt that if ISIS could get their hands on this stuff, they would use it. No level of violence is too great for this group. They glorify in the terror that it creates and the image of their brutality.

So, if they get it, they will use it. They also have a lot of former Baathist officers that give them some sophistication. And it may be also in the area of chemical weapons. I think, if they do possess these kind of weapons, and I can't go into specifics, but if they did, my guess is they're more likely to have gotten them as old weapons left over in Iraq from the old WMD program there than they were likely to obtain them in Syria in some kind of a hidden cache of the regime's.

But, again, we're obviously going to explore any of these reports and continue to do all we can to get to the bottom of them.

BROWN: I want to bring in Jim Sciutto -- Jim.

SCIUTTO: Congressman Schiff, I wonder if I can ask you this, because it's been the contention of the administration that the air campaign, the ground forces that are allied with the U.S. and the coalition on the ground, the Kurds, the Iraqi security forces, are putting ISIS under pressure, keeping it, in effect, from expanding its ability.

This would seem to indicate that they are expanding their ability, that they have gotten their hands on something that makes them more threatening to those forces. I just wonder from your perspective how much this undermines the administration's claim that they were being successful in putting pressure on ISIS, that ISIS is getting weaker, rather than stronger, as a result of the coalition campaign?

SCHIFF: Well, I think the administration is correct when they say that ISIS is under greater pressure than ever. But that doesn't mean that they're not still a very potent force. And they are and they're capable of taking over new towns and they have. And they're also capable of exploring new weapons if they can get their hands on them.

But I don't think that that means that the trajectory of the conflict is different than what the administration is saying. Even if they lay their hands on chlorine or remnants of Saddam's chemical weapons program, I don't think that's a game-changer, as much as it as new horrific element to this already horrific conflict. So, I do think ISIS is feeling the pressure, and I think

particularly with Turkey now taking some real steps to try to close down that border to infiltration of new ISIS fighters, that may help stem the flow of people into the conflict. And obviously there's new pressure from the air and I think a new capability on the ground certainly with the Kurdish fighters. It doesn't surprise me that ISIS really wants to go after the Kurds.

BROWN: Congressman, is this a red line? Do you think the administration needs to change its strategy as a result of this?

SCHIFF: I don't think so.

[18:25:00]

And it's heartbreaking, because this conflict has already claimed so many lives and we all want to see it come to an end and we obviously want to see a quick end to the threat ISIS poses. But the reality is, I don't think we can get too far out ahead of the changes that the Iraqi government has to make to bring the Sunnis into the fold, because, again, we can send in a lot more troops, and we can send in spotters, and we can do a lot of things that some people are calling for during the presidential campaign.

And we can win some of the battles. But we have seen they don't stay won if the political problems aren't solved. And right now, those political problems are still as bad as ever. And I just don't want to see us trading American lives for Iraqis who aren't willing to make the political compromises they need to.

SCIUTTO: Let me ask you, Congressman Schiff, you mentioned American lives there. You heard the outgoing Army chief of staff yesterday saying that he would recommend U.S. forces on the ground there, perhaps as spotters for airstrikes, forward -deployed advisers to Iraqi forces. If ISIS has chemical weapons, that would put U.S. forces certainly in greater danger. Does that -- you say it's not a game-changer in terms of the battlefield on the ground. But could this be a game-changer in terms of putting U.S. troops into greater harm's way to fight ISIS?

SCHIFF: It could put our troops at greater risk.

You know, we have, I think, good precautions that we can take if we're concerned about access of ISIS to chemical weapons. But I think the greater risk is that really putting Americans in harm's way, regardless of whether they possess these chemical weapons, risking the capture of American special forces, risking the spectacle that we saw that the Jordanian people had to suffer when their pilot was burned alive.

You can imagine how the conflict would escalate if that were to happen to an American. So, I think the president, quite rightly, has been resisting this being drawn in, particularly when we don't see the Iraqis making the kind of political changes they need to make.

It does add some additional risk, but, frankly, Jim, I think the risk is already very considerable for American forces.

BROWN: Congressman Schiff, thank you so much.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source