CNN's Frederik Pleitgen Arrives In Tehran; First Western Journalist To Enter Country Since Start Of Latest Conflict With Israel, Network Says
CNN's Frederik Pleitgen filed his first report on Wednesday after arriving in Tehran, reporting on hearing anti-aircraft gunfire as well as the sounds of potential Israeli airstrikes or some sort of interceptions.
'There's very few people actually though here. A lot of people appear to have left,' Pleitgen said of the streets of the city. In his report on The Lead with Jake Tapper, he reported that there was 'a good amount of traffic' going out of the city and stores that were closed.
More from Deadline
Iranian National TV Headquarters Hit By Israeli Airstrike During Live Broadcast
Donald Trump Says Tucker Carlson Apologized Amid MAGA Split On U.S. Involvement In Iran Strikes
Donald Trump Appears To Praise David Ellison Amid Pending Skydance-Paramount Merger Approval, Settlement Talks In '60 Minutes' Lawsuit
He said that they drove through Iran, 'the mood there is fairly calm. Not a lot of panic.'
In a digital video, Pleitgen, traveling with his producer, also described driving through a 'substantial part' of Iran to get to Tehran, where it 'appears to be almost business as usual.'
The network said that Pleitgen is the first Western journalist to enter the country since the conflict with Israel started. President Donald Trump said earlier Wednesday that he had not yet decided on whether the U.S. would take part in further efforts to dismantle Iran's nuclear arsenal.
Pleitgen is CNN senior international correspondent and anchor.
Networks have been mobilizing crews and coverage in the region since the Israeli airstrikes started on Thursday.
Much of the reporting from the Middle East on broadcast and cable networks has been from Israel, as journalists have been reporting on Iran's retaliatory strikes and the damage in Tel Aviv and elsewhere.
CNN has been providing images from Tehran from Iran's Mehr News Agency. The Committee to Protect Journalists said that the conflict with Israel has already increased media censorship among Iranian journalists, in a country where the government already controls broadcasting.
CNN earlier in the day featured Christiane Amanpour's interview with Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Majid Takht-Ravanchi, who told her, 'If the Americans decide to get involved militarily, we have no choice but to retaliate, wherever we find the targets necessary to be acted upon.'
Best of Deadline
'Stick' Soundtrack: All The Songs You'll Hear In The Apple TV+ Golf Series
'Stick' Release Guide: When Do New Episodes Come Out?
'The Buccaneers' Season 2 Soundtrack: From Griff To Sabrina Carpenter
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
25 minutes ago
- The Hill
Israeli defense chief says Iran leader ‘cannot continue to exist'
Israel's defense chief on Thursday declared Iran's leader 'cannot continue to exist,' days after President Trump joined Israeli officials in threatening the ayatollah amid the escalating Middle East conflict. Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said 'without question' Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei cannot continue to exist as part of the war, multiple media outlets reported. Katz made the remarks while touring the site of an Iranian missile strike in Holon, just south of Tel Aviv. In an earlier social media post reacting to Tehran's latest strikes on Israel, Katz called the Iranian leader 'cowardly' and vowed he 'will be held accountable.' The defense chief on Thursday echoed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's characterization of Khamenei as a 'modern Hitler' intent on destroying the Israeli people. Netanyahu in an interview with ABC News earlier in the week declined to rule out targeting the Iranian leader, saying eliminating him would 'end the conflict.' Trump, who had reportedly cautioned Israel against targeting Iran's supreme leader, indicated the U.S. and Israel are aware of Khamenei's location. The president called him an 'easy target' but said there were no plans to take him out — 'at least right now.' Trump added Wednesday that the United States' 'patience is wearing thin' while warning the Iranian leader not to target American soldiers or civilians. The Iranian leader said Wednesday his country 'will never surrender' after Trump called on Iran to do just that, and without conditions. Trump has publicly mulled the U.S. directly engaging militarily to cripple Iran's nuclear capabilities in the absence of a deal to rein in Tehran's nuclear program. The president on Wednesday said he had given Iran an 'ultimate ultimatium' and was reviewing his options. 'I like to make a final decision one second before it's due,' he said.
The Hill
32 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump pushes back on report he approved attack plan for Iran
President Trump on Thursday pushed back on reporting that he had given approval for attack plans against Iran as he publicly insists he has yet to decide on a path forward. The Wall Street Journal reported late Wednesday that Trump had approved of attack plans for Iran, but was waiting to give a final order in case Tehran agreed to abandon its nuclear program. 'The Wall Street Journal has No Idea what my thoughts are concerning Iran!' Trump posted on Truth Social. The president did not dispute the substance of the report, and administration officials said Trump was deliberating his options. Trump on Wednesday morning was non-committal about a potential strike against Iran's nuclear facilities. Trump on Wednesday dodged a question about whether he's moving closer to ordering a strike against Iranian nuclear facilities. 'I may do it, I may not do it. I mean, nobody knows what I'm going to do,' Trump told reporters. 'I can tell you this, that Iran's got a lot of trouble. And they want to negotiate. And I say why didn't you negotiate with me before all this death and destruction.' Trump met in the Situation Room for a second consecutive day on Wednesday with members of his national security team amid conflict in the Middle East between Israel and Iran. The U.S. has not been directly involved in strikes against Iran thus far, and some of Trump's allies have cautioned against engaging in a war with Iran. But the president's rhetoric in recent days has gotten more threatening toward Tehran, including a social media post targeting Iran's supreme leader. Trump has said Iran reached out about potential talks, including a possible meeting at the White House. But the president indicated he wished they had reached out sooner and acknowledged such a meeting would be difficult logistically.
Bloomberg
36 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
How Bombing Iran Can Set Back Non-Proliferation
Donald Trump seems on the cusp of ordering B2 bombers to join Israel's assault on Iran's nuclear program. It could all be a bluff, of course, but I suspect Benjamin Netanyahu knew his man. The appeal of being the US president who finally ended the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran – as opposed to the one who Taco'd out of helping Israel to get there – will be strong. Should that happen, Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei will have multiple options: He could attack US bases, set Saudi oil refineries ablaze or close the Strait of Hormuz. Or, he could do nothing, hoping to avoid an all-out war he could never win. He might cut a new deal, abandon nuclear enrichment or build new enrichment cascades even deeper underground and dash for a bomb. Such are the unknowns that can produce the forever wars that nobody ever intends. The one thing that does seem clear, however, is that the Israeli and now potentially US decision to bomb a threshold nuclear power to its knees will have significant implications for arms proliferation. The optimistic case is that those B2s fly the roughly 7,000 miles from their base in Missouri to drop 30,000 pound (13,600 kilogram) Massive Ordnance Penetrator bombs on Iran's deeply buried uranium-enrichment facility, at Fordow, near the holy city of Qom, and obliterate it. With Israeli jets already taking care of less hard-to-reach targets, and assuming no secret factory gets missed, the Islamic Republic would have to restart its uranium-enrichment program from scratch. That should dissipate or at least postpone the risk of a regional arms race. For if Iran doesn't have a nuclear arsenal, there'd be no imperative for Saudi Arabia or Turkey to get one, too. At least, that's among the key justifications for taking military action that proponents in Washington and Israel have long made. Israel has its own reasons for preventing Iran from getting the ultimate weapon, which would pose an existential threat in implacably hostile hands. That doesn't apply for the US. Its interests are more focused on these regional proliferation calculations — a difference that may help explain the reluctance of successive American presidents to back Israeli plans for airstrikes. But a more positive regional outcome is hardly guaranteed. It isn't just that the MOPs could fail to blast through a mountain to the cascade chambers at Fordow, leaving Iran's neighbors to assume the worst — that the regime would dash for a bomb to ward off future attacks. That's especially true if Iran should, as some officials have threatened, kick out international inspectors and withdraw from the 1968 Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, or NPT. A less cheering interpretation is that no matter how successful the attack, it will reinforce for governments around the world the lesson that a working nuclear arsenal protects you from getting bombed or invaded. That was illustrated by Libya in 2011, Ukraine in 2022, and now Iran in 2025. Iran's fellow pariah state North Korea, meanwhile, remains free to taunt the US and its allies, because it already has the bomb. There's a bigger trend and context to this scenario, because the NPT looks increasingly like a document from an earlier era. It's going to lose potency as we move from a rules-based order to one in which stronger countries assert their perceived national interests, regardless of international laws and treaties. This is the world in which China, in 2016, simply dismissed international arbitration that rejected its claims to own the South China Sea and all islands within it, up to an imaginary 'nine-dash line.' It's the world in which Russia claims a right to invade Ukraine in breach of multiple treaties and agreements, and is willing to threaten a nuclear strike in pursuit of this territorial conquest. Meanwhile, the main architect of the rules-based order, the US, is now declaring intentions to take over Canada, Greenland and the Panama Canal. Arms control, too, looks out of fashion. China's adding 100 warheads to its arsenal each year, while most of the established nuclear powers have announced programs to update or expand theirs. New Start, the only remaining nuclear arms-control treaty is due to expire next year and there's no sign of any negotiations to renew it. In this environment, it becomes increasingly appealing to have your own nuclear weapons. What else could protect against apex predators such as China, Russia and the US? Or from the regional hegemon that Israel is fast becoming? 'Some will bandwagon with stronger states while others may decide to balance with the only truly powerful asset, nuclear weapons,' Nikolai Sokov, a nuclear negotiator (for Moscow) during the Cold War and now senior fellow with the Vienna Center for Disarmament and Non-Proliferation, told me. 'We are talking years, of course, so neither Trump, nor Netanyahu will be answerable or will have to deal with consequences.' Should Trump decide to join Israel in bombing Iran's fuel-enrichment facilities (another first), it may well have no discernible short term effect on proliferation. Added together, the world's nuclear arsenals already store 14,000 times the power of the one dropped on Hiroshima, and that figure is rising all the time. But while setting back one nuclear program, the attack on Iran will very likely add to a gathering momentum for more.
