[Berman:] President Trump begins 2020 facing several crises. Escalating tensions in Tehran after pro-Iranian protesters tried to storm, and they vandalized the U.S. embassy in Baghdad in Iraq. And this new threat from the North Korean dictator, Kim Jong-un, that risks the prospect or really or throws open the question of what's going on with the U.S.-North Korea relationship and the nuclear development inside North Korea. Joining us now, CNN political and national security analyst David Sanger. He's national security correspondent, "The New York Times." And he has a great piece on all of this in this morning's paper that includes this quote, David. Let me read this. "Both the Iranians and North Koreans seem to sense the vulnerability of a president under impeachment and facing re- election, even if they're often clumsy as they try to play those events to their advantage." Let's start with North Korea this morning. Kim saber rattling again. How is it that President Trump so misjudged his relationship with him?
[David Sanger, Cnn Political National Security Analyst:] John, I think the core of it is that the president believed that the force of his personality, the personal relationship that he put together with Kim was going to do it. And that that, combined with the economic lure of of development in North Korea, would make this happen. You know, remember that in Singapore and then at some later meetings, the president delivered these videos that showed, you know, hotel
[Harlow:] On the iPad.
[Sanger:] On the iPad. That's right. That showed hotels they were going to build along the beaches, the east coast of North Korea. By the way, I've been on some of those beaches years ago. They're all mined. They may want to de-mine them before they they get kids out on the beach there. But the truth of the matter is, in the end, the president didn't get to the core issue, which is that Kim views the nuclear weapons as his great insurance policy.
[Harlow:] So given that, I'm really interested in what you make of the White House response, because from the president, it has been very subdued, sort of we hope for the best. No "fire and fury." No "Little Rocket Man." From Mike Pompeo, "Chairman Kim will make the right decision, and he'll choose peace and prosperity over conflict and war." Is that a strategy, or is that cross your fingers and hope?
[Sanger:] That's a hope. It's not a strategy. At this point, the president is so invested in this policy, Poppy, that I don't think there's a way he can really go back to "fire and fury." Because it would be acknowledging that everything he's been putting together for the 18 past 18 months has failed. And, you know, his base believes that he actually disarmed North Korea.
[Berman:] Well, he I think he believes it. I mean, what's the tweet?
[Harlow:] Yes, that's a good point.
[Berman:] What's the tweet he's saying? He said and this was from June 13, 2018 "There is no longer a nuclear threat from North Korea."
[Sanger:] That was just as he was leaving Singapore.
[Berman:] And it wasn't true then, and it's not true now.
[Sanger:] Well, it's less true now than it was then. Because the fact of the matter is, what he failed to get in Singapore was a freeze
[Harlow:] Freeze.
[Sanger:] on any of their nuclear development.
[Harlow:] Right.
[Sanger:] So we think that, at the time of Singapore, Kim had 20, 25 weapons or, at least the fuel for those nuclear weapons. The best guess now is 38 to 40.
[Harlow:] Yes. As you as you point out in your piece, you know, rightly so, they even have the president and Kim fundamentally different understandings of what denuclearization on the peninsula even means. They're not even on the same page there. And you talk about the vulnerability that the president is in and viewed as vulnerable by Chairman Kim but also by Iran. And how that vulnerability, you believe, fueled what we saw play out in Baghdad over the last few days.
[Sanger:] First of all, these leaders, they all read "The Times." They all watch CNN. They know what's going on. They understand the president's in a very sensitive year. The president knows they know it. That's why he said a few weeks ago that Kim shouldn't interfere in the presidential election. What does interfere mean? It means create a crisis, OK? The Iranians get that, too. And so all the Iranians were doing, I think, in stoking these protests in Baghdad was making a point that your diplomats, your troops, are vulnerable. Anybody want to drop by and tell the president about the hostage crisis, you know, in Iran exactly 40 years ago?
[Berman:] Yes. Look, I mean, this is the U.S. embassy in Baghdad or outside the U.S. embassy in Baghdad. One of the most secure structures in the world. But still, it's remarkable to see the damage that can be done. And I wonder, David, just big picture. What does this do to the U.S. position in that part of the world and our strategy to fight ISIS, for instance? You know, our presence in Iraq is crucial
[Harlow:] Yes.
[Berman:] now as the U.S. withdraws from Syria. If we can't be in Iraq safely, the U.S., how are they going to battle ISIS?
[Sanger:] Well, one of the great oddities here is that the U.S. and Iran were on the same side of the ISIS battle. And after the 2015 nuclear agreement, President Obama had hoped and really did not follow up to try to make it happen that the Iranians would make fighting ISIS their next common move with the United States. Obviously, we went in different directions on that. But I think the Iranians clearly understand that the president's view of American troop presence in Iraq and Afghanistan and every place else is get them out. And if they can just push that along a bit, they might actually get the withdrawal they want in the midst of a presidential election. I mean, it happened in Syria with much smaller numbers. It would be a harder thing to do in Iraq. But the president's overall instinct is, Why are we there?
[Berman:] Watch this space. David Sanger, terrific piece this morning.
[Sanger:] Thank you very much.
[Berman:] I'm sure we're going to see you again soon.
[Sanger:] I suspect we will. Happy new year to both of you.
[Harlow:] Happy new year.
[Berman:] Happy new year.
[Harlow:] Enjoy.
[Berman:] All right. There's this brash move from Israel's embattled prime minister. What he is now asking lawmakers as he faces corruption charges. That's next.