Roberts Gates, former defense secretary and CIA director, has served eight Republican and Democratic administrations over the course of his career. On Wednesday, Feb. 21 at 2:00 p.m. ET, The Post’s David Ignatius speaks with Gates about the Israel-Gaza conflict, Russia’s war in Ukraine two years on and America’s global standing.
Washington Post Live is the newsroom’s live journalism platform, featuring interviews with top-level government officials, business leaders, cultural influencers and emerging voices on the most pressing issues driving the news cycle nationally and across the globe. From one-on-one, newsmaker interviews to in-depth multi-segment programs, Washington Post Live brings The Post’s newsroom to life on stage. Subscribe to The Washington Post on YouTube: https://wapo.st/2QOdcqK
Follow us:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/washingtonpost
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/washingtonpost/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/washingtonpost/
>> THE FUNDAMENTAL LESSON IS THE IMPORTANCE OF AMERICA CONTINUING TO ACCEPT ITS GLOBAL LEADERSHIP RESPONSIBILITIES THE COST OF THOSE RESPONSE, OF EXERCISING THOSE RESPONSIBILITIES IS DRAMATICALLY LESS THAN IF WE WERE TO ENTER INTO A WAR THAT
LEADERSHIP HAS LED TO 75 YEARS OF GREAT POWER PIECE. THAT’S THE FIRST TIME IN CENTURIES THAT HAS HAPPENED. THAT’S OUR MILITARY. THE INSTITUTION INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS HE HELPED DESIGN OUR OWN SYSTEM FOR THAT MATTER. AND SO WHAT IS REALLY CRITICAL IS THE MESSAGE
THAT IT’S IN AMERICA’S LONG-TERM INTERESTS. THAT IS OUR VITAL INTEREST TO EXERCISE THAT LEADERSHIP BECAUSE ALL THESE THINGS INTERNATIONALLY ARE CONNECTED WELCOME TO WASHINGTON POST LIVE. I’M DAVID IGNATIUS, A COLUMNIST AT THE PUMP. >> TODAY. I’M PLEASED TO BE
JOINED BY FORMER DEFENSE SECRETARY BOB GATES. HE SERVED IN THAT POSITION UNDER BOTH PRESIDENT BUSH, 43 AND PRESIDENT OBAMA AND THAT SENSE, HE SYMBOLIZES WHAT USED TO BE A TRADITION OF BIPARTISAN FOREIGN POLICY AND THE COUNTRY. WELCOME BACK TO WASHINGTON POST LIVE
AND SECRETARY THANKS DAVID SO WE’VE GOT A LOT TO TALK ABOUT. I’D LIKE TO GET STARTED WITH RUSSIA. >> YOU WERE >> RUSSIA ANALYST EARLY IN YOUR CAREER AT CIA, YOU WROTE A DOCTORAL DISSERTATION ABOUT, ABOUT RUSSIA BEGIN BY ASKING
YOU ABOUT THE DEATH OF OPPOSITION LEADER ALEXEI NAVALNY IN PRISON OVER THE WEEKEND. >> DO YOU THINK THAT >> PUTIN ORDERED HIS KILLING? >> AND >> IN GENERAL, WHY DID THIS HAPPEN NOW, ON THE EVE OF RUSSIA’S PRESIDENTIAL
ELECTION, I WANT TO SAY SO-CALLED ELECTION. >> WHY NOW? >> THING, NOW, BECAUSE HE THINKS HE CAN GET AWAY WITH IT. YOU KNOW, WHETHER HE DIRECTLY ORDERED IT OR WHETHER LIKE HENRY THE SECOND HE SAID WE’LL KNOW WHEN RID ME OF THIS
TROUBLESOME PRIEST JUST I THINK MR. NAVALNY IS THE LATEST IN A LONG LINE OF VICTIMS OF OF PUTINS DETERMINATION TO HAVE NO, NO OPPOSITION. THE KILLING OF BORIS NEMTSOV ARE BRIDGED RIGHT OUTSIDE THE KREMLIN THE POISONING OF LET VEIN INFO AND
VARIOUS OTHERS AL NAVALNY THE WOMAN JOURNALISTS SEVERAL YEARS AGO THE LIST IS PRETTY LONG AND SHOULD NOT TO MENTION MR. PRIGOZHIN WHO HAD THE TEMERITY TO ACTUALLY CHALLENGE PUTIN WHO GUIDE IN A QUOTE, UNQUOTE MYSTERIOUS PLANE CRASH. SO THERE’S A LONG LIST OF PEOPLE
THAT PUTIN, AS HAS HAD REMOVED FROM THE SCENE ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. AND I THINK AS I AS I SUGGESTED, I THINK HE DID IT NOW BECAUSE HE COULD GET AWAY WITH IT AND HE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT IN THE RUSSIAN IT’S
AN ELECTION NEXT YEAR OR NEXT MONTH THAT THERE WAS, THERE WAS NO OPPOSITION TO SPEAK OF SO WHEN YOU SAY >> COULD GET AWAY WITH IT, THAT IMPLIES THAT HE HAS NO REASON TO BE WORRIED ABOUT THE POLITICAL REACTION ABOUT DEMONSTRATIONS PROTEST, ANGER
AMONG, AMONG THE RUSSIAN PUBLIC IS THAT SO IS HE REALLY THAT INSULATED NOW FROM DOMESTIC DISSENT? >> I THINK SO. I THINK THAT HE, YOU KNOW, THE RUSSIAN INTELLIGENCE SERVICES HAVE HAVE SUCH PERVASIVE SOURCES AND HAVE SUCH PERVASIVE SURVEILLANCE TECHNIQUES AROUND THE COUNTRY
THAT ANYTIME A GROUP OF PEOPLE, WHETHER THROUGH THE INTERNET OR SOME OTHER MEANS, I WANT TO HAVE A DEMONSTRATION OR PROTEST SOMETHING. THE POLICE ARE THERE WHEN THEY ARRIVE ESSENTIALLY. AND SO HE REALLY HAS I THINK IMPOSED HIS WILL AND AND
FRANKLY, YOU KNOW, HE ALSO DOESN’T HAVE MUCH TO FEAR FROM THE WEST AND HIS VIEW. IT’S NOT JUST HIS OWN PEOPLE THAT HE’S NOT WORRIED ABOUT AT THIS POINT. I THINK HE’S FEELING ACTUALLY PRETTY SMOKE. THE RUSSIAN ECONOMY HAS HAS RECOVERED FROM THE INITIAL
MONTHS OF SANCTIONS I ACTUALLY GOT A PRETTY GOOD CASH BALANCE THANKS TO SELLING OIL AND GAS AND THEY’RE GETTING A LOT OF CONSUMER GOODS FROM CHINA AND FROM CENTRAL ASIA AND TURKEY AND ELSEWHERE. SO THE DAILY LIVES OF MOST RUSSIANS HAVE NOT
BEEN AFFECTED VERY MUCH EXCEPT OF COURSE THE FAMILIES OF THOSE WHO ARE MANY FAMILIES WHO HAVE LOST THEIR SONS, HUSBANDS, BROTHERS IN UKRAINE, BUT I THINK HE’S FEELING LIKE THINGS ARE GOING HIS WAY INSIDE RUSSIA IN TERMS OF THE ECONOMY AND CONTROL AND I THINK HE BELIEVES
THAT AT THIS POINT, THE WEST HAS DONE ALL THEY CAN DO TO MAKE LIFE MORE DIFFICULT FOR HIM AND IN FACT, AS THE WEST BEGINS TO FRACTURE OF THAT, HIS POSITION WILL ONLY GET STRONGER THAT’S A CHILLING ASSESSMENT. THINGS GOING HIS WAY WANT TO
PRESSURE ON THE QUESTION OF WHAT THE US CAN DO ABOUT IT. THE WHITE HOUSE SAID THAT TWO DAYS AGO THAT THEY WILL ANNOUNCE NEW SANCTIONS TOMORROW. AFTER THE DEATH OF NAVALNY >> CAN YOU THINK OF SANCTIONS OF THINGS THE PRESIDENT COULD
ANNOUNCE TOMORROW THAT WOULD ACTUALLY MAKE A DIFFERENCE AND PENETRATE THIS SENSE. PUTIN HAS, AS YOU SAY, OF GROWING AND VULNERABILITY THANK YOU. >> IF THERE WERE SANCTIONS THAT ACTUALLY COULD INFLUENCE HIS BEHAVIOR. WE WOULD HAVE ALREADY IMPOSED THEM ON RUSSIA I DON’T
HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT THE ADMINISTRATION HAS IN MIND. IT MAY BE SANCTIONS AGAINST SPECIFIC INDIVIDUALS AGAINST OLIGARCH’S. I DON’T KNOW WHAT THEY HAVE IN MIND, BUT IN TERMS OF REALLY IMPACTING THE RUSSIAN ECONOMY OR PUTIN’S POSITION AND SO ON. IT’S HARD FOR ME TO
BELIEVE THEY WILL COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT IS QUALITATIVELY MORE IMPACTFUL THAN WHAT THEY’VE ALREADY, WHAT THEY’VE ALREADY DONE I WAS IN MUNICH ON FRIDAY AS THE NEWS OF NAVALNY’S DEATH, THEY CAME ACROSS THE >> WIRES AND WATCHED AS HIS SUDDENLY WIDOWED WIFE, YULIA,
ADDRESSED THE MUNICH SECURITY CONFERENCE VERY MOVING OR FACE JUST SHOWING THE GRIEF THAT SHE WAS EXPERIENCING. SHE NOW HAS SAID THAT SHE WANTS TO LEAD A RUSSIAN OPPOSITION MOVEMENT THAT PURSUING THE SAME GOALS AS HER LATE HUSBAND. >> DO YOU THINK
>> THAT SHE CAN MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE AND IN GENERAL, WHAT CAN AND OPPOSITION DO NOT. >> TERMS >> OF TOMORROW NEXT WEEK, NEXT YEAR, OR EVEN BUT OVER THE LONG RUN TO ALTER THE TRAJECTORY OF, OF RUSSIA THANK IT CERTAINLY IS
NOT A SHORT-TERM PROSPECT. I HOPE THAT IF SHE DOES GO FORWARD AND LEADING THE RUSSIAN OPPOSITION, THAT SHE DOES IT FROM THE OUTSIDE, FROM OUTSIDE OF RUSSIA BECAUSE IF SHE’S INSIDE RUSSIA, SHE MAY BE ARRESTED JUST AS QUICKLY AS
THIS YOUNG FORMER BALLERINA WAS JUST ARRESTED, I THINK FOR MAKING $150 CONTRIBUTION TO THE UKRAINIAN CAUSE. SO I THINK WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN THE ONE THING THAT WE HAVE NOT DONE SUFFICIENTLY IN MY VIEW IS USE OUR STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS CAPABILITIES. TO COMMUNICATE
DIRECTLY WITH THE RUSSIAN PEOPLE ABOUT WHAT THEIR GOVERNMENT IS DOING, NOT JUST IN UKRAINE, BUT THE CORRUPTION THE WEALTH SIPHONING OF RUSSIA’S WEALTH THE REPRESSION, THE KILLING OF PEOPLE LIKE MR. NAVALNY AND OTHERS >> THE
>> KIND OF REGIME THEY ACTUALLY HAVE AND I THINK WE HAVE BEEN RELUCTANT TO PRESS THE KIND OF EFFORT INSIDE RUSSIA THAT FRANKLY, WE DID A LOT OF DURING THE COLD WAR WHEN THE SOVIETS WERE IN CHARGE OF THE COUNTRY, WE INFILTRATED ALL KINDS OF
THINGS A INTO RUSSIA OVER TIME AND NOT TO MENTION THE RADIOS, RADIO FREE EUROPE, VOICE OF AMERICA, RADIO RADIO LIBERTY AND SO ON. WE STILL HAVE THOSE, BUT I THINK WE’D BEEN VERY CAUTIOUS ABOUT ABOUT USING THEM AGAINST THE REGIME AND USING
INTERNET SOCIAL MEDIA LIKE TELEGRAM AND SOME OF THESE OTHER VENUES TO TRY AND SEND A MESSAGE TO THE RUSSIAN PEOPLE ABOUT THE KIND OF GOVERNMENT THEY HAD. SO WE COULD BE ACTUALLY HELPING THOSE IN THE OPPOSITION OR WHO WANT TO
CREATE SOME KIND OF AN OPPOSITION INSIDE RUSSIA? >> SO JUST TO CLOSE OUT THIS, THIS AREA OF OUR CONVERSATION, IF YOU WERE BACK AT THE CIA TODAY AS DIRECTOR, WOULD YOU BE LOOKING FOR WAYS TO USE THAT AGENCY AND OTHER AGENCIES OF
THE GOVERNMENT TO INCREASE THE PRESSURE ON AND PUTIN. AND TO ENCOURAGE, TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE EFFORTS TO CHALLENGE THAT REGIME IT’S DILUTE. LATE >> WHO ARE SAYING THAT >> I THINK THAT SAYS IT ALL. I JUST I THINK THAT THE DIRECTION
LITERALLY HAS TO COME FROM THE PRESIDENT CIA IS I’M GONNA GO OFF AND DO THESE THINGS ON THEIR OWN. >> BUT THERE’S A STRATEGIC DECISION ON THE PART OF THE PRESIDENT THAT THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE >> SUPPORTIVE OF THE RUSSIAN
OPPOSITION. SO IT’S NOT JUST WHAT CIA MIGHT DO IT’S WHAT THE STATE DEPARTMENT DOES OVERLY, IT’S WHAT WHAT WE DO IN TERMS OF PROVIDING ASSISTANTS TO SOME OF THOSE GROUPS. YOU KNOW, ALWAYS BEFORE WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THIS KIND OF THING, THE
QUESTION WAS, WELL, IF YOU SUPPORT THEM, DOESN’T THAT COMPROMISE THEM? >> HOME >> AS JUST BEING TOOLS OF THE UNITED STATES? MY REACTION GENERALLY HAS ALWAYS IT’S BEEN THERE ALREADY SUSPECTED OR ACCUSED BY THEIR GOVERNMENTS OF BEING SUPPORTED BY CIA AND THE
UNITED STATES. SO WHAT’S THE POINT? >> WE >> WHERE THEY’RE GETTING BLAMED FOR SOMETHING THAT IS NOT HAPPENING. MAYBE WE OUGHT TO MAKE IT HAPPEN SO LET’S TURN TO ANOTHER GRIM TOPIC. WE’RE COMING UP ON THE TWO-YEAR
ANNIVERSARY OF THE WAR IN UKRAINE, FEBRUARY 24 >> GIVE US YOUR ASSESSMENT. ASSESSMENT AND THE SECRETARY OF THE WAR, AFTER AFTER TWO YEARS. AND WHERE ARE YOU THINK UKRAINE STANDS AGAINST THE RUSSIAN INVADERS? >> AS SO OFTEN HAS HAPPENED IN
RUSSIAN HISTORY. THERE ARE MILITARY PERFORMANCE AT THE OUTSET WAS VERY BAD HAND OVER TIME, THEY HAVE RECOVERED. THEY HAVE SUFFERED ENORMOUS LOSSES, 315,000 OR SO KILLED AND WOUNDED AFTER TWO-THIRDS OF THE TANK FORCE THAT THEY HAD BEFORE THE INVASION AND ARMOR AND SO
ON. THEY’VE HAD ENORMOUS, ENORMOUS LOSSES. THAT CHARACTERISTIC OF THE RUSSIANS ALSO OVER HISTORY AND AND MEANWHILE, THEY HAVE GOT THEIR DEFENSE INDUSTRIES BACKUP AND RUNNING. THEY HAVE AND PRODUCING A LOT OF STUFF. THEY’RE GETTING A LOT OF
DRONES FROM IRAN, BUILDING A FACILITY WITH IRANIAN HELP INSIDE RUSSIA TO BUILD DRONES, GETTING AMMUNITION FROM NORTH KOREA FOR ARTILLERY AND SO ON. >> AND, YOU >> KNOW, A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE REFERRING TO THE WAR AT THIS
POINT IS A STALEMATE. I’M AFRAID I BELIEVE AT THIS POINT IT’S ACTUALLY NOT SO MUCH A STALEMATE, BUT THAT THE RUSSIANS HAVE REGAINED MOMENTUM AND IT’S NOT BREAKTHROUGH KIND OF MOMENTUM. BUT IT IS THE SENSE THAT THEY ARE NOW THE ONES PRESSING THE OFFENSIVE,
THE LOSS OF ABDIVKA WAS, WAS IMPORTANT IT’S NOT, YOU KNOW, IT CREATES AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE RUSSIANS TO MOVE THE LINES FURTHER TO THE EAST AND EVERYTHING. I’M READING IS THAT THE RUSSIANS ARE ON THE OFFENSIVE ALL A LOT AT VARIOUS
DIFFERENT PLACES ALONG 600 MILE FRONTIER AND AND THEY HAVE MORE AND MORE SUPPLIES COMING IN. I’VE DONE I’VE READ THAT FOR EVERY ARTILLERY SHELL THAT THE UKRAINIANS FIRE, THE RUSSIANS ARE FIRING TEN AND SO THE UKRAINIANS NOW ARE FACING THIS SHORTAGE OF AMMUNITION.
ARTILLERY. THEY’RE FACING SHORTAGES WHEN IT COMES TO AIR DEFENSE AND SO ON. SO I THINK I THINK THAT I THINK THAT THE RUSSIANS ARE FEELING THAT THE TIDE HAS TURNED AND THAT WHILE THERE’S STILL A LOT CITING TO BE DONE, THAT THE INITIATIVE
HAS PASSED TO THEM AND THE QUESTION OF COURSE, IS WHAT IS TO BE DONE ABOUT THAT THE EUROPEANS HOPE WE SO OFTEN CRITICIZED HAVE COME THROUGH WITH SOME 55 BILLION IN ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE FOR UKRAINE A REAL LIFELINE FOR THE UKRAINIAN GOVERNMENT THE
EUROPEAN GOVERNMENTS HAVE PLEDGED A LOT OF MILITARY SUPPORT FOR THE UKRAINIANS HAVE SIGNED SECURITY GREEN, BOTH THE FRENCH, THE GERMANS OF SCIENCE PURITY AGREEMENTS WITH THE UKRAINIAN GOVERNMENT. PROBLEM IS THE EUROPEANS JUST DON’T HAVE MUCH IN THEIR SPOT PINES
AND AND THEY SAY THEY’RE GOING TO DO MORE AND PRODUCE MORE, INCREASE THE PRODUCTION OF THESE WEAPONS AND AMMUNITION AND SO ON. >> BUT >> WON’T APPEAR YOU’RE ON THE BATTLEFIELD UNTIL 2025 OR PERHAPS EVEN BEYOND >> SO WHILE WE
>> EUROPEANS HAVE EXTENDED AN ECONOMIC LIFELINE THE UKRAINIANS THE ONLY REAL MILITARY LIFELINE IS THE ONE FROM THE UNITED STATES. AND AS WE ALL KNOW THAT ONE IS SHALL WE SAY ON PAUSE RIGHT NOW >> WE’LL COME TO THE POLITICS
OF THAT INABILITY TO PASS THE SUPPLEMENTAL MILITARY ASSISTANCE TO UKRAINE. BUT ONE THING THAT PRESIDENT BIDEN COULD DO RIGHT NOW, I BELIEVE WITH HIS EXISTING LEGAL AUTHORITY HE’S IS TO SEND WHAT ARE CALLED ATACMS 300s LONGER RANGE MISSILES THAT COULD RANGE
TARGETS. IN RUSSIAN-OCCUPIED CRIMEA, FOR EXAMPLE I WROTE THIS MORNING THAT WHEN PRESIDENT ZELENSKYY SPOKE IN MUNICH WITH A GROUP OF BIPARTISAN MEMBERS OF CONGRESS. HE SAID, THIS IS WHAT I NEED TO GET THROUGH THIS PERIOD WHERE RUSSIANS HAVE THE MOMENTUM. WE
NEED THIS NOW FIRST, DO YOU THINK THAT’S A GOOD IDEA ASCEND THE ATACMS NOW DO YOU WORRY ABOUT THE RISKS? AND DO YOU THINK IT WOULD HAVE ANY DIFFERENCE IN THIS MOMENTUM SHIFT THAT YOU DESCRIBED EARLIER?
>> ONE, OF MY CONCERNS HAS BEEN THAT THE US IT DECISION-MAKING PROCESS AND PROVIDING MORE ADVANCED WEAPONS TO UKRAINE HAS BEEN DELIBERATIVE. SLOW, AND OFTEN TOO LATE THE GOVERNMENT WILL DELIBERATE FOR MONTHS ABOUT WHETHER TO SEND TANKS AND THEN ULTIMATELY DECIDE TO SEND
THE TANKS. THE GOVERNMENT WILL DEBATE FOR A YEAR OR MORE WHETHER TO ALLOW F 16s TO GO TO THE UKRAINIANS AND THEN WE’LL FINALLY DECIDE, YES. WE DON. AND OTHERS CAN PROVIDE HIM 16th. WE COULD HAVE BEGUN UKRAINIAN PILOT TRAINING ON F
16s, A YEAR-AND-A-HALF AGO AND THEN WHEN THE PLANES BECAME AVAILABLE, THE DECISION WAS MADE TO MAKE THE PLANES AVAILABLE FOR UKRAINIANS COULD ACTUALLY STEP INTO THE COCKPITS AND START FLYING THEM, NOT HAVE TO BEGIN THE TRAINING AT THAT POINT SO I THINK WE’VE BEEN I
THINK WE’VE BEEN SLOW TO PROVIDE THE KIND OF WEAPONRY THAT THAT COULD HAVE MADE A DIFFERENCE IN THE WAY THE FLOW OF THIS CONFLICT HAS HAPPENED. AND I THINK THE SAME THING IS TRUE OF THE ATACMS. THE LONGER-RANGE TACTICAL MISSILES
I THINK YOU KNOW, GIVING THE UKRAINIANS THE ABILITY TO ATTACK TARGETS FOR EXAMPLE, IN CRIMEA SEEMS TO ME TO BE A NO-BRAINER. IT’S THEIR TERRITORY. IF THEY CHOOSE TO IF THEY CHOOSE TO ATTACK TARGETS, THEY’RE ATTACKING TARGETS INSIDE UKRAINE, NOT TARGETS
INSIDE I’D RUSSIA, NO MATTER WHAT PUTIN CLAIMS AND, YOU KNOW IF YOU WANT TO GIVE THE RUSSIANS PAUSE, IF YOU WANT TO, IF YOU WANT TO INTERRUPT THAT SENSE OF MOMENTUM THAT THEY HAVE BY NOT BE ABLE TO DO THINGS LIKE DROP THE KERCH
STRAIT BRIDGE THAT WOULD HAVE A BIG IMPACT ON THE RUSSIANS. I THINK PSYCHOLOGICALLY AS WELL AS MILITARILY. I THINK GIVING THE UKRAINIANS THE ABILITY TO STRIKE SOME OF THESE STRATEGIC TARGETS IN CRIMEA AS THEY HAVE ATTACKED THE BLACK SEA FLEET SUCCESSFULLY I THINK IS REALLY
IMPORTANT AND FOOD AT LEAST PSYCHOLOGICALLY CHANGE THE TENOR OF WHERE WE ARE AT THIS POINT SO IT’S BEEN ARGUED BY PEOPLE WHO ADVOCATE DOING WHAT YOU JUST DESCRIBED >> PROVIDING CAPABILITY TO HIT CRIMEA, THAT MORE BROADLY,
UKRAINE FACING THIS GROWING RUSSIAN MOMENTUM MUDHENS WILLINGNESS TO JUST KEEP STUFFING HUMAN BEINGS INTO THE MEAT GRINDER THAT UKRAINE WOULD BE WISE TO TRY TO HUNKER DOWN IN 2024 TO PROTECT THE TERRITORY IT HAS TO REFRAIN
FROM EFFORTS TO GO ALL THE WAY TO THE BLACK SEA OR THE SEA OF AZOV AS THEY TRIED TO LAST YEAR IN THEIR COUNTER OFFENSIVE, WHICH DIDN’T WORK, BUT TRY TO GET THROUGH 2020 BEFORE. AS INTACT AS THEY CAN WHAT HOPING
THAT NEXT NEXT YEAR 2025 WOULD PROVIDE NEW OPPORTUNITIES FOR GOING ON THE OFFENSIVE AGAIN, DO YOU THINK THAT’S BASICALLY THE RIGHT STRATEGY? >> I THINK THAT YOU CAN DO BOTH THINGS. I THINK I THINK YOU CAN DO TWO THINGS. I THINK FIRST OF
ALL WE DO. I MEAN THE WHOLE AND ONE OF THE MAIN VALUES OF THE PACKAGE OF ASSISTANCE, MILITARY ASSISTANCE, THAT’S ON THE HILL RIGHT NOW, WOULD BE ABLE TO GIVE THE UKRAINE WOULD BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THE UKRAINIANS WITH SIGNIFICANT ADDITIONAL AIR DEFENSE CAPABILITY. AND WOULD
GIVE THEM THE WHEREWITHAL TO ESTABLISH A STRONG DEFENSE ESSENTIALLY WHERE THEY ARE IN THE EASTERN PART OF THE COUNTRY. >> SO >> I THINK I THINK FOR THE TIME BEING, THE FIRST AND MOST IMPORTANT THING FOR THEM TO DO
IS NOT TO HUNKER DOWN, BUT TO ESTABLISH A VERY STRONG DEFENSIVE BARRIER. IN EASTERN UKRAINE. SO THEY DON’T LOSE ANY MORE TERRITORY. SO THE RUSSIANS CANNOT HAVE A SUCCESSFUL OFFENSIVE THAT TAKES BACK MORE TERRITORY OR TAKES MORE UKRAINIAN TERRITORY AND
THICKENS THE UKRAINIAN ABILITY TO RESPOND TO THESE RUSSIAN ATTACKS WITH ARTILLERY SHELLS AND SO ON. BUT ALSO HELPS THEM REBUILD THEIR OWN DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL CAPABILITY FOR THE LONGER TERM, BOTH IN THE NEAR AND LONGER TERM, BECAUSE THEY
HAVE SOME OF THAT CAPABILITY PARTICULARLY IN PRODUCING DRONES AND SOME OTHER THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT THE KEEP THE RUSSIANS, KEEP THE RUSSIANS AT BAY. THE SAME TIME THAT YOU HIT SOME OF THE STRATEGIC RUSSIAN TARGETS IN CRIMEA IS ALONG THAT
I JUST WAS TALKING ABOUT. SO I THINK YOU CAN DO BOTH THINGS. AND AND AND AT THE SAME TIME MAKE IT USE THIS YEAR TO MAKE SURE THAT RUSSIA CANNOT GO ANY FURTHER, ANY FARTHER TO THE EAST THAN THEY ALREADY ARE AND
SO STRENGTHEN UKRAINE THAT THE RUSSIANS COME TO SEE THE FUTILITY OF TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH WHAT THEY’RE HERE ALL RIGHT >> BOWLS ARE. >> AND WHAT THE RUSSIANS HAVE TOLD US AND TOLD OTHERS IS THEY WANT, THEY WANT BOTH FOUR
PROVINCES THAT THEY’VE OCCUPIED. THEY WANT THE SOUTHERN COAST UP TO AND INCLUDING ODESSA. THEY WANT A CHANGE OF GOVERNMENT IN KYIV OF OUR BOGUT RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT WHAT PLEDGES THAT UKRAINE WILL NEVER JOIN THE EU OR ORINATO? >> I
>> THINK WE ARE ALL OF THOSE THINGS HELP THE UKRAINIANS COUNTER ALL OF THOSE THINGS. KEEP THEM AT BAY AND MAYBE AT SOME POINT, THE RUSSIANS DECIDE ENOUGH IS ENOUGH WE PARTICULARLY IF WE IMPOSE SOME ADDITIONAL PAIN ON THEM WITH
RESPECT TO THE BLACK SEA FLEET AND WITH RESPECT TO THE KERCH BRIDGE AND VARIOUS OTHER TARGETS THAT I THINK HOW BOTH PSYCHOLOGICAL AND MILITARY VALUED FOR THEM. SO I THINK I THINK THIS IS ALL OF A PACKAGE. AND SO YOU CAN CALL IT
HUNKERING DOWN HONOR, BEING DEFENSIVE VIA THINK, IT’S BASICALLY RECOGNIZING, FIRST OF ALL, THE RUSSIAN ADVANTAGES IN MASS PARTICULARLY JUST A SIGNIFICANT DEMOGRAPHIC ADVANTAGE THAT THEY HAVE OVER UKRAINE. AND THEIR ABILITY TO BRING TO BEAR TREMENDOUS INDUSTRIAL CAPABILITY BEFORE
THEIR OWN FORCES WHAT I’VE JUST SUGGESTED IS AN APPROACH AND WHAT OTHERS HAVE SUGGESTED IS AN APPROACH THAT PREVENTS UKRAINE FROM LOSING ANY MORE TERRITORY TO THE RUSSIANS, HOLDS THE RUSSIANS AT BAY STRENGTHENS UKRAINE FOR THE
LONG TERM AND ALSO IMPOSES SOME STRATEGIC COSTS ON THE RISE. >> AND LET ME ASK AS BIDEN PURSUED A PROGRAM LIKE THAT, LET’S SAY, WHAT ABOUT THE PROMISEE? GENERAL MARK MILLEY, FORMER CHAIRMAN THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF, USED TO SAY
OFTEN THAT AS MUCH AS WE WERE DOING TO HELP UKRAINE FIGHT THE WAR, WE NEEDED TO DO MORE DIPLOMATICALLY TO TRY TO SEE IF WE COULD HELP THEM GET A SETTLEMENT THAT WAS NOT CONCESSIONARY TO PUTIN. >> WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT
THAT? DO WE NEED TO DO MORE ON THE DIPLOMATIC FRONT AS WELL? >> IT’S NOT CLEAR TO ME WHAT TO DO. NOW, WE’VE SEEN NO INDICATION THAT PUTIN IS, I MEAN, THE IDEA OF A NEGOTIATION OR DIPLOMACY IS THAT THERE’S SOMETHING TO NEGOTIATE.
HAVEN’T SEEN ANY EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER. PUTIN IS PREPARED TO NEGOTIATE. >> ANYTHING THAT HE HAS DONE IN UKRAINE OR NEGOTIATE ABOUT HIS LONGER-TERM OBJECTIVES IN UKRAINE SO IT TAKES TWO TO NEGOTIATE. AND SO ESSENTIALLY IF YOU’RE PRESSING ZELENSKYY AND THE UKRAINIANS TO NEGOTIATE
THEN THERE HAS TO BE SOME EXPECTATION OF SOME GIVE ON THE OTHER SIDE, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF THE CRITICS OF THE WAR AND SO ON TO SAY, FINAL, HOW DOES OUT OF THIS AND WHAT’S THE STRATEGY THAT WE’RE GOING TO PURSUE? I THINK THE STRATEGY IS
WHAT I JUST DESCRIBED AND THAT IS HELPING UKRAINE PREVENT ANY FURTHER RUSSIAN GAINS. BRING THIS THING GIVE THE RUSSIANS EVERY REASON TO BELIEVE THEY’RE NOT GOING TO BE SUCCESSFUL IN ACHIEVING THEIR GOALS. AND MAYBE AT THAT POINT, YOU CAN
HAVE NOT NECESSARILY IN CEASEFIRE THAT ESSENTIALLY A PRACTICE PRACTICAL STAND DOWN IN WHICH THE LEVEL OF VIOLENCE SIGNIFICANTLY IS REDUCED. AND UKRAINE CAN FOCUS ON HIS ECONOMIC AND MILITARY STRENGTH, REBUILDING THE COUNTRY. AND, AND THEN PURSUING THE RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE EU AND
NATO IT SEEMS TO ME THAT’S THE STRATEGY. AND THAT’S HIS PROBABLY AS POSITIVE AND THE END GAME AS YOU CAN SEE RIGHT NOW, ME MY, I THINK REALISTICALLY, IT’S GOING TO BE VERY DIFFICULT IN THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE FOR UKRAINE GET BACK THOSE FOUR PROVINCES
AND TO GET BACK CRIMEA MY VIEW IS THOUGH THAT THE WEST AND ALL THE COUNTRIES THAT WE CAN GET TO JOIN US POSITION OUGHT TO BE WITH RESPECT TO THOSE PROVINCES AND CRIMEA ESSENTIALLY OUR POSITION DURING THE ENTIRE COLD WAR WITH RESPECT TO THE BALTIC
STATES LATVIA, ESTONIA, AND LITHUANIA, WE NEVER RECOGNIZE SOVIET SOVEREIGNTY OVER THOSE THREE COUNTRIES. AND, AND EVEN, THEY EVEN MAINTAIN LEGATIONS AND WASHINGTON ALL THROUGH THE COLD WAR DIPLOMATIC LEGATIONS. SO WE NEVER RECOGNIZED SOVIET CONTROL. THINK, NO COUNTRY SHOULD RECOGNIZE SOVIET CONTROL
OVER THOSE, OVER THOSE PROVINCES OR CRIMEA, THAT ACCORDING TO INTERNATIONAL LAW, THAT’S ALL STILL YOU UKRAINIAN TERRITORY. AND MAYBE SOMEDAY UNDER A DIFFERENT KIND OF RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT, YOU’RE CAN BE A NEGOTIATION THAT RETURNS SOME, IF NOT ALL OF THAT TO
UKRAINE BUT IT’S. NOT GOING TO HAPPEN UNDER POOP >> ANOTHER DIMENSION OF RUSSIA’S CURRENT SINCE OF DOMINANCE HERE IS IT’S CONTINUED NUCLEAR SABER RATTLING. THE MOST RECENT EXAMPLE WAS LAST WEEKEND, FORMER PRESIDENT DMITRY MEDVEDEV MADE SOME COMMENTS
THAT WERE TO ME JUST STUNNINGLY IRRESPONSIBLE. I WANT TO JUST READ YOU A BRIEF EXCERPT. >> HE SAID >> ATTEMPTS TO RETURN RUSSIAN TO THE BORDERS OF 1991, WHICH MEANS TO SOMEDAY GET THOSE FOUR PROVINCES OF UKRAINE BACK IN UKRAINE’S HANDS WILL LEAD TO
ONLY ONE THING THAT THE GLOBAL WAR WITH WESTERN COUNTRIES USING ALL THE STRATEGICAL STRATEGIC ARSENAL OF OUR STATE AGAINST IV, BERLIN, LONDON WASHINGTON AGAINST ALL OTHER BEAUTIFUL HISTORICAL PLACES THAT HAVE LONG AGO BEEN INCLUDED IN THE FLIGHT TARGETS
OF OUR NUCLEAR TRIAD. SO THAT KIND OF NUCLEAR RHETORIC HAS BEEN A FEATURE OF THIS CONFLICT. I WANT TO ASK YOU, HOW YOU RESPOND TO IT YOURSELF. THERE’S SOME PEOPLE WHO THINK THESE RUSSIAN EFFORTS REALLY HAVE TAKEN US TO A MORE
DANGEROUS PLACE THAN WE’VE BEEN IN SINCE THE 1962 CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS, WHERE THEY SPEAK DIRECTLY ABOUT THE USE OF TACTICAL. AND IN THIS CASE STRATEGIC NUCLEAR WEAPONS >> AND HOW DO YOU >> THINK MORE BROADLY ABOUT THE QUESTION OF DETERRENCE IN THIS
ERA WHERE THE PEOPLE BEING DETERRED SEEM TO BE US, WHILE THE RUSSIANS MAKE EVER-GREATER THREATS ABOUT THEIR WILLINGNESS TO RISK NUCLEAR WAR WELL, I THINK FIRST OF ALL, DMITRY MEDVEDEV IS GOING OFF THE DEEPENED IN RECENT YEARS ONCE
PUTIN TOLD HIM HIS TIME AS PRESIDENT WAS UP AND IT WAS TIME FOR HIM TO RECEIVE HE HAS RHETORIC HAS BEEN FAR MORE LAND ISH. I MIGHT SAY THEN THE PUTINS OR ANYBODY ELSE’S FOR THAT MATTER IN AN OFFICIAL
POSITION IN RUSSIA. SO I FIRSTLY, PRETTY MUCH DISCOUNT WHAT MADE VIA THAT HAS TO SAY YOU KNOW, THERE WAS I THINK LEGITIMATE CONCERN AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF THE WAR ABOUT THE POTENTIAL USE OF RUSSIAN USE OF TACTICAL NUCLEAR WEAPONS
EYE-VIEW IS THAT PARTICULARLY AFTER THE FIRST FEW MONTHS THAT WELL THAT CONCERN HAS BEEN CONSIDERABLY EXAGGERATED. FIRST OF ALL THINK ALL NUCLEAR WEAPONS OR TACTICAL THEY DON’T CHANGE THE STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENT. SO THEY USE OF TWO OR THREE NUCLEAR WEAPONS, TACTICAL NUCLEAR WEAPONS ON
UKRAINIAN FRONT MAY HAVE AT SOME IMPACT IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY. THEY DON’T CHANGE THE OVERALL STRATEGIC OUTLOOK SECOND, THE CONSEQUENCES OF CROSSING THE NUCLEAR THRESHOLD ARE ENORMOUS AND IT WILL BRING COUNTRIES THAT ARE SORT OF IN THE MIDDLE RIGHT NOW, LIKE
INDIA OFF THE SIDELINES AND AND THEN YOU HAVE XI JINPING FLIES PUBLICLY WARNING NOT TO USE NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN UKRAINE OR WITH RESPECT TO UKRAINE. THERE’S A FINAL SORT OF REALISTIC FACTOR AND THAT IS, THAT YOU KNOW, IN THAT PART OF
THE WORLD IN THAT AREA, THE WINDS BLOW FROM WEST TO EAST, SETTING OFF TACTICAL NUCLEAR WEAPONS. IT’S GOING TO END UP WITH RUSSIA GETTING MOST OF THE RADIOACTIVE FALLOUT. SO, YOU KNOW, JUST LOGICALLY SPEAKING, I THINK I THINK IN TERMS OF
WHERE WE ARE IN UKRAINE NOW THAT THAT’S AN EXAGGERATED THAT’S AN EXAGGERATED THREAT. AND FRANKLY, I THINK IT’S AS YOU SIT SUGGESTED, THE RESULT HAS BEEN WE’VE ENDED UP BEING DETERRED RATHER THAN THE RUSSIANS ANOTHER STRANGE NEW DIMENSION OF THE RUSSIAN THREAT
CAME LAST WEEK WHEN >> REPRESENTED MIKE TURNER PROMPTED DISCUSSION OF NEW RUSSIAN SPACE WEAPONS. THE DETAILS ARE STILL UNCLEAR AND CLASSIFIED. >> BUT AS BEST WE KNOW, THESE ARE >> SYSTEMS, PERHAPS NUCLEAR POWERED, THAT COULD DISABLE THE
ENORMOUS GROWTH OF COMMERCIAL NETWORKS, CONSTELLATIONS IN, IN SPACE. AS WELL AS US MILITARY AND COMMUNICATIONS CAPABILITIES. >> YOU STUDIED >> THESE MATTERS FOR DECADES. WHAT WAS YOUR REACTION TO THIS DISCLOSURE ABOUT ABOUT NEW RUSSIAN EFFORTS AND MORE
GENERALLY HOW SHOULD WE THINK ABOUT A SPACE AS A FUTURE MILITARY DOMAIN? >> WELL, IT’S NOT TERRIBLY SURPRISING TO ME THAT THEY WOULD EXPLORE THESE KINDS OF WEAPONS, YOU KNOW, BACK IN THE 1970s, THEY WERE EXPERIMENTING WITH WHAT WAS CALLED THE
FRACTIONAL ORBITAL BOMBARDMENT SYSTEM, WHICH WAS ESSENTIALLY THE USE OF SPACE IN TERMS OF LAUNCHING NUCLEAR WEAPONS. SO THE IDEA OF DISABLING SATELLITES IS NOT EXACTLY A NEW ONE AGAIN, THE CHALLENGE IS HOW DO YOU SET OFF THAT KIND OF IF YOU’RE USING ACTUALLY A NUCLEAR
WEAPON IN SPACE HOW DO YOU PREVENT IT FROM SIMULTANEOUSLY TAKING OUT ALL THE RUSSIAN SATELLITES THAT ARE UP THERE. HOW ARE YOU GOING TO DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN YOUR RUSSIAN SATELLITE, A CHINESE SATELLITE, AND AN AMERICAN SATELLITE IF YOU’RE SETTING OFF
SOMETHING AS CRUDE AS A NUCLEAR, AS A NUCLEAR DEVICE SO IT HAS BOTTOM, IT HAS A LOT OF COMPLICATIONS. IT SEEMS TO ME, BUT THE NOTION OF COUNTRIES FIGURING OUT AND RUSSIA IN PARTICULAR FIGURING OUT OR TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO
DISABLE AN ADVERSARY’S SATELLITES AND DISRUPT MILITARY COMMUNICATIONS AND TARGETING CAPABILITIES AND INTELLIGENCE IS NOT AT ALL SURPRISING TO ME >> SO I MENTIONED Ms SECRETARY, THE MOOD THE LAST WEEKEND IN MUNICH AS BEING PRETTY GRIM AND ONE THEME SOMETIMES STATED, BUT
OFTEN UNSTATED, WAS A CONCERN ABOUT WHAT DONALD TRUMP’S ELECTION. AGAIN AS PRESIDENT MIGHT MEAN, WE HAVE A QUESTION FROM A MEMBER OF OUR AUDIENCE, ERIK PROVO FROM BELGIUM WHO ASKS WHAT WAS TRUMP TERM MEAN? THE END OF NATO?
>> WHAT DO YOU THINK >> WELL, YOU HEAR DIFFERENT THINGS FROM DIFFERENT ELEMENTS OF THE FORMER PRESIDENT’S CAMP. SOME THAT THIS IS ALL ABOUT PRESSURE ON THE EUROPEANS, ON ON NATO MEMBERS TO DO MORE FOR THEIR OWN
DEFENSE AND LESS ABOUT ACTUALLY WALKING AWAY FROM FROM THE FROM THE ALLIANCE. I THINK NOBODY ACTUALLY KNOWS RIGHT NOW WHAT WHAT RE-ELECTED PRESIDENT TRUMP WOULD DO WITH RESPECT TO NATO, NATO HAS MADE SOME PRETTY SIGNIFICANT STRIDES IN RECENT YEARS IN TERMS OF ADDITIONAL
RESOURCES FOR SECURITY AND DEFENSE. WHEN I WAS SECRETARY, THERE WERE I THINK FIVE COUNTRIES THAT MET THE 2% THRESHOLD THE GDP FOR DEFENSE. THEY ARE NOW 18 OF 32 BY THE END OF THIS YEAR. AND MOST OF
THE COUNTRIES IN THE ALLIANCE ARE HEADED IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION, ARE THE REASON IS PUTIN’S INVASION OF UKRAINE. BUT THE OTHER REASON IS, AND IT GOES BACK SEVERAL YEARS, HAS LESS TO DO WITH OUR PROSPECTIVE ELECTION AND IT DOES WITH PREVIOUS ELECTIONS. AND THAT IS
QUESTIONS IN EUROPE. AND I WOULD SAY AMONG ALL OF OUR ALLIES AND FRIENDS ABOUT WHETHER THE UNITED STATES IS STILL PREPARED TO ACCEPT THE RESPONSIBILITIES IN THE BURDENS OF GLOBAL LEADERSHIP AND MOST OF OUR ALLIES AND FRIENDS ARE HEDGING THEY ARE BUILDING UP
THEIR OWN DEFENSES BECAUSE THEY’RE NOT SURE WHETHER THE UNITED STATES IS GOING TO BE THERE FOR THEM IN THE EVENT OF A FUTURE THREAT FROM RUSSIA OR SOMEBODY ELSE? I THINK THAT THE CHALLENGE THAT THEY FACE IS OUT WHETHER, WHETHER TRUMP IS A
ONE-OFF OR WHETHER BIDEN IS A ONE-OFF AND IT’S THAT UNPREDICTABILITY ABOUT THE FUTURE OF AMERICAN, OF AMERICA’S ROLE IN THE WORLD IT IS CAUSING THIS HEDGING TO TAKE PLACE. YOU KNOW, 11 OF THE POINTS I LIKE TO MAKE IS THAT
THE LEADERS OF SAUDI ARABIA, THE UAE, AND ISRAEL THERE HAD BEEN MORE VISITS TO BEIJING AND MOSCOW BY THE LEADERS OF THOSE THREE COUNTRIES IN THE LAST THREE HERE’S THEN THERE HAVE BEEN TO WASHINGTON, DC. >> SO
>> THE REST OF THE WORLD IS NOT QUITE SURE WHERE AMERICA IS HEADED REGARDLESS OF WHO IS PRESIDENT AND THEY’RE ALL HEDGING BECAUSE THEY DON’T KNOW AND THIS IS A VERY REAL CONCERN FOR OUR LONG-TERM VITAL INTERESTS ARE LONG-TERM STRESS TEACH IQ INTERESTS BECAUSE IF
WE CAN’T, IF THEY CAN’T COUNT ON US, WE CAN’T COUNT ON THEM >> LET’S SWITCH TO ANOTHER CRISIS WHERE AMERICAN POWER AND DIPLOMACY CERTAINLY OUR INTERESTS ARE ENGAGED IN THAT. THAT’S THE GAZA WAR THE UNITED STATES JUST VETOED ANOTHER UN RESOLUTION YESTERDAY CALLING
FOR A CEASEFIRE IN THE GAZA WAR. WHAT I ASKED YOU WHETHER YOU THINK THAT VETO WAS WISE BUT MORE BROADLY PRESIDENT BIDEN AND PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU INCREASINGLY SEEN TO BE ON A COLLISION COURSE IN WHICH BIDEN TRIES TO GET A
DE-ESCALATION OF THE CRISIS IN GAZA. AND THEN YOU ALWAYS SEEMS TO BE RESISTING. YOU’RE A LONG TIME WATCHER OF BIBI NETANYAHU. >> WHAT ADVICE HAVE YOU >> GOT FOR PRESIDENT BIDEN NOW IN DEALING? >> WITH >> THIS CRISIS, WHICH IS COST,
BECAUSE SO MUCH SUFFERING ON BOTH SIDES, BUT ALSO STILL HAS THE RISK OF BECOMING A MUCH, MUCH BIGGER, MUCH WORSE CONFLICT THANK THAT. >> I THINK THAT >> PART OF THE PROBLEM IS THE UNITED STATES NEEDS TO
UNDERSTAND THAT UNLIKE ON A LOT OF OTHER POLICIES THAT CAN YAHOO, ON THE TWO-STATE SOLUTION AS A LOT OF POPULAR SUPPORT, NATO’S REAL. I THINK THERE CONTINUES TO BE AN UNDERESTIMATE OUTSIDE OF ISRAEL ON THE TRAUMATIC EFFECT ON
ISRAEL OF OCTOBER 7, AND, YOU KNOW, ISRAEL WAS CREATED TO PREVENT ANOTHER HOLOCAUST AND TO PREVENT POGROMS THAT THERE WOULD BE A SAFE PLACE FOR JEWS. AND THE WORLD AND ALL OF THESE WARS WITH THE ARAB STATES. THEY HAVE NEVER EXPERIENCED ANYTHING LIKE THE MASSACRE OF INNOCENT
CIVILIANS THAT THEY SUFFERED ON OCTOBER 7. AND I THINK IT HAS HAD A HUGE IMPACT PSYCHOLOGICALLY INSIDE ISRAEL. AND SO I THINK THAT I THINK THAT THE ADMINISTRATION WAS CORRECT AFTER OCTOBER 7 AND THE VERY STRONG SUPPORT THAT THEY PROVIDED FOR ISRAEL UNDER THOSE
CIRCUMSTANCES. I THINK AS THE, AS THE THAT THE RETALIATION AGAINST HAMAS IN GAZA HANDS PROCEED. AND I THINK THE ADMINISTRATION HAS ALSO TAKEN THE RIGHT POSITION IN TERMS OF PRESSING HARDER FOR MORE HUMANITARIAN RELIEF. STEVE MOORE FOOD, MORE MADISON AND SO
ON. AND, AND TWO. AND MORE EFFORT TO PREVENT COLLATERAL DAMAGE TO REWET THE KILLING OF INNOCENT PALESTINIANS THIS HAS BEEN MADE MUCH TOUGHER BY HAMAS, HAS WHOLE APPROACH, WHICH IS TO INTEGRATE THEMSELVES WITH THE CIVILIAN IN POPULATION SO THAT THERE IS NO
WAITING GETTING UP HAMAS WITHOUT GOING THROUGH INNOCENT CIVILIANS. THIS IS WHAT THE TALIBAN DID. THIS IS WHAT HAMAS DOES AND IT MAKES THE SITUATION ALL THE MORE COMPLICATED FOR ISRAEL. MY OWN VIEW, DAVID, IS THAT WHILE WE HAVE TO SAY STATE THAT ULTIMATELY A TWO-STATE
SOLUTION IS THE ONLY SOLUTION WE HAVE TO RECOGNIZE THAT IT’S GOING TO BE A LONG PATH TO GET THERE. AND THE NOTION OF RECOGNIZING A PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY IS A STATE. NOW, EITHER USE A HUGE MISTAKE THERE HAS TO BE A PROCESS, A SEQUENCE
OF EVENTS. SOME ESTABLISHED CRITERIA OF ANGELS THAT HAVE TO HAPPEN IN THE WEST BANK, IN THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY AND AMONG PALESTINIANS THEMSELVES WITH ARAB SUPPORT THAT OVER TIME WILL ALLOW SOME CONFIDENCE TO BE BUILT ON THE PART OF THE ISRAELIS THAT A PALESTINIAN
STATE NEXT DOOR IS NOT GOING TO BE AN EXISTENTIAL THREAT ISRAEL IS NOT GOING TO BE A THREAT FOR ANOTHER OCTOBER 7, AND THAT’S GOING TO TAKE TIME AND ENHANCED IT AND WE WE CAN MOVE IN THAT DIRECTION. WE’VE HAD A THREE-STAR US GENERAL FOR
YEARS. AND IN ISRAEL, TRAINING IN CHARGE OF TRAINING PALESTINIAN SECURITY FORCES. AND OVER TIME, THE ISRAELI SECURITY FOLKS BEGAN TO DEVELOP SOME CONFIDENCE IN THOSE PALESTINIAN SECURITY PEOPLE. AND SO THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT CAN BE DONE, BUT THIS IS
GOING TO BE A LONG PROCESS BECAUSE IT IS GOING TO REQUIRE BEFORE THERE CAN EVER BE A TWO-STATE SOLUTION. IT’S GOING TO REQUIRE A REBUILDING OR A BUILDING OF CONFIDENCE ON THE PART OF THE ISRAELIS THAT THIS NEW STATE IS NOT GOING TO BE A
THREAT TO THEM. AND I THINK THAT’S WHAT THAT’S WHAT THE DIPLOMACY IN THE WEST IS KIND OF RIGHT NOW IS MISSING, IS THE NOTION THAT YES, WE HAVE TO STIPULATE THAT SOMEDAY THERE WILL BE THE TWO SOLUTION. BUT HERE ARE THE THINGS THAT HAVE
TO BE DONE. HERE IS THE PATH THAT GETS US TO THAT. AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE. >> NET, >> I’VE DISAGREED WITH NETANYAHU ON A LOT OF THINGS OVER A LOT OF YEARS. BUT HE DOES HAVE A POINT WHEN HE SAYS,
WHEN YOU WANT ME TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE PALESTINIANS, AM I NEGOTIATING WITH THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY THAT MIGHT BE WILLING TO RECOGNIZE IS REAL OR AM I NEGOTIATING WITH HAMAS THAT DECLARES THE EXISTENCE OF ISRAEL TO BE SOMETHING THEY WILL ALWAYS
FIGHT AGAINST AND TRY TO DESTROY THIS COUNTRY, WHICH PALESTINIANS IN MIND NEGOTIATING WITH UNTIL WE CAN GIVE THE ISRAELI PLAY SOME CONFIDENCE ON THAT SCORE. I THINK WE’RE NOT WE’RE NOT GOING TO HAVE MUCH SUCCESS ON THE DIPLOMATIC FRONT
>> SO IT’S BEEN A WONDERFUL CHANCE TO TOUR THE BOHR WORLD AND ALL ITS PROBLEMS WITH ONE OF THE WISEST FOREIGN POLICY OBSERVERS I KNOW WELL, FORMER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE BOB GATES, Ms SECRETARY, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING WITH US TODAY.
>> MY PLEASURE, DAVID >> SO PLEASE JOIN US ON WASHED POST LIVE FOR OUR FUTURE PROGRAMMING, WE INVITE YOU TO SUBSCRIBE TO SIGN UP, SEE WHAT WE’VE GOT COMING. THANK YOU FOR JOINING US TODAY FOR THIS CONVERSATION ABOUT GLOBAL CRISES