towards 4%. allies are not waiting for a boon else to catch up. we have a number of allies udincluding some of our nordic friends. the united kingdom just made an announcement about their desire to get 2.5%. romania at 2.5. so a number of allies are moving out on stretching be on the 2% to ensure we can replenish our stocks from the valuable assistance we provide to ukraine over the last two years and keep giving ukraine additional forms of security assistance. so, this is generally a good news story but will be will be sure to give her foot on the gas to ensure every nato member meets its commitment to get to 2%. but we are well on our way. >> with that we're out of time unfortunately but ambassador smith, thank you very much for joining us here today. thank you to the elected council

for hosting us this morning. we look forward to seeing you here in washington in july. >> thank you. thank you veryy much. >> next a discussion of u.s. aid to ukraine and global security. foreign diplomats from ukraine and norway. they also weigh in on possible outcomes of the nato summit being held this summer in washington d.c. this is from the atlantic council. >> good morning to you all. good afternoon in europe and hello too you wherever you are attending in the world. president of the atlantic council. i am pleased to serve as moderators for fire side chat the importance of supporting a crate had the summit. welcome back from your break. from our break in the headquarters. the ukrainian ambassador like policy pajamas.

a big policy change. in all important people who are on our panels may be all people on our panels a cup for the atlantic council. that is a great innovation. and thank you for that suggestion. governments of norway and ukraine will not walk away from the session empty-handed. this year's curtain raiser event comes during a milestone year for the alliances they don't nas celebrate 75 years of collective defense. next week the atlantic council have first distinguished leadership awards. awardees will be the romanian president. what will be the commerce secretary the famous actress michelle from everything everywhere all at once.

but in the question of the nato weanniversary of are presenting our distinguished leadership award distinguish a military leadership award to thn supreme allied commander europe will do a special salute that evening to nato as well. we'll be driving conversations about nato this entire year as the atlantic council what it does it puts an emphasis thists year. we have seen clearly the continued bravery of the ukrainian people. even as russia continues to leverage its war machine against ukraine. the summit proceedings this july with this historic moment. it's called inflection points. a road ahead of the congressional decision on the

supplemental that would've been geopolitical malpractice. heads of state and government convene and washington d.c. the summer into steps need to be taken to give ukraine the continued and enhanced support and needs of the whole alliance? finally it moved forward last week. we all know there's a lot to be done. before going to the conversation acted briefly take a moment to introduce our guests onstage. like to welcome the ambassador. ambassador thank you so much for being here. as a deputy minister on

investments.nm as minister of finance we are honored to be joined by you today. additionally we are joined we did a big gathering at your residence with working for a forlong-term and issues are the leading experts on arctic issues of security to see the norwegian ambassador of the united states. she served with the foreign affairs since the beginning of the trainee. jeopardy directorate general of the department of security policy it's on the record.

were going to leave some time as always for questions from the audience. there is a microphone here where people can stand to deliver their questions. if you are listening to us online please submit a question to ask ac.org they will show up on my screen here. please identifyde yourself if yu ask a question here or ask it online we like to give yousk credit your questions. we also invite you to interact with us on x, formally known as twitterte frolicked at atlantic council using our # stronger with alleys. so, let's start with how you see the situation following the passing of the supplemental and head of the washington summit with the situation on the ground. my own writing head of the passing of the supplemental i invoked churchill where he said

americans would always do the right thing after exhausting all other alternatives churchill actually never said that but it's a nice quote when you don't know who's a person who said something it's always good to say churchill set up with the fact of the matter is we took a long time to pass what should've been passed months ago. it did not help on the ground. but we are where we are. russia, there is great concern about a counteroffensive the summer from russia that might be quite strong. there is a summit where people are going to be wondering what people are going to do regarding ukraine in the short-term, medium-term, long-term. let me start with you. as you are looking at this, what are your highest priorities? what are is your biggest hope in the months ahead and may be your biggest concern? >> thank you. thank you so much for having us in this very timely discussion. thank you to the atlantic

council hold the publication inform the public about what is important. first of all the parties never changed and the date russia invaded us. they frankly it never changed his 2014 when they attacked us the first time. or weapons for ukraine, or sanctions and isolation of russia. it's important to keep a focus eeon it. as the delay in congress has been really difficult six months. it is not just the decision we should not dropped at the end oh great, they built a supplemental. with the speed at which we will turn into a weapons into support to budgets. the information is there and everything that was dependent on this very important support with

our european 796 days. there was no and russian attacks. they've taken a very long. they have a double down together with their north korean friends and allies together with iran on attacks on energy infrastructure. every date they are destroying everything. the biggest concern now or the task i would say is defense to ukraine so we can protect. it's cheaper to protect and deter that fight or reconstruct as we know. but also, all of the weapons that we can get. we can actually be in true active defense. which means we will defend everything. also actively were.

796 days the ukrainians are killed and tortured on the occupied territory. just today, i don't if you saw it, there's a program on ukraine. 98-year-old ukrainian woman from the occupied and she said i live through world war ii. i lived through the spirit and not with a rush occupation. it was not as little as this one. the 98-year-old woman have to walk 10 kilometers to get away from russians. we have to double down now. that is what keeps us up at night. >> well, i will come back and follow up on that in a moment. ambassador, what is highest on your prayer list? >> thank you. first of all thank you for the

talk. [laughter] >> was coffee drinking people in the world where among the happiest people there's probably a relation. [inaudible] i completely agree of course. the supplemental has to be turned into weapons as soon as possible. i think it is very, very important do not -- the supplemental and will be fine but of course it will not ride thepp supplemental is important but it will not change the battle like that. so, you said it. to protect the infrastructure. union artillery, you need heavy tanks and all of that. but i think we must continue

thinking what is the next step question what we cannot rest now and say it's fine. the combined package from europe and from the u.s. will gradually change the situation. i think the most difficult thing now that continues our efforts. because we share the same goal. russia cannot win this war. and you are fighting for us. that's most important thing. >> was take a look at that. there is a lot of conversation in washington about it's not as well-informed as it ought to be. how do you see? i'll start with the ambassador, how do you see the division of

labor here. but most importantly and how have you seen this evolve? as you know there has been some concern of american support will continue to come after what it took for this package to get through. i just wonder if over time europe would be able to step up. obviously you're performing your own defense capabilities at the same time. this is a gathering about nato. how are you looking at how the transatlantic support is a balance between europe and the united states,an canada and ukraine? to win this war. you see it russia, you see us clearly in order to win this war to deter russia everyone has to

participate. your past to step up. you look at the defense and other you look at the support the u.s. is number one for their very grateful to all the american friends. everyone from the president, to ordinary americans. who are at the point of this with the snow replacement for the u.s. as a rule and defense support. if you look at the budget support which is equally important. if you don't have money for police or for schools or for medical supplies but i think this as revenue we escort defensese is held them to fund. and frankly with more than 30% of the budget for defense.

not only approve this plan of 50 billionon for the next four years but also frontloaded it while we were waiting for support from the u.s. since last november all the budget support we had and we do have on a monthly basis a huge gift was covered by a european union by individual countries, by japan. japan has frontloaded their come very committed support during the first quarter of 2024. actually, everyone is doing a piece now. if you look at by gdp we will suddenly see the baltic states, the northern states providing support to us. in some categories of defense articles i would not name them but they provided our before they had. i understand that is working

together. it's a stronger notion which will get us somewhere. it's not a competition. it's us are joining forces and doing whatever it takes to win. if the goal is to win what is it that we can do. now in some areas like defense, of course we hope the u.s. will continue to lead and would really help the long-range artillery will not only come from the u.s. but other european countries german mainly. but also in russian acids they've been very clear some european countries are still reluctant and what to do we should not compete we should sit down, discussed and find a

solution to move quickly together. >> are you getting what you want from europe as opposed to the united states? what more would youmo like? >> the fast answer would be everything. 800 miles active front line. brush it takes us on a daily basis with russia is using large we should turn they are simply destroying residential areas is a mental facility. we need all the air defense put all the artillery. all the armored vehicles, everything. and none of us friendly peaceful countries have enough in order to fight the war against a brutal enemy like russia. especially given the fact they don't have any redlines.

we just have to come together and solve them. we can. it's still a very winnable war. we conceivably have seen when they liberated 20% of our occupied we can continue our success in the black sea without having a big navy our selves with just our production of naval we were able to liberate black sea and deter russians from going into some areas and have the quarter at which we don't have to discuss with them anymore. we can do it in 2024. because russians have time to dig in. they have time to bring so much from north korea which is providing us. and producing together with iran. they are producing and russia together with iran.

now think about that it's not just a threat to ukraine. date together and prove flight into israel or we just have to stop all of them this new access of evil. it takes the right decision and now would be for everyone to double down. provide us what you have. replace it later. but we have to stop this war. >> and really glad you underscored that. we are not s seeing a static stalemate situation in the war. but we are actually seeing us rush m is getting more support from north korea. more from iran and china at the same time. >> if they with their gdp is so much more than hours altogether. hithey can be so coordinated and organize the question we answer can democracies do the same?

it's not just a big statement. are we capable of defending ourselves in our democracy? >> we have to be. we have to be. you are completely right. europe has contradicted more than the u.s. but that's humanitarian budget support altogether. on the military side we look at what is been allocated it's almost all the same. 43 billion from the u.s. imported from europe with us before the supplemental it's not yet there that was agreed it's not yet allocated. i think europe was slow on the spotth you look at the 40 billin allocated from european countries, from that nordic country. we really stepped up and will continue to have two.

that is an understanding in europe we actually have to understand there's a war going on. we have to take responsibility for that. we cannot replace an yes is still the leader of the world. with it comes responsibilities with being the leading of the world. their other hotspots in the world that middle east, asia. so we have to take responsibility in ourselves and europe. we are understanding that. >> from the standpoint of norway, where you see the priority of what you can do and what you are doing for ukraine? >> they do a lot of military aid. they've just opened a new facility to ramp up production,

government support we are an industrial base. he one of the biggest uses of ammunition in europe is in norway. to be able to step up production.e we donate f-16 for the long-term of course. the capability from maritime. you mention the black sea we are proud of what were doing in the black sea and deterring the russians there. we are doing what we can now put we are also thinking long term. a year ago we established something which had a five year timeline. we now of course finished art negotiations of the mou with ukraine. so many partner countries do will be signed by the prime

minister and president zelenskyy soon as a 10 year horizon. that is important that so many countries of the 32 nato countries but also the group has 54 countries the combination of the immediate aid but also the long term perspective to deter russia turn to the best thing to do to deter russia is that they do not win this war then we have to continue to deter them when this war is over. demings building the strong force of ukraine and of europe. in the defense minister we have to build to deter russia. >> thank you for that. let's fast, the nato summit. a member of nato, ukraine is

not. if you look at the baltic balticsthey've not been threated during this period of time, poland is not been threatened during this period of time. ago you would think it nato guarantee makes a country more secure part of their other arguments that save you gave nato guarantee to ukraine right now would make it less secure because russia would test it. from your standpoint what is the ideal outcome of the july summit? also keeping in mind this became a little bit of a mess and lithuania there were some disagreements was present so it's he going to attend? not attend or come out? what would be an ideal outcome this year? >> what you heard the american ambassador think she did not foresee an invitation to come this year.

we'll think we have to build the bridge as they say, build the bridge to nato members for ukraine. has proposed nato gradually assume more responsibility for coordinated thehe military as a comes ukraine. we have the nato/ukraine council but nato has to work with ukraine as a party for many years. i makes a lot of sense to use that framer for coordinated the military aid to ukraine. we also have the memberships mep sneaking bilateral commit to ukraine. all this together build the bridge to membership. secretary o'brien that should be bought at should be well lit. that was very well said. that is my hope at this time

ukrainians can fill they come closer with all of the combined deliverables. and of course very, very clear note to russia that ukraine is in d.c. and as a partner. they're in there for the long run. russia cannot wait us out. >> ambassador, is that sufficient? what underpinning should there be for that bridge should be more thann that? any deliverables. today's a secretary general incident ukraine i think we are focusing too much but the

strategy is and what's the object if we have it for the strategic objective should be you must be a member of nato. and for the past 16 years the bucharest summit. we have been discussing a movement closer, not closer but we find a different modality is a required or not required? in 2008 went to beat members of nato and sad the leadership of ukraine express their desire. the president of the u.s. at that time was leading the effort. providing ukraine with membership action plan. u the leader of germany at that time is very important to say if

a buffer zone or the great zone it's quite opposite. russia was a threat to all of us. ukraine in 2014. it is actually the other way around. if you are not a member of a civilized family or country with the same value russia and they attack you. we have to be very clear. after 16 years of discussion on the same page or not with regard to the main thing. should ukraine be a member of

nato? and, as ukrainian they have to add to nato. the most capable the army that was not only the nato equipment will nato for produce equipment understand together with the former soviet and russian equipment. in the same program where we are using some of them to the best of use. if you really want to deter aggressive russia and this is what it iss you can only do it n the eastern flank. which is the true eastern flank of nato. this is the eastern flank of ukraine for you cannot deter russia from behind a very, very large territory unless of course you are prepared for ukraine to

lose this war. a week, as ukrainians it's an existenial war for us. we will fight until we win. if we win together and ukraine becomes eight member of nato that will make not only ukraine and family more secure. so we have to discuss. then how we get there very specific concrete plan on how to be moree prepared and ready for nato. which, by the way we are doing not through our peace but are annual plans which all of our annual plans within nato, ukraine executed successfully. there are ways to do that. or are there legal challenges to discuss. how do you progress on the countries in active or that we

should put together to discuss it. that's how not what. we have to keep in mind mbs ambassador to nato. to be crystal clear about that objective then that objective is shared by all. if we do not have because it requires unanimous decision. they've started to agree on that is no problem discussing how. then we should be able to come up for this or for that previous or what ever venues with a very specific commonly shared deliverables on how we're getting to that goal big bucks ambassador that is very clear. you have said ukraine is fighting for us pretty said this earlier in the conversation. i agree that one should not focus too much on the single meeting. it's more important when the underlying direction.

it is a time of war and ukraine. i just wonder from your perspective, short of nato membership in the alliance ought to be given to ukraine from your standpoint? which would actually move things forward to a sustainable postwar peace. since it membership is not going to be tomorrow and there is a path to membership one can make security to guarantee. i cannot help but point out, president zelensky's comment after the defense of israel is not a israel of nato. there was a number of countries with that time. ambassadors seem to be pointing to what nato do something of the

same. let me turn to you first ambassador about what a reasonable and possible security guarantees one could look forward to? >> i think the question on security gets. -- collected by the mail start taking questions of s people wat to go to the microphone i will turn to them. we also have a couple of questions here in front of me on the screen as well. . >> this is a nato membership. ukraine should become nato member and to help the process move forward and as to helping the institutional

reform and everything, that i know you're working so hard on. the institutional reform anticorruption work is on track so we're looking forward to working with you on that. the security guarantees after war that's a huge and complicated issue and a lot of people both in europe and here are thinking a lot about that, and to deal with the big europeant security architecture, and i don't think i should go too much into that because it is being discussed in so many places. but again, it deals with -- deterrence, of course, that deterrence of russia is the most important thing, and we have to do that together. and the best deterrence is first to win this war and then to -- to give ukraine also step up and let us mention that most countries are 2% not always --

or just made -- which will take up 3% during those years. that is long-term planning will take up to 3%. so that's also part of the security guarantee. it's the security architecture where the european countries make sure they can have some credible deterrence towards russia. so i'll leave it at that. >> thank you. >> you know about when i was listening to -- to the minister and ambassador and always good constructive countries pox on building bridges. but f also should focus on destroying bridges so the best way to -- to security more security is actually destroying bridges like illegal ukraine bridge which russia is building to sustain their attack on ukraine.

but again you know what do we have to focus on now in order to get where we need to get? first of all, we have to pox on the battleship. this is very important. and we have to do it nows and we have to provide or get everything or produce everything in order to win the war. second we have to focus on sanctions let's not sanctions because this is important part of winning war and deterrence in russia, and you know, doubling on them and russian banks we're talking about for the past two years and still there are only 55 russian banks which are working sanctions out of -- what is it 200 -- 326 i think now. we have to sanction all of them so that is not convenient for other countries not only to buy something from russia but also to sell and helping them to

produce. third, complicate russian efforts two discussion and thank you for taking that active part many that. we have to move forward and use those 300 billion to actually support the efforts. do you know the security arrangements that we have with many countries now we should have with more of the countries so that we sending a strong signal, to ukraine and all of us together how we're going to move forward and that is also very important so, i mean -- >>rw information war -- exactly. the disinformation information -- the peace also going to be this, this summer. which is very important because we immediate to get -- we have already 83 countries organizations that are participating in it. but it is a very important

element together with sanctions everything that we do together to get more countries to participate and push on russia. for them to actually realize that it is not them against ukraine. it's not even them against europe. it is not even them against the rest if they want to, it is them against everyone on the planet who believes to integrity -- ofet course nato membershipships an important element of that, of course, you know, seeing what nato is capable also showing that in ukraine because there's so many nato members that individual helping us and there is -- so much corporation between us and nato as institutional -- that it's just natural that we have to move forward and toipght to say thing again in the opening russia should not have no vito power about this.

and this is clearly what they're aiming to do and scaring all of us trying to move all of us into not taking decisions. you know, and not very successful and they have not achieved what they wanted on the contrary. i mean look at nato. stronger than evered and two moe members. i don't think residents are happy with having sweden and nato as members so they're not scaring us. they're not, and i really appreciate the work you do here because i think that trump atlantic relationship -- we cannot take for granted, we have to work all of the time and you do a phenomenal job on that. >> let me pick up a couple of questions i'm looking to the microphone and i think i'm asking -- ian to go over there in a minute because i know he has the question that i know he's just being polite b and maybe you cod go -- behind and we'll do it that

way -- but let me ask a question from here. b neither of you went to the country guarantees independently could gi one of the questions from emily dunn our security guarantees during active conflict too little too late does that escalate the conflict with russia? the debate i'm hearing in washington is between those who believe that's right that -- a security guarantee right now would expand the conflict and those who believe just the opposite. that -- that if a strong security guarantee were given to ukraine even it weren't territory but in russia handle to increase security of those areas. so why don't we take emily dunn's question first and first and for you -- about what a security guaranteed during active conflict either from a group of nato countries

or nato itself actually expand the conflict or escalate the conflict. j that's what the debate is about and that's why reluctant to go into that debate because there's so much and you mention the possibility of part of ukraine. i think that is for -- i mean that is sensitive thing. i mean, the ukrainians have to also that is something would be willing to. so -- these are very sensitive discussions and i prefer not to be clear on that. >> i respect that as well and previous models one has a south korean model and west germany model, i know that -- that pongt you didn't have missiles falling on west germany that's a differentiation but maybe tackle this to a security guarantee --

>> anymore of those and we have to also evaluate conditions that exist master's degree that time and i don't think any of them is truly applicable in this situation. second, we have to define what do we mean when we say guarantee because ukraine saw in 1994 when we gave up voluntarily our third largest and arsenal we stop and receive guarantees at that time and learn assurances and that's definitely not what guarantees. so we have to be clear that not only meaningful guarantee is a full membership in nato that's a guarantee. now we're working on a lot of security agreements how we will incorporate what countries can provide to us and great that we have a agreement for ten years or with longer period with some countries. because that provides us with the basis for the plan. but let's not get from the

discussion that all the security guarantee is when we together members of the same family of countries and then we defend each other together. andr again i want to go back and i'm sorry that i may be getting back to something that is not specific or concrete but it is important to -- for this. russia violated not just ukrainian border with this attack. they violated all rules and the u.n. which we all -- believe and play separate. so anything short of full victory and russian withdrawal from ukrainean will not restore the international order which russia violated. so when we are talking about -- security guarantees, or anything else, we all talk about the situation, you know, when ukraine wins and russia is defeated let's say it was -- this. because if that doesn't happen,

then the call international lawyers not restored at all. but if that happens, if all work towards it, then i don't see why it will be a problem for ukraine to be a full member of nato -- at that time. so i think we, we are starting off the discussion with putin all of the variables on the table. >> thank you for that. and pointing to larger stakes now we have quite a -- quite a lineup there and i'll see how far we can get through it and for the -- online audience here please -- identify yourself. >> thank you, fred ian senior fellow at the atlantic council one of fred's volunteers. you know, one of the criticisms of western assistance allied assistance to ukraine has been trickled out over the last two years enough to keep ukraine alive but not you have in to win and the justification for that is the west a license didn't

want too much to provoke russia into escalating this conflict into the nuclear domain that's same issue permeating issue of nay toe membership for ukraine. there are nose who argue that you can't give ukraine nato membership today into escalation do your governments agree with the alliances estimation of that threat of escalation? do you feel that the alliance and perhaps the biden administration itself has been overly conservative to exaggerated this risk escalation or do you share that perception of the risk of escalation? enches let's not forget the -- let's use the word nuclear escalation i think that's the biggest potential concern. let me pick up two questions a the a time and come back to you, please. >>ue your excellent fred thank u from the defense aero space report. you know, disinformation is -- has been mentioned by everybody on this panel ultimately. it was only a few weeks ago that

chairman of the house intelligence committee mike turner made a case that american members of congress were being putin's useful idiots in this process. how do you get ahead of the information war when -- a large number of americans actually depend on telegram they are by their leaders bombarded by false messaging and in the middle of this we're having very intellectual conversations and we heard from smith taken the argument for may nato to american public. how do you fight this information war in a more nuanced fashion that is actually fact and sanity based? that's just a typical large iceburg that i want to see so far as to how it effects ukraine. thank you so much. >> first ian's question first which is the question of -- threat assessment and also president zelenskyy first.

>> i think the fair was bigger at the start of the war. i think that was talking about the nuclear threat. i think we are out. i think the reason is that it has trek trickled out is other reasons what we're hearing it was, of course, the lack of the decisions by congress. i think actually what has happened well that in the beginning we were afraid of escalation no we just don't have the capabilities to give it away.he so that's my assessment. i don't think we are that afraid of estimation as we were in the beginning. >> interesting. >> to that because i think it is very important question, and very important consideration. we have been very and of course i'm biased ukraine ambassador and i -- represent my country and everyone who is fighting on the

frontline but we've been very clear from the beginning of this in 2014 and now russia always will talk about escalation because their goal is to deter as a country to help us in this fight. they intend to not change they want to destroy us and they want to occupy all of ukraine and use that as a basis for their further -- escalator advancements. so it's clear that they want to scare everyone into thisce and they will -- raise their redlines or -- scare try to scare everyone including nuclear threats. every time they will see that you are moving closer to providing capable to provide us more, more support to take the decisions which are important and reenforce ukraine. but we also have to always remind people that during this two years, we have seen so many russians, red liened, broken by

ukrainians, and not happening in even before this. so they said that -- you know, retaking kyiv over would be a red line we talk about it and nothing happened after that four was ukraine intel into russians federation that would be a red line and they will defend it with every capability they've got and they hinted towards nuclear -- as putin was signing that again exception ukraine already retook couple of villages which they said is now part of russia. nothing happened. then they said crimea is offlimits we conduct our operations there and continue to do so we just have to understand -- everything they're doing to us from torture, rape, killing all of the war crimes including those which point is already guided there's a global arrest

warrant for the abduction of ukrainian children already doing that and he's been doing that during the past ten years in crimea and during two years more than threer yews everywhere in ukraine. so -- actually, like with the typical bully, the right response is to act and not get intimidated you know sometimes i go back my father who is no longer with us but when i was a kid and i was -- ask him for sol advice he would always start by saying -- think what you would do if you were not afraid. and i think it is good advice now let's all think what we would do if we were not afraid, of course, i'm not asking anyone to be reckless. you know, ukrainians have responsible people also. we understand all of the threat we have to discuss them and analyze them. but we also look through the russian disinformation and propaganda and campaign which is very much related to the second question. >> yes -- >> with russia we've been to

russia before and soviet union before that and affirmed predictable and that's the only language they understand. we have to be strong. >> getting to the disinformation question for you and -- that's we we cannily last two questions before we close down let me ask you the question that thee ambassador think what you would do if you were not afraid since you're not intimidated not afraid go to n the nato membersp is is escalatory and if we weren't afraid would we do it? >> well, as long as there's a war going on -- that's kind of complicates the issue.go i think it is clearly we have to do things step by step here. so we have to win this war. >> yeah. got it. disinformation. >> i don't know how to fight disinformation. in this country -- might i say that -- we have on our side to be very

clear, and to be fact-based. we have to make sure that our information is correct and then we can always stand test of fact he canning so nobody can say we're doing disinformation and then we just have to inform a lot. we have to be out there. and we have to prove it when we see disinformation we have to be -- like this is not correct. this is wrong. we have to be there all of the time. but it is extremely demanding in this information society. >> next question or do you have a brief answer to this? >> i think we're brief but do what we're doing when president zelenskyy did it we should citizens in countries more. we should use all of the social media and other venues in order to push facts and install the information. we should differentiate between

propaganda and misusing freedom of press in other countries, and we should just stay the course but it is very difficult. it is very difficult and we see how russians are moving and propaganda is robbed so we have to be also more agile. >> truly great to be here and please introduce yourself for the audience, and i'm watching organizers because i don't know when i run out of time so -- so somebody could signal that to me. please. >> trudy ruben from philadelphia inquire i should talk about what needs to be done between now and the nato conference in order for ukraine to survives. so first of all their defenses it seems that despite europe's talking strongly except for germany this real reluctance to put out and as for the united states, we're exporting to switzerland system, but there's no sign yet that the u.s. will provide.

can you without more patriots and again on escalatory deescalatory for the united states seems for the white house taking crimea or making it unattainable was always a redline now u.s. has long range attacks, do you feel now that there is no -- blockage on the united states side? no pushback from trying to make crimea unattainable including burning the bridge. >> [inaudible conversations] ambassador, i leak -- like your answer i've heard you say this before i like it even more now that -- ukraine should not worry about this or that meeting that we should all focus on the end result we want which is ukraine in nato and then the war

problems get easier so here's my question. we hear different things from the administration about military tactics. a month ago i was in kyiv when the word came out asked to not attack u.s. russian oil refineries that didn't go down well and then we heard that the administration neither nor enables implying they don't actually try to block them. then, secretary defense austin said pretty recently well he hopes ukraine will use the attack to get effect and he didn't add the not in russia. so what's your understanding of the american position and if you choose not to answer like i get it. it's okay. [laughter] >> well, thank you. and then thank youet for your wk and i would encourage you to thosesking all of questions. and of course i cannot speak for the american administration except to say how grateful we

are for all of this support. but let's makete it clear from e ukrainian perspective. we have to win this war. and we are defending ourselves in this war. and article 52 if i'm not mistaken of the charge clearly allows us to defend ourselves by using all of the means including suppressingrs their threat, comments from the country on the territory of the aggressor so from the legal stand point, we not only can do all of the attacks and everything to liberate our country and defend ourselves but we must do it if we're defending our country. now, of course we are defending on all friends and ally on the capabilities and right now, the more capabilities we get the faster we can liberate everything for us there's no difference between crimea or the anything else -- it is all ukraine. and as actually the declaration

of the u.s. state secretary from 2018 which was supported every year after that it is also very clear crimea is ukraine there's no difference. so we have to liberate all ukraine including crimea and we have been crystal clear with our partnersai and american friends with regard to that and there's always considerations as you know provided for us which we can use, we cannot use it to hit targets in russia. and we're not doing that again ukrainians are responsible people but you know, we have to win this war. and we have to do whatever is forcible to win this war, of course, according to international rulings again we have to say that ukraine is the one that is -- fighting on our own territory and still adhering to all of the international rules. including our -- how we treat their russian prisoners of war.

and like what they're doing torturing our people not just the prisoners not our defenders but the city -- and trudy's question. >> yes. >> to true did is question and thank you for all of your work and you were first one to say who is -- if i remember in 2000, you know, and you knew that nothing good is going to be there but no we cannot survive without more airs defenses it is very clear on the frontlines. how they're leveling out, you know they're founding on a daily basis so close to the border that they can reach it not only with the ballistic or other missiles but a rocket launch system what is they're doing to --h to literally we all are talking about the towns of butlet say

what it is. they're not -- they did not receive those towns they destroyed them and simply erased them from the ground you can see it on satellite images but we need air defense and when we say air defense we mean layered complex system so not just the air defense system but also interceptors but also the f-16s which will be when they're there a very important part of the air defense capability. and everything else. so -- and it is really urgent, and because you're in the past six months of the debating he in the united states -- and again grateful to congress and speaker everyone who fought for it so hard to be -- to be approved. but during the last six months we didn't sign any new and we have to fit up everything now. >> thank you. you have the final word.

>> that's relieving to the other -- that you mention in germany so the german initiative is something that more countries can join if you cannot give up an entire defense system yourself. you can join forces, just ask the check artillery administrative no mottles is a karattive one so final word -- we will win it that's combination of give everything you need right now and then also thinking long-term deterrence. we need to do both. >> thank you very much. so thanks for the audience, thanks for the online questions. and thanks to the two wonderful ambassadors and to your countries, and for the -- for remarkable courage that you're showing ukraine, and remarkable alliance solidarity that we've shown this far which we have to show even more in the coming days and months. so round of applause and i'm going to pass --

[applause] >> recently irs commissioner danny testified on the 202 tax filing season. and president biden's 202 budget request for the agency. you can watch the hring held before the senate finance committee, tonight at 8 easte on c-span2. c-span now our fre mobile video app or online at c-span.org. ♪ ♪ c-span washington journal, our live forum involving you to discuss the latest issues of government, politics, and public policy. from washington, d.c. to across the country coming up tuesday morning we'll talk about the history of student activism in the u.s. and current protest taking place on college campuses with history professor angus johnston former labor secretary marty discusses addiction in the u.s. his own journey through addiction and recovery and policy approaches to address this public health issue.