since russia's invasion last year, but congress has not cleared any more funds since the republicans took control of the house injanuary. last night, an emergency spending bill to provide billions of dollars in new security assistance for ukraine was blocked by the us senate as republicans pressed their demands for tougher measures to control immigration at the us border with mexico. in the last hour, we spoke to white house budget director shelanda young about the shortfall in funding and what that could mean. our panel tonight — lord peter ricketts, who, amongst his many diplomatic posts, was the uk's permanent representative to nato. the democratic political analyst hilary rosen is here. and joining us to take us through this press conference mark cancian, senior adviser at the think tank the centre for strategic and international studies. we've misplaced our interview with

the budget director, mark, so maybe you can tell us what the impact of these decisions would be. the budget director said that _ these decisions would be. the budget director said that the _ these decisions would be. the budget director said that the united - these decisions would be. the budget director said that the united states i director said that the united states is almost out of money, and that's certainly true. it is true that the money is committed. it's not all spent. that means there won't be any new money, new purchases, but there will be a flow of previous purchases and previous commitments going to ukraine. that will decline over time. what that means is that over time, as this flow decreases, ukrainian military capabilities will decrease also. militaries and back need to constant flow of munitions and supplies to replace what's lost and supplies to replace what's lost and used up, and without those, they become less effective, and we will see that happening with ukraine,

although over a period of time. could probably were allowed for their operations —— probably rule out. what about the targets on the infrastructure?— infrastructure? suspect the ukrainians _ infrastructure? suspect the ukrainians may _ infrastructure? suspect the ukrainians may not - infrastructure? suspect the ukrainians may not be - infrastructure? suspect the ukrainians may not be able i infrastructure? suspect the i ukrainians may not be able to conduct these counterattacks. eventually, the defence make it weaker so the russians may be able to achieve a breakthrough. their placement visual and ammunition declines. . , declines. hillary rosen, the country's — declines. hillary rosen, the country's support _ declines. hillary rosen, the country's support of- declines. hillary rosen, the l country's support of ukraine, declines. hillary rosen, the - country's support of ukraine, 30 times bigger than russia. why are we

so incapable of pressing home the advantage? so incapable of pressing home the advantaue? . �* , ., so incapable of pressing home the advantaue? . �* , . . , ., advantage? that's a great question. mark. sorry. — advantage? that's a great question. mark. sorry. can i— advantage? that's a great question. mark, sorry, can ijust bring - mark, sorry, can ijust bring in hillary. i mark, sorry, can i 'ust bring in hilla . ~' ~ mark, sorry, can i 'ust bring in hilla . ~ ~ ., ., , mark, sorry, can i 'ust bring in hilla . ., ., hillary. i think mr cameron is a little bit optimistic. _ hillary. i think mr cameron is a little bit optimistic. i— hillary. i think mr cameron is a little bit optimistic. i think - hillary. i think mr cameron is a little bit optimistic. i think he l hillary. i think mr cameron is a | little bit optimistic. i think he is clearly— little bit optimistic. i think he is clearly a — little bit optimistic. i think he is clearly a good spokesperson, a good salesman _ clearly a good spokesperson, a good salesman and hopefully his visit will make — salesman and hopefully his visit will make some difference. but i think there are some fundamental questions that many particularly the republicans have about _ particularly the republicans have about the commitment to ukraine and the addition of them using this as a ledge _ the addition of them using this as a ledge against president biden by bringing up the immigration issue, which is _ bringing up the immigration issue, which is of course a hot topic this election — which is of course a hot topic this election i— which is of course a hot topic this election. i think ultimately, president biden is going to have to weigh— president biden is going to have to weigh in— president biden is going to have to weigh in and use as much leverage as possible. _ weigh in and use as much leverage as possible, but i think it's not going to be _ possible, but i think it's not going to be easy — possible, but i think it's not going to be easy-— possible, but i think it's not going to be eas .~ , ., ., ., to be easy. why has he not done that alread if to be easy. why has he not done that already if this — to be easy. why has he not done that already if this has _ to be easy. why has he not done that

already if this has been _ to be easy. why has he not done that already if this has been a problem . already if this has been a problem coming over the hill for several weeks? why has he not caused the leaders to the white house to find out where they can find a compromise?— out where they can find a comromise? ~ , compromise? well, president biden has had a bit — compromise? well, president biden has had a bit of _ compromise? well, president biden has had a bit of a _ compromise? well, president biden has had a bit of a strategy _ compromise? well, president biden has had a bit of a strategy with - compromise? well, president biden has had a bit of a strategy with the i has had a bit of a strategy with the democrats — has had a bit of a strategy with the democrats and the senate to let them do leads— democrats and the senate to let them do leads on— democrats and the senate to let them do leads on negotiated, and that's what he has done. he's let the negotiations have been on the immigration issue in the hopes that it would _ immigration issue in the hopes that it would break the deadlock on ukraine — it would break the deadlock on ukraine i_ it would break the deadlock on ukraine. ithink it would break the deadlock on ukraine. i think that's looking less and less— ukraine. i think that's looking less and less likely as we head towards congressional recess next week, so he's going _ congressional recess next week, so he's going to have to get more involved — he's going to have to get more involved and be more aggressive aboul— involved and be more aggressive about this. ,. about this. peter, david cameron said this morning _ about this. peter, david cameron said this morning that _ about this. peter, david cameron said this morning that the - about this. peter, david cameron said this morning that the us - about this. peter, david cameron said this morning that the us is l said this morning that the us is the linchpin. what happens if you remove them from the picture? he’s them from the picture? he's right. the americans have _ them from the picture? he's right. the americans have in _

them from the picture? he's right. the americans have in particular. them from the picture? he's right. i the americans have in particular the have sopplied — the americans have in particular the have supplied the _ the americans have in particular the have supplied the lion's— the americans have in particular the have supplied the lion's share - the americans have in particular the have supplied the lion's share of- have supplied the lion's share of soppliee — have supplied the lion's share of sopplies. europe— have supplied the lion's share of supplies. europe is— have supplied the lion's share of supplies. europe is better- have supplied the lion's share of supplies. europe is better in - have supplied the lion's share of. supplies. europe is better in terms of financial — supplies. europe is better in terms of financial support, _ supplies. europe is better in terms of financial support, but _ supplies. europe is better in terms of financial support, but the - of financial support, but the hardware _ of financial support, but the hardware that _ of financial support, but the hardware that they - of financial support, but the hardware that they need - of financial support, but the i hardware that they need is... of financial support, but the - hardware that they need is... the europeans— hardware that they need is... the europeans cannot _ hardware that they need is... the europeans cannot substitute - hardware that they need is... the europeans cannot substitute for. hardware that they need is... the i europeans cannot substitute for that we can't _ europeans cannot substitute for that we can't produce _ europeans cannot substitute for that we can't produce the _ europeans cannot substitute for that we can't produce the volume - europeans cannot substitute for that we can't produce the volume or- europeans cannot substitute for that we can't produce the volume or thel we can't produce the volume or the level— we can't produce the volume or the level of— we can't produce the volume or the level of the — we can't produce the volume or the level of the weapons _ we can't produce the volume or the level of the weapons that _ we can't produce the volume or the level of the weapons that the us i level of the weapons that the us have _ level of the weapons that the us have been— level of the weapons that the us have been supplying. _ level of the weapons that the us have been supplying. if- level of the weapons that the us - have been supplying. if the american sorrow— have been supplying. if the american sopplv weapons — have been supplying. if the american sopplv weapons is— have been supplying. if the american supply weapons is cut _ have been supplying. if the american supply weapons is cut off, _ have been supplying. if the american supply weapons is cut off, the - supply weapons is cut off, the ukrainian _ supply weapons is cut off, the ukrainian capacity— supply weapons is cut off, the ukrainian capacity to - supply weapons is cut off, the ukrainian capacity to defend l supply weapons is cut off, the - ukrainian capacity to defend against the russians— ukrainian capacity to defend against the russians will— ukrainian capacity to defend against the russians will decline. _ ukrainian capacity to defend against the russians will decline. this - ukrainian capacity to defend against the russians will decline. this is - ukrainian capacity to defend against the russians will decline. this is a l the russians will decline. this is a pretty— the russians will decline. this is a pretty important _ the russians will decline. this is a pretty important moment - the russians will decline. this is a pretty important moment in - the russians will decline. this is a pretty important moment in theirl pretty important moment in their campaign — pretty important moment in their campaign its— pretty important moment in their campaign. it's not— pretty important moment in their campaign. it's not been- pretty important moment in their campaign. it's not been going - campaign. it's not been going well overthe summer. _ campaign. it's not been going well over the summer. they're - campaign. it's not been going well over the summer. they're facing l campaign. it's not been going well over the summer. they're facing ai over the summer. they're facing a wager— over the summer. they're facing a wager of— over the summer. they're facing a wager of renewed _ over the summer. they're facing a wager of renewed russian - over the summer. they're facing a wager of renewed russian attacks| over the summer. they're facing a . wager of renewed russian attacks on infrastructure — wager of renewed russian attacks on infrastructure. without— infrastructure. without the defensive _ infrastructure. without the defensive weapons - infrastructure. without the defensive weapons to - infrastructure. without the defensive weapons to takei infrastructure. without the - defensive weapons to take down missiles, — defensive weapons to take down missiles, drones, _ defensive weapons to take down missiles, drones, aircraft, - defensive weapons to take down. missiles, drones, aircraft, they're going _ missiles, drones, aircraft, they're going to _ missiles, drones, aircraft, they're going to suffer— missiles, drones, aircraft, they're going to suffer a _ missiles, drones, aircraft, they're going to suffer a very _ missiles, drones, aircraft, they're going to suffer a very bad - missiles, drones, aircraft, they're going to suffer a very bad winter.| going to suffer a very bad winter. there's— going to suffer a very bad winter. there's no— going to suffer a very bad winter. there's no way— going to suffer a very bad winter. there's no way anybody - going to suffer a very bad winter. there's no way anybody can - there's no way anybody can substitute _ there's no way anybody can substitute for— there's no way anybody can substitute for what - there's no way anybody can substitute for what the - there's no way anybody can - substitute for what the americans have been— substitute for what the americans have been doing _ substitute for what the americans have been doing to— substitute for what the americans have been doing to shore - have been doing to shore up ukrainians, _ have been doing to shore up ukrainians, give— have been doing to shore up ukrainians, give them - have been doing to shore up ukrainians, give them the l have been doing to shore up- ukrainians, give them the offensive capacity— ukrainians, give them the offensive capacity thev — ukrainians, give them the offensive

capacity they need. _ ukrainians, give them the offensive capacity they need-— capacity they need. that's certainly true, but capacity they need. that's certainly true. but we _ capacity they need. that's certainly true, but we shouldn't _ capacity they need. that's certainly true, but we shouldn't put - capacity they need. that's certainly true, but we shouldn't put all- capacity they need. that's certainly true, but we shouldn't put all the l true, but we shouldn't put all the blame on washington's door. when you look across the board of the donor countries, 42 donor countries, only 20 have committed new age between august and october. —— new aid. do you think that could be they see indifference from washington? i indifference from washington? i think there is a risk that this is setting — think there is a risk that this is setting a — think there is a risk that this is setting a very _ think there is a risk that this is setting a very bad _ think there is a risk that this is setting a very bad example - think there is a risk that this is setting a very bad example toi setting a very bad example to europeans— setting a very bad example to europeans who _ setting a very bad example to europeans who are _ setting a very bad example to europeans who are beginning | setting a very bad example to . europeans who are beginning to setting a very bad example to - europeans who are beginning to look for ways— europeans who are beginning to look for ways of— europeans who are beginning to look for ways of reducing _ europeans who are beginning to look for ways of reducing economic - europeans who are beginning to look for ways of reducing economic cost l for ways of reducing economic cost unsupported — for ways of reducing economic cost unsupported ukraine. _ for ways of reducing economic cost unsupported ukraine. the - for ways of reducing economic cost| unsupported ukraine. the germans have been— unsupported ukraine. the germans have been building _ unsupported ukraine. the germans have been building up _ unsupported ukraine. the germans have been building up significant i have been building up significant volumes— have been building up significant volumes of— have been building up significant volumes of military _ have been building up significant volumes of military and - have been building up significantl volumes of military and economic support. but— volumes of military and economic support, but other— volumes of military and economic support, but other countries i support, but other countries are weakening, _ support, but other countries are weakening, even in— support, but other countries are l weakening, even in poland, which has been a strong — weakening, even in poland, which has been a strong supporter of _ weakening, even in poland, which has been a strong supporter of ukraine. i been a strong supporter of ukraine. we now— been a strong supporter of ukraine. we now have — been a strong supporter of ukraine.

we now have blockades _ been a strong supporter of ukraine. we now have blockades to - been a strong supporter of ukraine. we now have blockades to the i we now have blockades to the borderm _ we now have blockades to the borderm i_ we now have blockades to the border... i think— we now have blockades to the border... i think america i border... i think america stepping back— border... i think america stepping back at this — border... i think america stepping back at this point _ border... i think america stepping back at this point can _ border... i think america stepping back at this point can only - back at this point can only set about— back at this point can only set about example _ back at this point can only set about example to _ back at this point can only set about example to others i back at this point can only set about example to others who| back at this point can only set i about example to others who are back at this point can only set - about example to others who are also shuffling _ about example to others who are also shuffling away — about example to others who are also shuffling away from _ about example to others who are also shuffling away from the _ about example to others who are also shuffling away from the kind - about example to others who are also shuffling away from the kind of- shuffling away from the kind of commitments _ shuffling away from the kind of commitments we _ shuffling away from the kind of commitments we saw- shuffling away from the kind of commitments we saw in - shuffling away from the kind of commitments we saw in the i shuffling away from the kind of. commitments we saw in the first shuffling away from the kind of- commitments we saw in the first year and a _ commitments we saw in the first year and a half _ commitments we saw in the first year and a half this — commitments we saw in the first year and a half. this is _ commitments we saw in the first year and a half. this is ukraine _ commitments we saw in the first year and a half. this is ukraine fatigue i and a half. this is ukraine fatigue setting _ and a half. this is ukraine fatigue setting in— and a half. this is ukraine fatigue setting in as _ and a half. this is ukraine fatigue setting in as economic— and a half. this is ukraine fatigue setting in as economic pressuresl setting in as economic pressures bite and — setting in as economic pressures bite and other— setting in as economic pressures bite and other priorities - setting in as economic pressures bite and other priorities fight i bite and other priorities fight their— bite and other priorities fight their way— bite and other priorities fight their way up— bite and other priorities fight their way up the _ bite and other priorities fight their way up the agenda. i their way up the agenda. mark, peter's right that _ their way up the agenda. mark, peter's right that there are i

they're worried about corruption, they point out the united states needs money at home. this wouldn't be an issue because the number of republicans could dissent. because the majority is so thin, a small number can keep this a package from getting to the floor. zelensky said in the absence of support, they prioritise their own defence, but how long realistically with that take to come to proration. ?

unfortunately, the defence industry in ukraine _ unfortunately, the defence industry in ukraine is— unfortunately, the defence industry in ukraine is really— unfortunately, the defence industry in ukraine is really not— unfortunately, the defence industry in ukraine is really not well- in ukraine is really not well adapted _ in ukraine is really not well adapted for— in ukraine is really not well adapted for the _ in ukraine is really not well adapted for the current i in ukraine is really not well- adapted for the current struggle. it was adapted for the current struggle. was really part of the russian and soviet industry. it was not intended to operate on its own so it doesn't produce a lot on its own. it will take years before they can rebuild, retool, restructure their defensive industry. retool, restructure their defensive indust . . , industry. hillary, it was interesting _ industry. hillary, it was interesting that - industry. hillary, it was interesting that david l industry. hillary, it was - interesting that david cameron, industry. hillary, it was _ interesting that david cameron, when he got to washington, sat down with speaker mikejohnson. clearly the speaker mike johnson. clearly the senate is speaker mikejohnson. clearly the senate is a problem. speakerjohnson is under pressure from the conservative hardliners. he has a very slender majority. they are insisting on far—reaching border reforms in this package. how difficult do you think it's going to be for speakerjohnson if he doesn't get what he wants out of the bill

the senate are considering? i get what he wants out of the bill the senate are considering? i think ou're the senate are considering? i think you're going _ the senate are considering? i think you're going to _ the senate are considering? i think you're going to be _ the senate are considering? i think you're going to be very _ the senate are considering? i think you're going to be very difficult i you're going to be very difficult and i_ you're going to be very difficult and i think what this is all about is domestic policy in the united states— is domestic policy in the united states -- i_ is domestic policy in the united states —— i think it's going to be. this— states —— i think it's going to be. this is— states —— i think it's going to be. this is really— states —— i think it's going to be. this is really because the republicans in congress are determined to put pressure on president biden in an upcoming election— president biden in an upcoming election year. that is dominating, really. _ election year. that is dominating, really, much of the politics. i would — really, much of the politics. i would just— really, much of the politics. i would just add one other thing which is at home — would just add one other thing which is at home, and many of these districts. — is at home, and many of these districts, there'sjust not an outcry— districts, there'sjust not an outcry of— districts, there'sjust not an outcry of support for this effort. there _ outcry of support for this effort. there was— outcry of support for this effort. there was a huge amount of support when _ there was a huge amount of support when russia invaded ukraine. this has gone _ when russia invaded ukraine. this has gone on for quite some time. the

end is— has gone on for quite some time. the end is not— has gone on for quite some time. the end is not quite insight. i think president _ end is not quite insight. i think president zelensky have to keep telling _ president zelensky have to keep telling people about the progress and what the strategy is for success here _ and what the strategy is for success here but _ and what the strategy is for success here but i — and what the strategy is for success here. but i think, as a practical matter. — here. but i think, as a practical matter, congress knows that the united _ matter, congress knows that the united states leadership as david cameron— united states leadership as david cameron said today, really important here _ cameron said today, really important here i_ cameron said today, really important here ithink— cameron said today, really important here. i think ultimately, the funding _ here. i think ultimately, the funding will be approved, but they want president biden to pay a political— want president biden to pay a political price for it. the british government — political price for it. the british government revealed - political price for it. the british government revealed today i political price for it. the british | government revealed today that hundreds of mps and public figures have been hacked by the russian security service. 0liver dowden said the russian federal service has orchestrated a massive hacking campaign since 2015 and a group within the fsb has leaked and amplified information designed to undermine trust in politics. they're believed to have targeted product on my private

e—mail accounts to obtain confidential information. this is what russia is all about. it's relevant to what we're talking about here. if you're weekend, and russia is quite weak at the moment, you have to find a way to exercise outside influence. hacking and misinformation and tampering with people's democracies is the best way they can do that. people's democracies is the best way they can do that-— they can do that. yes, it's one of their tools, _ they can do that. yes, it's one of their tools, and _ they can do that. yes, it's one of their tools, and they're - they can do that. yes, it's one of their tools, and they're clearly i they can do that. yes, it's one of| their tools, and they're clearly an expert _ their tools, and they're clearly an expert at — their tools, and they're clearly an expert at it — their tools, and they're clearly an expert at it. we've _ their tools, and they're clearly an expert at it. we've always - their tools, and they're clearly an expert at it. we've always known| their tools, and they're clearly an i expert at it. we've always known the russians _ expert at it. we've always known the russians were — expert at it. we've always known the russians were very— expert at it. we've always known the russians were very active _ expert at it. we've always known the russians were very active in - russians were very active in hacking _ russians were very active in hacking. perhaps— russians were very active in hacking. perhaps most- russians were very active in i hacking. perhaps most worrying, russians were very active in - hacking. perhaps most worrying, they have collected — hacking. perhaps most worrying, they have collected enormous— hacking. perhaps most worrying, they have collected enormous an _ hacking. perhaps most worrying, they have collected enormous an amount l hacking. perhaps most worrying, theyl have collected enormous an amount of data, have collected enormous an amount of data. only _ have collected enormous an amount of data. only a _

have collected enormous an amount of data. only a small— have collected enormous an amount of data, only a small amount _ have collected enormous an amount of data, only a small amount of - have collected enormous an amount of data, only a small amount of what i data, only a small amount of what they have — data, only a small amount of what they have so — data, only a small amount of what they have so far— data, only a small amount of what they have so far use. _ data, only a small amount of what they have so far use. they - data, only a small amount of what they have so far use. they are i they have so far use. they are sitting — they have so far use. they are sitting on— they have so far use. they are sitting on piles— they have so far use. they are sitting on piles of— they have so far use. they are sitting on piles of private i they have so far use. they arei sitting on piles of private data, they have so far use. they are i sitting on piles of private data, no doubt _ sitting on piles of private data, no doubt trying — sitting on piles of private data, no doubt trying to _ sitting on piles of private data, no doubt trying to judge _ sitting on piles of private data, no doubt trying to judge the - sitting on piles of private data, no doubt trying tojudge the momentj sitting on piles of private data, no i doubt trying to judge the moment we are releasing — doubt trying to judge the moment we are releasing some _ doubt trying to judge the moment we are releasing some might— doubt trying to judge the moment we are releasing some might be - doubt trying to judge the moment we are releasing some might be good i doubt trying to judge the moment we are releasing some might be good to| are releasing some might be good to manipulate _ are releasing some might be good to manipulate or— are releasing some might be good to manipulate or influence _ are releasing some might be good to manipulate or influence during - are releasing some might be good to manipulate or influence during the i manipulate or influence during the election _ manipulate or influence during the election it's— manipulate or influence during the election it's a _ manipulate or influence during the election. it's a version _ manipulate or influence during the election. it's a version of - manipulate or influence during the election. it's a version of this i election. it's a version of this kind — election. it's a version of this kind of— election. it's a version of this kind of something _ election. it's a version of this kind of something that's - election. it's a version of this| kind of something that's been election. it's a version of this i kind of something that's been a russian — kind of something that's been a russian tool _ kind of something that's been a russian tool for— kind of something that's been a russian tool for a _ kind of something that's been a russian tool for a century - kind of something that's been a russian tool for a century of. kind of something that's been a - russian tool for a century of these. as far— russian tool for a century of these. as far as _ russian tool for a century of these. as far as i — russian tool for a century of these. as far as i know, _ russian tool for a century of these. as far as i know, it's _ russian tool for a century of these. as far as i know, it's probably- russian tool for a century of these. as far as i know, it's probably not. as far as i know, it's probably not the end _ as far as i know, it's probably not the end of— as far as i know, it's probably not the end of the _ as far as i know, it's probably not the end of the russians _ as far as i know, it's probably not the end of the russians doing - as far as i know, it's probably not the end of the russians doing it. i the end of the russians doing it. ae3 lon- as the end of the russians doing it. long as the wars ongoing, mark, there will have to be a huge culture shift. against an instantly well—financed hackers backed by the russian state. well-financed hackers backed by the russian state.— russian state. there is no question that hacking _ russian state. there is no question that hacking has _ russian state. there is no question that hacking has been _ russian state. there is no question that hacking has been a _ russian state. there is no question that hacking has been a huge - that hacking has been a huge problem, probably even more on the economic side. we've seen a lot of

hacking groups holding groups for ransom. what we've seen in the uk is very typical of what has happened. i think it's important to keep in mind that this is an indirect influence, it is a virgin. —— subversion. almost no effect from internet

tools. as come in arrears, in subversion. tools. as come in arrears, in subversion-— tools. as come in arrears, in subversion. �* , subversion. the point i'm trying to make is... purely _ subversion. the point i'm trying to make is... purely because they - make is... purely because they don't see a national security threat. but there is a national security threat. we are expecting the foreign secretary to appear alongside the us secretary to appear alongside the us secretary of state. talking about ukraine and also i imagine talking about israel as well and their thoughts on where we go post the gaza conflict. just staying with the hacking story, which is on the front page of the times here, hilary,

today. kevin mccallum, director general of mi five, he warned that artificial intelligence, and he includes that deep fake technology, thatis includes that deep fake technology, that is going to be used at the next election. they interfered, the russians, in the 26 and election may because because the democrats the white house, who knows? why will they not do it again?— they not do it again? well, they will of course _ they not do it again? well, they will of course try _ they not do it again? well, they will of course try to _ they not do it again? well, they will of course try to do - they not do it again? well, they will of course try to do it - will of course try to do it again and they tried before and in many cases they were caught. but it's quite difficult even to this day to know what impact it had. if you ask hillary clinton, she'll say that it had a civic and impact. if you ask donald trump, he'll say it did not have any impact. but i think one thing is for certain, which is that the hacking situation, the hacking of public officials, is embarrassing. you know, they have been leaking personal correspondence over the years, and that's as much of a problem i think for public

officials as anything else. what officials as anything else. what the are officials as anything else. what they are saying _ officials as anything else. what they are saying is _ officials as anything else. what they are saying is they - officials as anything else. what they are saying is they elite - they are saying is they elite details of the trade negotiation between the uk in the us a few years ago to embarrass the conservative government because it was going nowhere. but they had the information, the e—mails, the communication that proved it was going nowhere and they proved it and time to emily to the cause maximum embarrassment.— time to emily to the cause maximum embarrassment. that's a whole goal. the civilisation _ embarrassment. that's a whole goal. the civilisation and _ embarrassment. that's a whole goal. the civilisation and embarrassment. l the civilisation and embarrassment. spying is not anything new, and neither is learning about private information, but i think to the extent that they can directly use people's personal correspondence to embarrass them, it may not change the outcome, itjust destabilises the outcome, itjust destabilises the conversation for a bit and that's the goal.— the conversation for a bit and that's the goal. lord rickets, so if ou look that's the goal. lord rickets, so if you look at _ that's the goal. lord rickets, so if you look at this _ that's the goal. lord rickets, so if you look at this podium _ that's the goal. lord rickets, so if you look at this podium and we i that's the goal. lord rickets, so if i you look at this podium and we wait for david cameron to appear, ijust wanted to get your thoughts really on his return to the f cdo and wanted to get your thoughts really on his return to the f cd0 and what you think he brings to the table. i

hope i'm not being unfair to james cleverley who was previously in postal because he's been a prime minister, david cameron, he does bring more gravitas. does that open doors in terms of an negotiation over ukraine and in what are going to israel and sitting down with prime minister netanyahu? it certainly is an advantage in a better— certainly is an advantage in a better declare interest because i was his— better declare interest because i was his national security adviser and worked very closely in the first two or— and worked very closely in the first two or three years. he came into this sort— two or three years. he came into this sort of— two or three years. he came into this sort of visit to washington several— this sort of visit to washington several times as prime minister with barack— several times as prime minister with barack obama. he is an experienced figure _ barack obama. he is an experienced figure he _ barack obama. he is an experienced figure he is— barack obama. he is an experienced figure. he is called. he is decisive _ figure. he is called. he is decisive. we can all feel that he may have — decisive. we can all feel that he may have made one very bad judgment in this— may have made one very bad judgment in this time _ may have made one very bad judgment in this time and that is calling the brexit— in this time and that is calling the brexit referendum, but he is a very effective. _ brexit referendum, but he is a very effective, persuasive communicator and it— effective, persuasive communicator and it gives — effective, persuasive communicator and it gives some weight. he is a heavy— and it gives some weight. he is a heavy weight back in the room. and finishing _ heavy weight back in the room. and finishing a _ heavy weight back in the room. and finishing a previous discussion, i think— finishing a previous discussion, i think the — finishing a previous discussion, i think the key thing is that the russians— think the key thing is that the russians are on a war footing. their

economy in— russians are on a war footing. their economy in a — russians are on a war footing. their economy in a society is on a war footing. — economy in a society is on a war footing. and _ economy in a society is on a war footing, and we are not. none of the capitals of— footing, and we are not. none of the capitals of the westar. so things like hacking, things like the amount that they— like hacking, things like the amount that they are piling into their defence _ that they are piling into their defence industries, the scale of the armament — defence industries, the scale of the armament production they have is outstripping anything that any individual western country except the americans can do. and so i think there's— the americans can do. and so i think there's a _ the americans can do. and so i think there's a different of mindset. the russians— there's a different of mindset. the russians is— there's a different of mindset. the russians is rented for the long game and we _ russians is rented for the long game and we are _ russians is rented for the long game and we are not. and i think david cameron— and we are not. and i think david cameron s— and we are not. and i think david cameron 's visit to washington where he is applauding american leadership on ukraine _ he is applauding american leadership on ukraine over the last two years, engaging _ on ukraine over the last two years, engaging with leaders on the hill who are — engaging with leaders on the hill who are hearing the imports of american — who are hearing the imports of american leadership in the future and on _ american leadership in the future and on israel and gaza by the way and on israel and gaza by the way and perhaps we look about that later treing _ and perhaps we look about that later being another key issue in these discussions with blink and i'm sure. at that _ discussions with blink and i'm sure. at that they— discussions with blink and i'm sure. at that they can only help somebody who is— at that they can only help somebody who is known and worked with previous — who is known and worked with previous american leaders coming back into — previous american leaders coming back into this with all that network of global— back into this with all that network of global communications to be able to contact— of global communications to be able to contact around the world and i think— to contact around the world and i think it's — to contact around the world and i think it's a — to contact around the world and i think it's a good thing to have

david — think it's a good thing to have david came in there and i think this visit witt— david came in there and i think this visit will show he brings real weight— visit will show he brings real weight to the world. let's quickly touch on israel and gaza. there's been some stark statements. they said they don't have an eight operation of any distraction. they are dodging in air raids and assaults. that's not what they would do normally and it certainly doesn't suffice. mark.— do normally and it certainly doesn't suffice. mark. yes, the humanitarian situation is becoming _ suffice. mark. yes, the humanitarian situation is becoming more - suffice. mark. yes, the humanitarian situation is becoming more difficult i situation is becoming more difficult and more difficult to get supplies through. it's always been difficult. i'm not sure how much longer of the israeli operation will go on. once

they finish with khan younis, they may decide to stop. there will be a lot of pressure.— lot of pressure. how long do you think the white _ lot of pressure. how long do you think the white house _ lot of pressure. how long do you think the white house has - lot of pressure. how long do you think the white house has given | think the white house has given them? there's a suggestion it could be the beginning ofjanuary. i them? there's a suggestion it could be the beginning ofjanuary.- be the beginning ofjanuary. i think the will be the beginning ofjanuary. i think they will have _ be the beginning ofjanuary. i think they will have a _ be the beginning ofjanuary. i think they will have a little bit _ be the beginning ofjanuary. i think they will have a little bit longer, i they will have a little bit longer, but not a whole lot. they won't have enough time to occupy the entire gaza strip. enough time to occupy the entire gaza stri -. ,, . . , enough time to occupy the entire gaza strip-— enough time to occupy the entire gaza stri. ,, . . , , ,, gaza strip. secretary blinking has been to the _ gaza strip. secretary blinking has been to the region _ gaza strip. secretary blinking has been to the region several - gaza strip. secretary blinking hasj been to the region several times, and ordinary british foreign minister would be there to find information —— secretary blinken. the secretary blinken have the leverage he thought he had, because a lot of what he was calling for has not come to pass?— a lot of what he was calling for has not come to pass? well, the united states has an _ not come to pass? well, the united states has an enormous _ not come to pass? well, the united states has an enormous leverage i not come to pass? well, the united i states has an enormous leverage over israei~ _ states has an enormous leverage over israei~ it— states has an enormous leverage over israei~ it has— states has an enormous leverage over israel. it has been a little reluctant to use it. that's been the

view— reluctant to use it. that's been the view of— reluctant to use it. that's been the view of the — reluctant to use it. that's been the view of the united states government, to let israel defend itself _ government, to let israel defend itself i_ government, to let israel defend itself. i think we've seen over the last two— itself. i think we've seen over the last two weeks a worldwide outcry for more — last two weeks a worldwide outcry for more strategy, for israel to realty— for more strategy, for israel to really acknowledge what their long—term goal is. i think you'll hear— long—term goal is. i think you'll hear secretary blinken say again today— hear secretary blinken say again today that he has said this privately many times to the israetis _ privately many times to the israetis i— privately many times to the israelis. i think the goal here is to trring — israelis. i think the goal here is to bring the israeli leadership into a place _ to bring the israeli leadership into a place where they are as concerned about _ a place where they are as concerned about the _ a place where they are as concerned about the outcome for peace as anyone — about the outcome for peace as anyone else. but there's no question that there _ anyone else. but there's no question that there is — anyone else. but there's no question that there is empathy for what israet— that there is empathy for what israet is — that there is empathy for what israel is going through. hamas has put them in — israel is going through. hamas has put them in a terrible position and this outcry—

put them in a terrible position and this outcry for a solution is really not israet's — this outcry for a solution is really not israel's alone to give. hamas has to— not israel's alone to give. hamas has to come to the table, and i think— has to come to the table, and i think that's what secretary blinken has been _ think that's what secretary blinken has been doing. this is notjust all on israet. — has been doing. this is notjust all on israet. it— has been doing. this is notjust all on israel, it has to be a joint effort — on israel, it has to be a “oint effort. ., �* . on israel, it has to be a “oint effort. ., v ., on israel, it has to be a “oint effort. . �*, . effort. that's a good point. peter ricketts, the _ effort. that's a good point. peter ricketts, the defence secretary i effort. that's a good point. peter| ricketts, the defence secretary is in israel. he's talked about in the same way about surging aid into certain areas into gaza, but he was talking about bringing it in by ship. i was saying to paul that in a way, he was talking about the technical details. are the israelis content for aid to be surged in at this level?—

this level? well, i think the catastr0phe _ this level? well, i think the catastrophe in _ this level? well, i think the catastrophe in gaza - this level? well, i think the catastrophe in gaza is - this level? well, i think the - catastrophe in gaza is intensifying all the _ catastrophe in gaza is intensifying all the time, _ catastrophe in gaza is intensifying all the time, now— catastrophe in gaza is intensifying all the time, now that _ catastrophe in gaza is intensifying all the time, now that israel- catastrophe in gaza is intensifyingi all the time, now that israel has in the south — all the time, now that israel has in the south 2 — all the time, now that israel has in the south 2 million _ all the time, now that israel has in the south 2 million people - all the time, now that israel has in i the south 2 million people gathered. i'm the south 2 million people gathered. i'm not— the south 2 million people gathered. i'm not surprised _ the south 2 million people gathered. i'm not surprised that _ the south 2 million people gathered. i'm not surprised that the _ the south 2 million people gathered. i'm not surprised that the un - i'm not surprised that the un secretary—general's- i'm not surprised that the un secretary—general's alarmed | i'm not surprised that the un - secretary—general's alarmed with his letter— secretary—general's alarmed with his letter to— secretary—general's alarmed with his letter to the — secretary—general's alarmed with his letter to the security _ secretary—general's alarmed with his letter to the security council. - secretary—general's alarmed with his letter to the security council. i- letter to the security council. i don't _ letter to the security council. i don't think— letter to the security council. i don't think israel— letter to the security council. i don't think israel will- letter to the security council. i don't think israel will be - letter to the security council. i don't think israel will be happy letter to the security council. i. don't think israel will be happy in a way they— don't think israel will be happy in a way they can't _ don't think israel will be happy in a way they can't control. - don't think israel will be happy in a way they can't control. i- don't think israel will be happy in a way they can't control. i think i a way they can't control. i think they— a way they can't control. i think they witt— a way they can't control. i think they will want _ a way they can't control. i think they will want to _ a way they can't control. i think they will want to be _ a way they can't control. i think they will want to be sure - a way they can't control. i think they will want to be sure they l a way they can't control. i think - they will want to be sure they know what's _ they will want to be sure they know what's coming _ they will want to be sure they know what's coming in _ they will want to be sure they know what's coming in and _ they will want to be sure they know what's coming in and that - they will want to be sure they know what's coming in and that it's - what's coming in and that it's not being _ what's coming in and that it's not being used — what's coming in and that it's not being used for smuggling - what's coming in and that it's not being used for smuggling or- what's coming in and that it's not being used for smuggling or fuel| what's coming in and that it's not i being used for smuggling or fuel or weapons to— being used for smuggling or fuel or weapons to hamas. _ being used for smuggling or fuel or weapons to hamas. i'm _ being used for smuggling or fuel or weapons to hamas. i'm sure - being used for smuggling or fuel or weapons to hamas. i'm sure they. being used for smuggling or fuel or. weapons to hamas. i'm sure they will take a _ weapons to hamas. i'm sure they will take a tot _ weapons to hamas. i'm sure they will take a tot of— weapons to hamas. i'm sure they will take a lot of convincing, _ weapons to hamas. i'm sure they will take a lot of convincing, but - take a lot of convincing, but i think— take a lot of convincing, but i think the _ take a lot of convincing, but i think the defence _ take a lot of convincing, but i think the defence secretary'sj take a lot of convincing, but i - think the defence secretary's right to press— think the defence secretary's right to press that — think the defence secretary's right to press that there _ think the defence secretary's right to press that there has _ think the defence secretary's right to press that there has to - think the defence secretary's right to press that there has to be - think the defence secretary's right. to press that there has to be a huge uplift _ to press that there has to be a huge uplift in _ to press that there has to be a huge uplift in the — to press that there has to be a huge uplift in the supplies _ to press that there has to be a huge uplift in the supplies coming - uplift in the supplies coming into gaza _ uplift in the supplies coming into gaza i_ uplift in the supplies coming into gaza i do — uplift in the supplies coming into gaza i do hope _ uplift in the supplies coming into gaza. i do hope tony— uplift in the supplies coming into gaza. i do hope tony blinken - uplift in the supplies coming into| gaza. i do hope tony blinken and david _ gaza. i do hope tony blinken and david cameron— gaza. i do hope tony blinken and david cameron will— gaza. i do hope tony blinken and david cameron will talk— gaza. i do hope tony blinken and david cameron will talk about - gaza. i do hope tony blinken and| david cameron will talk about the wider— david cameron will talk about the

wider context. _ david cameron will talk about the wider context. it _ david cameron will talk about the wider context. it only— david cameron will talk about the wider context. it only could - david cameron will talk about the wider context. it only could be i david cameron will talk about the . wider context. it only could be done in the _ wider context. it only could be done in the region— wider context. it only could be done in the region with _ wider context. it only could be done in the region with a _ wider context. it only could be done in the region with a regional- in the region with a regional sotution~ _ in the region with a regional solution. americans - in the region with a regional solution. americans are - in the region with a regional solution. americans are keyj in the region with a regional- solution. americans are key arbiters in that _ solution. americans are key arbiters in that but — solution. americans are key arbiters in that but it— solution. americans are key arbiters in that. but it is— solution. americans are key arbiters in that. but it is time _ solution. americans are key arbiters in that. but it is time statesmen - in that. but it is time statesmen took— in that. but it is time statesmen took to— in that. but it is time statesmen took to the — in that. but it is time statesmen look to the immediate _ in that. but it is time statesmen look to the immediate crisis, . in that. but it is time statesmen. look to the immediate crisis, how can they— look to the immediate crisis, how can they possibly— look to the immediate crisis, how can they possibly come _ look to the immediate crisis, how can they possibly come out - look to the immediate crisis, how| can they possibly come out of this with the _ can they possibly come out of this with the government _ can they possibly come out of this with the government of _ can they possibly come out of this with the government of gaza? - can they possibly come out of this with the government of gaza? i’m“ with the government of gaza? i'm 'ust auoin with the government of gaza? just going to enter you because the two foreign secretaries just arrived at the podium. let's listen in. ah, at the podium. let's listen in. pleasure to welcome secretary cameron to washington. the infamous special relationship has never been more important than now, and i think that's reflected in the conversations we've had. we began on the phone almost immediately after your appointment. we were in brussels together a week or so ago and we picked up today, looking at the work we're doing together, both addressing bilateral issues, but especially the many regional and

global issues where the us and the uk are so closelyjoined. we spent some time talking about ukraine, and i believe david, yourfirst trip abroad as foreign secretary was to ukraine. our countries are in lockstep when it comes to doing everything possible to ensure that putin's aggression remains a failure for russia and determined to ensure that ukraine continues to stand strongly on its own feet as a sovereign country. our meetings at nato, i think made very clear that there remains unwavering support for ukraine across our alliance and well beyond more than 50 countries that are working together. in those efforts, over the last almost two years, the united states has provided something north of $70 billion to support ukraine. our european allies have provided more than $110 billion of support. when

we talk about burden sharing, this is a very powerful it example of just that. we are grateful for the work that our partners have done, starting with the uk. their leadership has been absolutely essential. the second most out of any country in military assistance, and across the board, if you look at what our partners are doing and others in other parts the world are doing, as i said, other countries are doing extraordinary things. military, economic and humanitarian support. as we accelerate our efforts to enable ukraine to stand on its own, it's crucial that the united states and the partners do our part. that's why it's so urgent. there's a very clear choice before us — are we going to ensure that

putin's aggression remains a failure, or will putin prove that it, as he believes, he can divide us, he could not only to continue to threaten ukraine, but take that aggression elsewhere, including potentially nato countries? we know the supplemental is an important moment, because the people who want to see it fail, the people who want to see it fail, the people who want to see it not go forward are sitting in moscow, sitting in tehran, sitting in beijing. we also discussed the ongoing conflict and is really campaign in gaza. we both recently returned from the middle east. we're both united in support of israel's right to do everything it can to ensure october the 7th never happens again. at the same time, we're committed in our

conviction that israel must do everything it can to protect civilians, to ensure that humanitarian assistance flows into gaza. the united states has made clear that israel has to make maximum efforts to avoid civilian casualties, even as hamas uses civilians as human shields, and to sustain and increase the humanitarian assistance that's going to people who need it. men, women and children. on the hostages, we continue to exploit every means to secure their release. hamas is responsible for the pause that enabled the release of more than 100 hostages and it came to an end. we are pressing for hamas to renew that effort. to date, they continued to refuse to return to it. we are also pressing in the meantime for hamas to allow access

for the icrc to hostages in gaza, to assess their condition, there well—being and to at least be able to tell the world that. finally when it comes to conflict in the middle east, we are absolutely united and doing everything possible to prevent it from spreading. we remain together and with others intensely engaged in the region to make sure that other fronts don't open up. this includes safeguarding maritime security in the red sea in the gulf of aden. we have seen totally unsuitable attacks there on shipping. that has to stop. we've every reason to believe the attacks were enabled by iran, my weapons supplied by iran to the who the rebels, and we are closely coordinating our steps to protect maritime shipping into make sure that this practice stops. we are also focusing on ensuring that anything will that would add to

instability in the