over 4 years there was no rushing aggression for 2016 to 2020 in 2022 flattery put in, took aggression on ukraine once again. not well. president trump is president of the united states. so any suggestion that president trump is doing anything other than negotiating from a position of strength is on his face a historical and false. so when you look at what he may have to give or take what's in or what's out in those negotiations, we have the perfect deal maker at the table from a position of strength to deal with both vladimir putin and zelinski. no one's going to get everything that they want. understanding who committed the aggression in the 1st place. but i challenge anyone else to think of a world leader at this moment, who with credibility and strength could bring those 2 leaders to the table and forge a durable piece that ultimately serves the interest of ukraine,

stops the killing. and the death which president has been, trump has been clear he wants to do. and hopefully, ultimately as guarantors are guaranteed by strength of europeans, where they're prepared to back it up. why not invoke article 5 then for the nato peacekeeping forces that could potentially be deployed? like, how does that deter president put in? well, i would say, i wouldn't be clear about something as it pertains to nato membership, not being realistic outcome for negotiations. that's something that we stated as part of my remarks here, as part of the coordination with how we're executing these ongoing negotiations, which are led by president trump. all of that said, these negotiations are led by president trump, and everything is on the table. in his conversations with latimer food and zalinski, what he decides to allow or not allow is that the per view of the leader of the

free world of president trump. so i'm not going to stand at this podium and declare what president trump will do our want to what will be in or what will be out, what concessions will be made or what concessions are not made. i can, i can look as our team has a, what's realistic likely on an outcome. i think realism is an important part of the conversation that hasn't existed enough inside company conversations amongst friends, but simply pointing out realism, like the borders won't be rolled back to what everybody would like them to be in 2014 is not a concession to vladimir putin it's a recognition of hard power realities on the ground after a lot of investment and sacrifice 1st by the ukrainians and then by allies. and then a realization that negotiated peace is going to be some sort of demarcation that nire neither side wants. but it's not, my job is the secretary defense to the to find the parameters of the president united states as the lead, some of the most complex and consequential negotiations in the world. sticking with

the us press, let us go with acts uses exact pursuit right in the, in the far right. thank you, ms. secretary, given the position you've now state out what leverage exactly is ukraine being left with, especially if the us also applies to wind down its military aid. and then quickly, if a nato allies attack by russia or any country will the us unequivocally uphold his obligations under article 5, regardless of that country. so we've separate, committed to the alliance, and that's part of the alliance, right? you pointed out or 5, you point out article 3. it's just a cheap. i'm not saying it's cheap coming from you. but it's just a cheap political point to say, oh, we've left all the negotiating cards off the table in by recognizing some realities that exist on the ground. president zalinski understands the reality is on the ground. president putin understands the realities on the ground. and president

trump, as a deal maker, as a negotiator, understands those dynamics as well. by no means is anything that i state here, even though we, we lead the most powerful military in the world. hemming in the commander in chief and his negotiations to ultimately decide where it goes or does not go. oh, he's got all the cards he would like. and the interesting part is often times, while the conventional status quo mindset, or the legacy media wants to play checkers the same checkers game we've been playing for decades. president trump time and time again finds a way to play chess as a deal maker as a business man who understands how to create realities and opportunities where they otherwise may not exist. take, for example, the conversations that our treasury secretary had in camp recently with presidents zalinski, which will continue in munich with our vice president and secretary of state around investments and resources inside you crank. i don't want to get ahead of any decision or announcement that could be made. there could be any number of

parameters, but president trump as a deal maker, and a business man recognizes that a investment relationship with ukraine. ultimately in the long term for the united states, is a lot more tangible than any promises or shared values. we might have, even though we have them, there is something to relationships and deals in real ways, whether militarily or economically or diplomatically that he sees that are possibilities that could force together a lot of opportunities to show that solidarity. vladimir putin will clearly recognize that's one of any number of other opportunities that this president will leverage in these high stakes negotiation. so i just reject on his face the premise that somehow president trump isn't dealing with a full set of cards. when he's the one that can determine ultimately what card to hold right now, shifting to the international press will take the french wire service on john's

cost, plus with max delane. thanks very much. uh, sec. the uh, defense um, can you, you've spoken about trying to pull us both put in and the lens key to the table. can you give a guarantee that no deal will be forced on ukraine, but they do not want to accept. i know also that you will include your up in the negotiations about their own about an issue that, that, that, that, that concerns europe in security. and can you tell us whether the us will continue to supply us? do you crane during any negotiations or to the 1st part of the question? that's not ultimately my decision of present will lead these negotiations alongside our secretary state or national security advisor and numerous other officials that will be involved. and ultimately we've played our role and in talking to our nato

allies about what that would look like. president, trump, i'm gonna point out, i've got the, the truths right here that he posted, called both in case we messed it. vladimir putin and presidents lensky, called them both and need to go. she ation that's had, will be had with both. i also am very encouraged by with the secretary general, i said here a trip. clearly a tune to the realities of the moment, the need for peace and that the nato alliance in european members will play a role in that. ultimately, the president, trump speaking to those 2 countries is central to be made, but it affects a lot of people. of course. so i, i'm not gonna, i'm not gonna be involved in those intimate diplomatic negotiations. that's for the, the pro is the top of trump administration who do diplomacy and negotiations. and ultimately as security assistance, we have continued to provide what has been allocated. uh,

i think it would be fair to say that things like future funding, either less or more, could be on the table in, in negotiations as well. whatever the president determines, is the most robust carrot or stick on either side to induce a durable piece. understanding. obviously the motivation is the flight of recruiting his hat on, on ukraine for quite some time. thank you. we'll have a 2nd international press outlet. we'll go with the german paper fund for the exit out of the amount upside to him with dr. thomas. which cool thanks a lot to to us push confronted document insight to a good afternoon. mister secretary, 2 questions please. at the 1st one regarding then you defends investment catch. when you and president trump and speak about raising it to 5 percent, do you mean your penalize only? or do you mean the us as well,

which is currently at 3.4 percent according to nature statistics. and if the letter is true, when do you think the us could possibly reach the goal of spending 5 percent on defense? that's number one. number 2, you've sent yesterday that europeans need to take ownership of their own convention of security. so should your opinions expect that ultimately the us would withdraw the back of their forces from europe and just leaving please in place? what is necessary for nuclear deterrence? i know there's a revision going on. i don't expect you to name any numbers, but maybe give us an outlook of what we should expect. thank you. thank you. i think nobody can or should contest the extent of america's willingness to invest in national security. um are we have a budget of $850000000000.00 spent on defense, but i'm in the business of ensuring that every dollar of that is use wisely,

which is why we're pushing a pentagon audit and making sure that we're cutting fat so that we've got more of the 2 at the tip of the spear 3.4 percent is a very robust investment. larger than most of our allies within nato. any defense, any defense minister or secretary defense that tells you they wouldn't want more would be lying to you. i understand that ultimately we have our own budgetary considerations to be had, but i don't think an unwillingness of nato allies to invest in their own defense spending can be dismissed away by trying to point at the 9 $100000000.00 that america has invested around the globe to include an annual lines and saying that's not enough. so ultimately, we're very much committed to the nato alliance and to our allies. but without burden sharing, without creating the right set of incentives for european countries to invest. then

we would be forced to attempt to be everywhere for everybody all the time. which in a world of fiscal restraints is again to get back to that word reality, just not reality. so yes, we will continue to spend robustly, our expectation of our friends. and we say this in solidarity is you have to spend more on your defense for your country on that cotton and understanding that the american military and the american people stand beside you as we have in nato. but can have the expectation of being the permanent guarantor, as i alluded to from what even eisenhower observed post world war 2. that shift has to happen. the piece of dividend has to end. there are autocrats with ambitions around the globe from russia to the communist chinese. either the west awakens to that reality and creates combat multipliers with their allies and partners to

include nato. or we will advocate that responsibility to somebody else with all the wrong values. you mentioned your we have not said in any way that we're abandoning our allies in europe. there been no decisions based on troop levels. again, that's a discussion to be had by the commander or chief in, in these high stakes negotiations. and that would most likely come later on. but there is a recognition that the ambitious of the con, the ambitions of the communist chinese or threat to free people everywhere to include america's interest in the pacific. and it makes a lot of sense just just in a common sense way to use our comparative advantages. european countries spending here in defense of this continent in defense of allies here,

against an aggressor on this continent with ambitions that strikes me is the right place to unfit. and i don't say that in a condescending way. i see that in a common sense, practical way, investing in defense on the continent makes sense. we support that as well. it also makes sense, comparatively, and geographically for the united states, along with allies in the pacific, like japan and south korea until the philippines and australia and others. to also invest in allies and partners and capabilities in the pacific to project a power there in service of deterrence, that the turn effect in the pacific is one that really can only be led by the united states. we wish we could lead everywhere at all times. we will stand in solidarity with allies and partners and encourage everyone to invest in order to have force multiplication of what we represent. but it requires realistic conversations. those with disingenuous motives in the media. i don't mean to look at you just saying anyone that suggests it's a band and men are trying to drive

a wedge between allies that does not exist. we are committed to that nato alliance . we understand the importance of that partnership, but it can't endure on the status quo forever. in light of the threats we face and fiscal realities, europe has to spend more nato has to spend more has to invest more and more, very encouraged by what the secretary general headset and frankly, by behind closed doors. what a lot of our allies have said as well, acknowledging that reality. and that's why when i say make nato great again, it's what president trump set out to do in 2017. the press said, president, trump is abandoning nato, just turning his back on our nato allies. that's what, that's what the headlines read. in 20172018. what actually happened? that tough, tough conversation created even more investment to the point where now almost every nato countries meeting the 2 percent goal that was said to be breach us when he 1st

said it. now europe and countries are stepping up and president, trump continues to ring the alarm bell, but even more investment is required considering where we are. so suggestions of abandonment, otherwise continue to be disingenuous. and we are, we're proud to be part of this alliance in standby. so i'll take a couple more. sure. why don't we take one from the us outlet one from an international outlet with us out with? pardon me, sir. what we're going to take from us is logan radner from news max please. you talked about expanding the defense industrial base and also expedite in foreign military sales. can you expand on that a little bit and how important that is to nato? well, one of the, yeah, self evident the conclusions of the war and ukraine was the under investment that both european cotton and america has had. unfortunately,

in the defense, industrial base, the ability to produce munitions, emerging technologies rapidly and few of them was a blind spot exposed through the aggression against ukraine. ukraine has responded to that as we, but you get a chance to listen to a great deal. europe is responding to that, and so as an america we have to do more to ensure whether you called the arsenal for democracy or defending the free world. if america can't build an export and build and provide rapid capabilities because we're to scale or static or bureaucratic or the pentagon is bloated, then we're not able to feel the systems we need in the future. so deep and dramatic reforms are coming at the defense department with the leadership of president trump, to ensure that we're investing robustly in our defense, industrial base, a great example of ship building. we need to vastly increase our ability to build ships and submarines not just for ourselves which is on our obligations to our allies as well. and,

and we will do that for military sales is another thing i mentioned this morning with the secretary general. we have for, for a long time in the country by width and through that our allies are able to supply major platforms in weapon systems like you have 35 of the patriots and others, whatever the system is, we need to reform that process. so it's quicker. so a request today isn't delivered 7 years from now, but 3 years from now with less red tape and with the most efficient and effective technology possible. we hear that from our allies. and that's part of the good faith partner is we're gonna invest in our defense industrial base. we're going to make sure for military sales or as rapid as possible, which again, is a force multiplier for american power, which is something we want to do in a contested world. for our final question will go to an international outlet, the jumping in service and h k, with cios for you to please, or set you up for manage k. they're just these tv station. thank you very much

like task that china, as you mentioned that to us with you prioritizing in to turn china, what role would you be expecting the japan and i'd be for countries to play in this context? sure, i mean, 1st of all, i would point out the president, trump has expressed a strong relationship with shipping. we don't have an inevitable desire to clash with china. there's a recognition that there are diversion interest which lead to a need for strength on the american side to ensure our interest or advance and then ultimately any aggression is deterred. that's a real thing, but we don't feel like conflict is inevitable and certainly don't see conflict with china and that's why president trump has that good relationship was easy thing. but it was prudent for us to work with allies and partners in the pacific to ensure that, that the turns hard power deterrence, not just reputational but reality exists. and that's why a lot of my 1st phone calls as secretary defense,

where to pacific allies trust real yeah. to japan, to south korea, to the philippines and others. and we'll continue because that just as this alliance in europe is critical, working by within, through allies and partners in that region who understand the reality of the, the offended chinese threat will be critical. it can't be america alone. it won't be america alone. if we are to deter that, so it's, it is a focus of, articulated that from day one, america achieves the strength. whether it's in this, in the, in the, in peace through the ukrainian conflict or deterring it in the pacific through springs. there's a reason why donald trump emphasizes peace through strength at every moment. my job, my job alone as the secretary defense, is to ensure he has the strongest, most capable, most just leave sole, military possible. heaven forbid,

we have to use it. it's meant and built for the church, but if we have to, we can close with and destroy our enemies and bring our men and women home with success as quickly as possible. thank you very much for being here. thank you, everyone. nato allies must increase their defense spending up to 5 percent of their g. d. p. and european allies should take primary responsibility for defense of the content. and that's just what the us defense of to repeat. heck said, said as he was speaking in brussels, and he also did say that the u. s. is committed to the nato alliance. he was speaking at the end of a native defense ministers meeting that was taking place in brussels, as you can see. and this actually marks his 1st trip to nato, as a member of the new us administration on ukraine. he said that the u. s. does seek a diplomatic peaceful end to the war and ukraine in a manner that creates in during peace. and he gets said that his previous comments on ukraine's borders which he made about 24 hours ago. that's what he said, that ukraine must have bands and the goal of returning the country to his pre 2014

borders. so he just addressed these comments while he was speaking and he says that this does not amount to concessions to russia, but in fact, it's a recognition of the new realities on the ground. this all happening, the nature meeting as well as pete hex, that speaking and brussels all happening as the us pushes for an end to the war. and you create of the okay, well the fragile does us cease fire deal with read how my son is really appears to be back on track how my says it will continue implementing phase one of the deal by releasing 3 captives on saturday. the group released the statement saying that talks with mediators were positive. how much delegation has been holding talks in cairo with egyptian and council re officials. the statement reads,

in part the discussions during all the meetings on contacts focused on the need to adhere to the implementation of all the terms of the agreements. it went on to say that's how i'm us confirms that continues position to implement the agreements in accordance with what was signed, including the exchange of prisoners, according to the specified time table. by some name is a member of how master's political bureau. he says, israel has promised to do more to fulfill its commitments under the ceasefire deal of what we have now discuss it. how can we stop these uh, regulations based on the discussion with the so it is through the mediator. they all know, talking clearly we are committed to the deal. we are ready to show a serious change in our behaviour. maybe what we have seemed to be the for a possibility to a low more 10 smaller roof cut of ends and more heavy machine that a lot of stuff to get in together. we hope that they continue to be committed to,

to these uh, the bro, mrs. month we are, we think also for the next week the start of the negotiations or the 2nd 5th, which is which is 6. the link is seriousness of this lady. the said committed to the view as it is of a deal or 3 phases. okay, how does, on whole joining us from a mind in a moment? because the is really the governments of housing authority have bound delta 0 from reporting from israel in the occupied west bank to tell us if there is any official reaction from israel. but 1st, we bring in handy my for joining us from what i've off in southern gaza. so honey, there must be a sense of relief that the ceasefire. a peace phase one now appears to be back on track. tell us what you're hearing from your end. the, the is the people are still concerned over the fact that this been going on for quite some time. it's exhausted, it's

a draining, it doesn't give them much of a sure instance of what's going to happen after phase one so far. there's no talks about the phase 2 of the ceasefire, which considered by the majority of people who have people who has suffered for the amount for the past 15 months of, of devastation everywhere. the next phase is the most important. one is a solid one. it will sit the road ahead of everyone for a permanent in 2 active facilities and to genocide the lights on the ground to bring in more relief due to peoples. but as we talk right now, we can clearly hear the buzz sound of a drone hovering. and rough i city, this is part of ongoing trauma, ongoing fear, even in time of the seas. fire that's supposed to these drones, this guy, printers, it a go out. we are not to intimidate people. there are still in the area, but they clearly hear enough as to the lady earlier this day of it was in the central part of the, of the gaza strip. these are part of the violations. these really military continues to fail. due me, the obligations of the see is fire on the agreements of the ceasefire between the 2,

the 2 parties. and that's the problem. why we have this is stand up in the past. it's 3 days until earlier this afternoon. where'd move the started to be? to look more positive that there are letting more it come in and they agreed upon numbers of a trucks that tends to have your machinery equipment, which by the way, they haven't made their weight to the gaza strip yet. but there are talks and their promises that they will event and but in terms of other trucks, other kind of stuff for the food parcels that highs. union it materials and stuff for the sanitation signed a tree material i'm looking at are being lifted, but not at the level that is needed at right now. not at the level that will combat the trauma, the psychological impact that was left because of the 50 months of devastation. okay, honey. thank you for that reporting from alpha and gaza. i'm the son who's joining us now from jordan's campus online. so any official response from is really us as

well. there hasn't been an official response from these really government about him asked announcing that they will release 3 captives on saturday. but there is talks behind the scenes and through is really officials were speaking anonymously to media saying that israel wants 9 captives released in the coming days, not just on saturday. and not only those 3 that are promised as part of the deal in framework. but how much has rejected that and said that israel is the one who violated the agreement in the 1st place by not allowing this critical and vital humanitarian a to enter the gaza strip. we're talking about these tense, these caravans, these mobile homes, that would house palestinians in the interim until there would be that rebuilding process ultimately in the later phases of the deal. but it's worth mentioning that a spokesperson for these really prime minister has denied that his role is actually conducting negotiations for phase 2, which is a little bit worrisome to people on both sides of this deal. because as laid out in

the agreement that was signed, it said that on the 16, a phase one, negotiations for phase 2 would come in. but this folks person said that israel is not doing that. they are prioritizing other things. and today these really prime minister actually held the security assessment in southern israel with the heads of the military on his top security brass, and they're talking about plans for resorting the war if the deal does not go through on saturday. okay, thank you. honda sometimes reporting from online the police are treating an incidents in which a car drove into a crowd of people in the german city of munich. as i suspected attack at least 28 people were injured. when the sedan sped into a group of trade union protest or is police say, the suspect is a 24 year old f gun asylum seeker and he was arrested after an officer fired a shot at the car. the incident happened today before the city is due to host a major security conference in the easiest way of who is the show hedge fund. we

have very, very high safety standards. as far as the protection of the unix security conference is concerned, we are at the point 5000 officers to make meaning safer. invoking the participants in the meetings that are taking place are to be protected here and the participants at the munich security conference will be protected. that's why we have so many officers on duty in mind. so there is no such thing as 100 percent protection. as we've seen again today, just the same space as more for munich, and i'm at the scene of this horrific attack in the center of munich. let me show you what we think happens if you look up the road at the end of the road. that is the central railway station in munich. there was a protest by one of the main trade unions in germany, marching up from the railway station along this road. we think about 1500 people, a politically charged time in this country with elections. just 10 days away, police were scolding the protests up the road,

but by pro behind the protesters came a call. it was that many you can see the which started to move down. the protest is out. of course, what is worth knowing is that this is a time when security was already very, very high in this city because the munich security conference takes place over the next 3 days. dignitaries are going to be here, including the us, vice president j, the vance. the president of ukraine, vladimir zalinski, and the juvenile chancellor, off schultz. although investigations continue and it's been a growing up in the last few minutes around the co taking further pictures of the scene. he's pretty clear this wilson attack, he's described the man who was driving the car 24 year old, asked out asylum seeker as the perpetrator of that attack. and he says, jim is going to be very tough of the sort of attacks in future. anyone who cares about will face prison time and potentially will be deported to that country of origin. j space out to 0,

munich for you as president. donald trump says he plans to unveil reciprocal tariffs later on thursday without offering more details in a post on truth social he wrote 3 great weeks perhaps the best ever. but today is the big one. reciprocal terrorists make america great again? well, reciprocal tariffs are one of trump's core campaign, pledges aimed at matching rates imposed by other countries on american goods. the president says the taxes will address what he calls unfair trade practices. here's our white house correspondent, kimberly how could in washington dc. this is a tactic that the president uses to achieve his foreign policy and sometimes at domestic goals. a take, for example, what we saw with canada and mexico. the us president use the threat of terrorists to achieve border security on the domestic front. so this is what.