even worse. >> this is a time when you have to be careful. >> you are going to see growth around 3%. >> the combination of tighter monetary policy, obviously the geopolitical peace is slowing down growth. announcer: this is "bloomberg surveillance" with john keene, jonathan ferro and lisa abramowitz. jonathan: i'm jonathan ferro, futures in this s&p. we are going to start with this bond market move. lisa: yesterday, huge move. was this a hawkish fed meeting? to me, that with the rhetoric come and get the market took it as something slightly different. jonathan: threes are basically there already. lisa: basically, people are

saying the fed cannot accomplish the stock landing that they seem confident they are going to accomplish. they are saying you are going to spur some sort of slow down. it is basically one sign of that coming to the floor. i'm not seeing it in equities, but the bond market is sending a clear message. jonathan: report of major progress in ukraine, kailey, that is wrong. reports of major talks, "wrong." kailey: that with the story published yesterday, to kind of outline what a peace agreement might look like. ukraine wants security guarantees. there a lot of remaining questions which may be is why the kremlin is saying that major progress has not yet happened because it is going to take quite some time to iron out all of those issues. jonathan: yesterday the president of the united states referred to vladimir putin as a war criminal. the kremlin saying that is "unforgivable." that does not look good.

i kailey: kailey: was really shocked by the rhetoric coming out of vladimir -- lisa: i was really shocked by the rhetoric about basically rejecting anybody who wasn't a patriot. this was a little bit alarming to a lot of people who heard a new tone, a new rhetoric, a hard-line approach that frankly sounded very passionate. jonathan: have you been keeping up with talk this morning? the s&p down about a half a percent. lisa: i can't keep up with what to believe. we did hear from the ukrainians as well as the kremlin, some progress about the idea of neutrality, and yet all of the details so far, i'm not sure what we are going to see in order to get some sort of resolution. jonathan: let's put it all together on the market for you. equity futures down half of 1%. we are talking about that big rally in the bond market. yields lower by seven basis points. it goes for the rest of the

curve. threes at 2.15, sevens at 2.14. this curve is slowly inverting. crude approaching 5% higher. those headlines out of the kremlin this morning. lisa: it gives the indication that you're going to get a conflict because it is unclear what the offramp is for either side. what we want to see today is a gauge of the policy ramifications of this conflict on a prolonged level. the ecb came out with the report minutes ago and they were talking about how it could potentially reduce growth will -- global growth by one percentage point and increase the inflation the average consumer feels by 2% this year. she the economist laurence boone is joining us. and expecting the third consecutive raise hike -- rate

hike where they did make a move. what is the longer-term projection? if you take a look at what is going on in the rates market, they've actually brought back expectations along the line, thinking that because of the war in ukraine, with respect to gas and oil prices, they are not going to be able to hike as much. at 8:30, we will get a slew of economic data from the united states and initial jobless claims. i am watching this as fed chair powell talks about an extremely tight labor market. how tight is this labor market? when you look at the unemployment rate, it looks like it is pretty tight. if you look at the participation rate, here is the question that a lot of people are raising after the press conference yesterday: does it indicate that there are a lot of people waiting on the sidelines to get back in, should the conditions warrant? is that what we are going to see? jonathan: thank you, we will

pick up on that in just a moment. the euro-dollar was positive, now negative. several headlines coming out of russia, the kremlin. more talks with ukraine expected today. reported major progress in ukraine talks: wrong. what is confusing about this to me is that they are not just reports, it was some of the communication we had had from sergey laffer of earlier this week -- sergei lavrov.0 lisa: to me, this raises the question that you have raised before, who holds the cards? does lavrov speak for that one person, vladimir putin? how much does any communication have? jonathan: the president of the united states calling vladimir putin a war criminal, the kremlin responding by saying it is "unforgivable." we caught up with john kirby and this is what he had to say. john: the russians, for all the talk about wanting to find a diplomatic path forward, we

haven't seen them act on that. there are cease fire talks going on and we want to see it negotiated. but what you are seeing by the russians on the ground is a full on commitment to military operations. it has been very strong, very clear, very concise, we are going to make sure we defend nato territory. jonathan: jack fitzpatrick in washington, maria tadeo in brussels. maria: we see that the actions and the words from the russians pretty much change by the hour. vladimir putin gave a speech that went on for seven minutes in which he talked about completing this operation, he talked about a fight for the soul of the russian nation, he talked about almost cleaning the country from traitors who do not live by russian values. that is very different and would not point to a diplomatic solution for the time being. if anything, this is the harshest putin we've hard so

far. it really signals that the war is not going well for russia. russia is seeing a military operation that is almost stalled. they have not been able to capture the main places in ukraine and the capital is still under control of the ukrainian government. when you speak to the ukrainian government, they tell you everything we see for the time being about neutrality, those are russian ideas, those are not our ideas. we have other talking points. this is not just a bilateral negotiation. we want to see guarantees approved by the united dates, by europe, but also countries like turkey. kailey: on the subject of the security guarantees and neutrality, we have any idea what that realistically would look like when it comes to european to nato? maria: we don't, because this is now a catch phrase that means everything and anything and it really depends who you ask. when you talk to the russians, they continue to use the word,

and we really need to go to the culture of this word. if you are a russian speaker, this completely dehumanizes you. it is an almost emotional insult in russia. of course, it goes back to their history. when you speak to the ukrainians, they tell you neutrality means very serious international security guarantees. remember, they still believe that even if nato gets stitched, they want to join the european union. at this point we can talk about neutrality but they tell you a very different story about what they mean but in particular, what they hope it means in the future. lisa: that dehumanizing aspect also in the language and the rhetoric of vladimir putin, talking about how anyone not deemed a patriot would be treated like a fly. the response to the very emotional testimony by zelenskiy and the video that he played, how much feeling is there to do more in addition to drones? was there any willingness to really answer his request to

preserve a no-fly zone over ukraine? >> know, there wasn't any willingness on capitol hill for the no-fly zone and there was some pushback, at least polite pushback by lawmakers to admire president zelenskiy, but pushback nonetheless on the idea of sending fighter jets. adam smith said he has some concerns about how effective those planes would actually be. you saw the response from the white house, more handheld weapons that they are sending, body armor, javelins, stingers, 100 fairly lightweight drones. there is a conversation happening on capitol hill about what would need to be in a subsequent bill to provide more aid, but the conversation is about economic sanctions on russia, humanitarian and more

lightweight defense needs, and there really wasn't any follow-through on the idea of a no-fly zone and even some skepticism about writer jets. jonathan: wonderful to catch up. great down about 6/10 of 1% on the s&p. here are the headlines from vladimir putin's spokesman. more talks with ukraine are expected today. the ukrainian negotiators are in no rush and there is talks of ryegrass. reports of major progress in ukraine talks are wrong. what you think they are referring to specifically? again, i will repeat this: a lot of people thought talks were improving because of the words directly from the foreign minister. >> i think this shows they are trying to message something and they are flipping on the messaging back and forth. also, how can lavrov be trusted

to represent vladimir putin when you get this kind of communication out of the kremlin? i honestly don't know what to make of it but it is not encouraging at a time when a lot of people need to see a cease-fire to even begin discussions. jonathan: just looking accrued, wti, 99 i almost 5%. kailey: almost back to that triple digit level. in the bond market, you are seeing yields session lows, back down to 2.11. still, the curve is flatter. jonathan: this curve is slowly inverting. we will talk about that decision in the next hour. you do not want to miss this. it is the day after the fed, so you know what that means. he will get no rest. back with us sometime next week. from new york city, "this is bloomberg." >> keeping you up-to-date with news from around the world.

the bank of england is almost certain to reach another milestone today, expected to take interest rates back to their pre-covid levels. policymakers are likely to increase their benchmark by three quarters of 1%, responding to a worsening inflation outlook. the fed is ramping up as jerome powell believes it is tough enough to cope. he signaled there will be six more increases this year. he assured americans that the economy will hit recession. russia would be put in the same category as countries such as north korea and cuba. in china, the latest outbreak appears to be easing. authorities reported the latest number of cases -- dropped from recent heights.

the 8% daily price limit prompted the london metal exchange to delay the opening of electronic trading. global news 24 hours a day on air and on bloomberg quicktake. powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts in more than 120 countries. this is "bloomberg."

biden: i am once again using my presidential authority to activate additional security systems to continue to help ukraine fend off russia's assault. this will include drones, which demonstrates our commitment to sending our most cutting edge systems to ukraine for its defense. jonathan: the president of the united states for new york city this morning, good morning. rolling over just a little bit on this line from the kremlin, reports of major progress in ukraine, talks wrong.

throw that into the mix. lower again by eight basis points. this curve, lisa, slowly inverting. the conversation we had yesterday going through the forecast of the federal reserve. the plan implied by the dot plot, is that achievable? pretty much a consensus on yesterday's program. lisa: basically that the projections were basically not achievable and frankly, in all of the notes we were talking about before, and a lot of people said that markets seemed biased. they don't think the fed can actually achieve this, that they say is likely. jonathan: let's talk about that right now with the founder and ceo. at the plan implies -- is the plan implied by the forecast achievable? >> the plan is changing very, very fast. compare the dot plot from december to the dot plot in march. 100 basis points change and what we are expecting.

these plans are in flux. i think we are facing clearly the biggest inflationary challenge we have several decades, and the fed is ready to do something about it. i think at the next several meetings, it is not going to be about where they go, it is going to be about where they accelerate the pace. is going to be about 50 basis points certainly in may and june, something that is up for discussion. and you can see that and how the dust is spread out. we have a significant minority that actually believes that they should do more than 25 at each meeting. the fed is definitely shifting gears, and they have totally revised their outlook to three months ago. lisa: we were talking about this yesterday, how the projection from the fed is a 3.4% unemployment rate. just going up a little bit in 2025. is that achievable?

with this cycle, to not have any impact, unemployment and other broad economic metrics? >> what is so tricky about this cycle is that we have so much in ration that it really matters, but the look of a normal rate they are delivering or the real rate. the real rate on any measure is just incredibly low, right? even for people who look at financial conditions tightening, it looks like we are getting back to a normal degree of tightening. if you do it in real space, conditions are still extremely easy. this is something that is very, very tricky to sort of calibrate. i would also say if you look at the housing market, we have a housing market that is just totally different from the pre-global financial crisis, because it is undersupplied. that needs to get sorted out before interest rates. even that sector to see whether

monetary policy starts happening with the economy. lisa: basically people are saying the fed doesn't know, we don't know. which market do you buy? you saw pessimism from ponds, dollar. he saw a surgeon optimism in equities. -- surge in optimism. >> i would say it is very, very awesome that you have that out partly because you have people on the sidelines that don't want to make a big head into the event and they make that that that they would want to make otherwise. i think there has been an element of that, especially considering that we had this credible period of volatility since the russian invasion created by risk aversion, and therefore getting those events out of the way might have been the reason we have the volatility as opposed to any specific read on the news that came out on the day. >> lisa mentioned a weaker

dollar. have we already seen the peak of the dollar strength, or is this cycle different? >> if you analyze hiking cycles, you will find that typically in the run-up to the first type, sort of six months into the height is typically the per iod. the question is whether that historical experience really applies to this cycle. it really comes down to what is the terminal rate? how much can this economy really take? 1%, 2%, 3%, or something different? i do think we have an economy that is just totally different from the last cycle, and, and therefore the notion that we cannot get rates above two and we will have a recession before that is probably too pessimistic. i think the fed is going to be going aggressive and certainly where rates are totally stock, i

think the pressure that you have seen in recent weeks can be sustained. jonathan: the federal reserve chair is confident that this economy is strong and can stand a tightening cycle, it can even flourish. should that worry me, or give me confidence? >> one indicator that i looked like -- like a look at, one of the normal info from the u.s. economy? normal income is when you add up both the wage gains and the fact that there are job gains that are pretty significant. it is around 10%. 10% on the momentum is still 10%. we do have full momentum in the economy, and we are coming from such a high level that growth is going to slow. i tend to agree that this is not an economy that is going to go quickly into recession. this economy will be based on rate hikes. jonathan: thank you, sir. lisa, i have to say jens' view

is a rare view. people shrugged their shoulders and say it is unlikely, i doubt it. kailey: i love that your question is basically are they delusional, or brilliant? a lot of people say they are fooling themselves. we are seeing inflation that we haven't seen in decades. the low inflation, the inversion of that going forward is hard to do based on some of the dynamics that we see persisting for way longer than we expected. jonathan: if he is saying it is the strongest and a tightening cycle, does it concern you that he is going to get more aggressive in the coming months? not to respond to the banner sheet story, either, the questions yesterday in the news conference. lisa: read the minutes, you will

get lots of information in the minutes. jonathan: this whole story reminds me of december. they waited for the minute and said wow, they are going to do this? from new york, with futures lower, this is bloomberg.

jonathan: the talks between russia and ukraine, the action on the ground with the federal reserve. the kremlin up this morning pretty early saying the following. talks of major progress, reports of major progress in talks, one word, wrong. in negative territory, the nasdaq down .5%. after a two-day gain on the s&p 500, going back to april 2020. this equity market didn't respond to the federal reserve yesterday, the bond market did. 192 was where we were on tens a week ago. that is how quick things have

moved. things are starting to get really punched up when you look at the yield curve. getting tighter, tighter, tighter. you can throw in threes, fives, sevens, we are starting to see inversion. between the belly end of the curve and out to tens it is already there. lisa: there is no way that the fed can go at the pace they are expecting without seriously dampening growth. how much are equities saying it will take 12 to 18 months for there to be a recession so the party is on in the meantime? jonathan: i don't know. i just scratched my head repeatedly yesterday. why are stocks up? the chairman is confident about the outlook. he things that the economy is strong, as if we should be buying stocks based on the forecast of the federal reserve based on the last 12 months. lisa: i love the sarcasm. i wonder how you really feel.

i don't think that is a credible reason for a stock be up. overnight the moves for china, perhaps that is a little more credible. jonathan: 3.8% next year? lisa: a lot of people are looking at central bankers in the federal reserve and today in about an hour and a half looking at the bank of england and what their decision will be. we were speaking with david page talking about what is the more important shift? what central bankers are thinking about or what vladimir putin is thinking about? david page told us, what is your response, what are you more focused on? >> more focused on the uncertainty of the ukraine situation. we are in a phase at the moment where there is a degree of optimism. we are closely following the peace talks. it would be wonderful to think

there could be peace soon. that might lead to some resolution in terms of sanctions, but frankly we don't know. when we see the concerns, the pushback that we are seeing on a military basis to the russians, but we have seen on the path of this has always been escalation. if we were to see some degree of escalation in ukraine, it is not obvious what the nato response would be, but it is obvious what the market response would be. significantly tightening financial conditions through energy markets. to take this relatively benign week rather than the malign week that we've seen in the weeks go by, and to extrapolate that to the impacts on the u.s. economy to the global economy, it looks like what the fed has done. if we get this benign outcome that seems to be settling in and markets at the moment, maybe the fed could achieve what they are looking at with relatively minimal slowdown. if we see escalation come

through you will get tightening and financial conditions and a slowdown in global growth and in the u.s. that will take some of the steam out of what the fed itself needs to do. that is the big uncertainty rather than the internal dynamics of where the neutral rate is and how much the fed needs to tighten inflation. lisa: how much more uncertain is it for the federal reserve then the bank of england, which is more directly affected in some capacities by the conflict and the ramifications? david: i think that's right. the epicenter of this is europe. the key channel is not really proximity it is the energy markets and direct exposure that you have to that.we think of the euro zone but the u.k. is on the same gas hub as the eurozone. the bank of england fleshed this out to some extent in february in the monetary report we saw in february. the bank said that if we raise rates to 1.5% by the middle of

next year, which is what markets were considering at the time, we think that unemployment in the u.k. will rise from 4% to 5% to the end of the forecast horizon, quite a meaningful push up. that would really start to draw down on some of the domestically driven inflation we are seeing come through. since then things have got worse. the markets are pricing in tighter policy because of the boost to inflation in energy markets, and energy markets are giving up bigger trade hits to the u.k. forecasts based on today's numbers, we would expect a bigger increase in unemployment, and that is what all central banks are thinking about. inflation will spike, inflation expectations need to be contained, but unemployment. when the bank needs it won't publish the forecast, it will just publish a decision. it is relative to talk about the outcome qualitatively, but it is

the same decision in the u.k. that the fed is debating as well. lisa: a 25 basis point move is expected from the boe, but 50 possibly in june. chairman powell seem to leave the door open potentially to a 50 basis point move at some point saying that they will adjust and be more aggressive and necessary. do you think that will be necessary? kailey: from that -- david: from the fed's point of view we don't think so at this stage. if we think they're more priced in markets over the coming weeks and months in terms of escalation from the ukraine situation obviously the fed may have to do less by the end of the year, but the dot plot is suggesting the fed starts at a unique clip. clearly the fed is uncertain. their talks about being humble and nimble. from the bank of england's

perspective that is unlikely. there is evidence the gradualists are picking up. i wouldn't be surprised if today we see one vote for an unchanged giving the bank of england time to consider projections in the may meeting. we personally see three consecutive heights of 25 basis points through june and then we think it will pause. kailey: the note called this dating without commitment from the fed. the idea that it is giving credence to the market pricing that it will be more aggressive so that all of the hawkish and is potentially becomes priced in giving them room to be more dovish if they need to be. when they say that they are going to make it to 1.9% by year end, why might they not be able to do that? do you think they will do that? david: on balance we think they

will be just short. why will they not be able to do that? what we just said. the fed needs to achieve a tightening of financial conditions to somewhat slow growth and take pressure out of the labor market and that was made clear. in a benign situation the fed needs to raise monetary policy to achieve that outcome. in a less benign situation, we could see escalation in the geopolitical concerns. that would slow growth. then the fed doesn't need to move as much. probably do see a little bit of that coming through by year end and even more through the 2023 forecast where they are seeing four hikes come through. chairman powell said a number of times that the dot is not a plan or projection, it is a projection of a forecast on what they will do. the fed doesn't know what it will do over the next three years any more than any of us do

in markets. what we take from the dot plot is they know they need to move relatively quickly because for the next few months maintaining inflation expectation levels around their target is paramount, and that is with acs the key risk. for now we get back to anything that surprises materially to the upside in their inflation outlook could deliver a faster increase, with that is not our base case. jonathan: thank you. the language has changed, they're talking about tightening. before they were talking about removal of accommodation. kailey: the language matters. first they abandoned transitory and now they are saying we will move towards tightening. you mentioned about the lack of conversation around quantitative tightening specifically in the press conference, not a lot of questions about the balance sheet. it is not just about the dot plot it is about those things

happening in tandem. jonathan: chairman powell was thrilled to just get a question on it. he said "thank you for the question." lisa: he didn't seem happy for the rest of it. he seemed like he was eager to get off of the stage. the balance sheet question they focused on this extensively. i thought it was interesting he planted to the meeting minutes and it reads the question of how markets could react to those minutes down the line when they get details and are faced with the possibility of balance sheet shrinkage. do you have any idea for the effect on markets would be? jonathan: how much of balance sheet shrinkage equals one rate hike? no one asked. that followed me through the newscast. you get a federal reserve that comes out with a plan to tighten financial conditions and raise interest rates in the market front loads it and they have to back away. this time as you know so many

things about this tightening cycle are different. they're trying to do things more quickly. they think that the economy was stronger than when they started the tightening cycle in 2015. the fact that inflation is weird is rather than where it was is a major factor too. lisa: they admitted they got inflation wrong. they said some of the comparisons would be different than what they are now and they expect inflation to be high for a lot longer throughout the year. jonathan: what was strange as they said it was not the new framework. what do you make of that? i thought it was bizarre. lisa: a lot of people had a lot of comments on twitter and i will leave it there. jonathan: very diplomatic. thank you. tom keene is away. but he would have shared it. from new york, this is bloomberg. ♪ >> keeping you up-to-date with news around the world. the kremlin says that reports of

major progress in peace talks with ukraine all wrong after russia said a proposal for ukraine to become a neutral country with its own armed forces was a compromise. ukrainian negotiators are in no rush. the u.s. is sending 100 armed drones launched from the ground and plunged into their targets. it is called switchblade. president biden has promised thousands of antiaircraft and antitank missiles. authorities in japan say that an earthquake killed at least four people and injured thousands. the earthquake is a magnitude 7.4 and struck roughly the same area that was devastated by an earthquake and tsunami 11 years ago. officials in texas are unhappy over a group on abortion. the bank will cover travel costs for employees seeking an abortion after several states

including texas implemented or proposed a near total ban on the procedure. george p bush, running for the republican nomination for attorney general, called it a pr awoke company. robinhood plans to let users moan stocks to other financial institutions as part of a push to compete with more conventional fidelity and e-trade. they are known for commission free stock and cryptocurrency trading and is gradually becoming more of a full-service platform. global news, 24 hours a day on-air and on quicktake, powered by more than 2,700 journalists and analysts in more than 120 countries. this is bloomberg. ♪ countries. this is bloomberg. ♪

>> i have a very good feel that some of our financial institutions losing patience

about the sort of isolated status of hong kong and hong kong is an international financial center. no one attaches as much importance as myself to hong kong's international status. jonathan: the hong kong chief executive from new york city this morning. futures bouncing off the lows, down one third of 1% on the s&p 500, yields coming in six basis points with the curve inversion from the valley to attend. the 10 year yield 2.12 25. the latest on russia, ukraine. yesterday was a story from the financial times that read, ukraine and russia have made significant progress on a tentative 15-point peace plan. the response from ukraine as they dismiss the report saying that significant issues remained. the response from the criminal in this morning, the spokesman

saying that financial times report of substantial progress in talks with ukraine was wrong and talks will continue today. he blamed kyiv for dragging its feet on negotiations. lisa: what do we trust, who can we trust? the fact that markets respond so violently to every headline raises questions about the uncertainty and degree of uncertainty out there. the uncertainty seems to be underpinning all the notes that we get from analysts. not only from the fact we are seeing the crisis in ukraine but that we are still in a pandemic, covid pandemic, which is raising questions about the public health ramifications of this conflict. joining us to bring the crises together in this pinnacle of pain that we are seeing in ukraine. let's start there. this question of how much we are seeing the dueling crises come together.

what are the potential ramifications from a public health standpoint of the exodus we are seeing in ukraine and the invasion at this moment? >> lisa, it is always the case that when you have conflict and population displacement and movement there is a heightened risk of many kinds of health threats, but certainly infectious diseases. the last thing that you would ever want to do was launch an invasion of another country during a pandemic. russia did that. they are targeting civilian targets, so that means driving millions of people who are internally displaced and displacing to other countries. 2.5 million ukrainians have left the country already. half of those are children. many of those children are too young to be immunized. ukraine had a sputtering and stalling covid vaccination effort. perhaps 35% of adults were immunized. with a mix of vaccines,

including low efficacy vaccines. this is a vulnerable population who are moving into countries like poland, moldova, and many of these countries have high vaccine hesitancy, higher than the states because of mistrust in the old soviet system and mistrust of the soviet and chinese products. lisa: what are we talking about? we all have a deep feelings of empathy for the pictures that we see for the children that you talk about who are now homeless and trying to find anyplace to be safe. what are the longer-term ramifications from the exodus? dr. beyrer: we are concerned about several. one is the covid transmission acquisition in these low vaccine coverages. ukraine was undergoing a public health emergency in december, january, and up to the invasion. they were attempting to immunize about 140,000 children against

polio when russia invaded. the polio campaign has been suspended. these crowded conditions, poor hygiene, not enough fresh water, people crowded into train stations and buses and shelters is a terrible setting. ukraine had a serious epidemic, the second-most serious epidemic of hiv in the region. russia has the most severe epidemic of hiv and tb. drug resistant tb can spread in these situations of crowding mass population. all of this taken together is suggested that there will be lasting vulnerabilities of whatever happens in the conflict, and i don't have to tell you about the mental health toll of shelling and bombing and fleeing is a norm is for children and their parents. of course, this is splitting up families. lisa: the other factor to

consider is that this is war. there are facilities that are being attacked. we have seen the pictures of attacks on hospitals. when it comes to health care infrastructure, how difficult is it to get those facilities up and running even if the conflict ends? dr. beyrer: this is one of the most horrific aspects of rush's strategy. it is often seen as something like collateral damage. this is the deliberate targeting of health care facilities, health care workers, and patients as part of the terror campaign to undermine the ukrainian system. this is putin's playbook in syria. in syria they bombed more than 500 health care facilities. what we know now is that the russians have bombed at least 31. that is confirmed by the who. the ukrainian estimate is closer to 60 including maternity hospitals, cancer centers, blood transfusion centers.

really just extraordinary. the rebuilding of those, the re-creation of the health-care structure will take years. you lose a great deal of health professionals, many of whom may not come back or may not come back quickly. devastating impacts on the long-term well-being of the population. it should be understood that this is a war crime for which putin and his accomplices should be held accountable. there is an investigation in the international criminal court related to these attacks on health care because ukraine is a member of the international criminal court, unlike russia. jonathan: thank you. the johns hopkins bloomberg school of public health on health care. next we will talk about food security as well. we heard from the agricultural minister from ukraine. they said the situation with ukraine's food is under control.

wheat stock is sufficient for two years, corn for 1.5 years, but we heard in the last hour or so. lisa: that is the food security for ukraine. what is the food security not only for ukraine, but the rest of the world? particularly countries who depend on that region for wheat and agricultural imports? we talked about maximizing wheat and some flowers and trying to be flexible. one of the key areas of the breadbasket of europe. jonathan: when you have a big global shock it is a global story for global markets and a regional one and a local one. futures are not doing much on the back of these headlines from the kremlin, down 131% on the s&p. lisa: it was an initial leg lower. how much is the market

discounting and eventual end to the conflict? why was it if yesterday is still a question that i don't think any of us have the answer to. jonathan: for the equity markets stateside, nasdaq futures down for tens of 1%. from new york city, this is bloomberg. ♪

>> there's just too much uncertainty and too many negative headlines for investors to stomach. >> with the war in ukraine, inflation is going to become even worse. >> this is a time where you have to be careful. >> we think there is strong enough momentum that you can keep growth around 3%. >> the culmination of higher monetary policy, the geopolitical peace is -- the geopolitical piece is slowing down growth. global news 24 hours a day, on air and on bloomberg quicktake, powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts in more than 120 countries. -- is slowing down growth. >> this is "bloomberg surveillance" with tom keene, jonathan ferro, and lisa abramowicz. jonathan: good morning. this is "bloomberg surveillance ," live on tv and radio. futures down about 0.25% on the s&p, 24 hours after a fed decision. some big goals for the central bank. lisa: and basically a bond market that says we don't buy it , pricing and slower growth ahead and vying