>> here's a look at our prime time lineup next week on the c-span network each night starting at 8:00. on monday, a debate on genetically modified food. and then general motors recalls. . d this year's idea forum thursday we'll look at climate change. monday on c-span2 it's a discussion about fracking. tuesday night at 8:00, afterwards with author of

"history of money." and talk about new technology will change every day life. thursday night a discussion about the future of politics with former maryland governor. and on friday at 8:00 p.m. stern "in-depth" with reza aslan. an entire week on the civil war. monday a look at the overland campaign in virginia. on tuesday, the battle of' stevens. wednesday night the 150 anniversary of the battle of crater and general sherman's march to the sea. find our television schedule one c-span.org.nce at call us at 202-626-3400. join the c-span conversation. and like us on facebook, follow

us on twitter. during his weekly address president obama talked about his administrations efforts to make college education more affordable. doug collins gave the republican response. democrats to said act quickly to pass the bill. >> over the next couple of weeks schools across their country will open for doors. students will suit up for sports, marching band and the school play. moms an dads will snap those first day of school pictures. i want to talk about one of the most important things any of you can do this year. and that's to begin to prepare yourself for an education beyond high school. we know that in today's economy whether you go to a four-year college, a community college or a training program, some highest education is the ticket to

middle-class. and there are also much more likely to have a job in the first place. the unemployment rate for those with a bachelor's degree is less than 1/3 of the rate for those without a high school diploma. but for too families across the country paying for higher education is a constant struggle. earlier this year, elizabeth cooper wrote to tell me me about middle-class family is hard to afford college. she tells me not poor enough for people to worry about but not rich enough u enough to be cared about. michellers i know the feeling. we only finished paying off our student loans 10 years ago. i want to make sure students like her cannot rack up big debts. we expanded grants and college

tax credits for students and families. we took action to offer millions of students a chance to cap their student loan at 1010% of their income. and congress should let student refinance their loan just like the parents can refinance their mortgage. as long as college costs keep rising, we can't keep throwing money. colleges have to do their part to bring down costs as well. that's why we proposed a plan to tie federal financial said to a college's performance and create a scorecard so that students and has ts to see which school the most bang for your buck. in january more than 100 college presidents came to the white house to increase opportunities for underserved students. since then we met with even more leaders who want to create new

community based partnerships an support school counselors and this week my secretary of education announced a series of economyments to support student who is need extra academic help getting through college. this is a challenge i take personally an to all you young people now that you're heading back to school. your education is something you to take personally also. it's up to you to push yourself to take hard classes and read challenging books. science shows when you struggle to solve a problem you're forming new connections in your brain. so when you're thinking hard you're getting smarter. which means this year challenge yourself to reach higher and set your sights on college and the years ahead. your country is counting on you. and don't forget to have some fun along the way too. thanks, everybody. good luck on the year. >> a small community ofless than

1,500. family often go to camp, kayak or just catch a few trout. at the local high school we had a good honest conversation about growing the economy, creating more jobs and ex-panting opportunities for all americans. i listened to workers and parents who were living paycheck to paycheck share their concerns about the future of their family and also about country. like most americans my constituents are frustrated with the status quo. they wish washington would start meddling in things that aren't broken and start fixing the things that are. they think it's too much talk. they want to know why can't our leaders just do their jobs of i know how they feel because my republican colleagues in the house and i have made the american people's priority our priority. and that every child get a good education. the democrats in the senate

decided no to do nothing. our bills are collecting dust. they passed a common sense solution without doing the hard work to pass their own. that's just irresponsible. there's no other word for it. republicans have led efforts to enact job training legislation that helps people get back to work. we've given veterans outdated federal broccoli timely care to what they need. nd we prevented major highways from shutting down. president obama, his own party controls the senate and they need to get to work. more than 75% of them have originated in the house.

republicans aren't going to slow down. we're going to keep passing common sense solutions for american families. we're going to keep the pressure on the senate democrats to do their job. thank you so much for listening. >> hi, i'm greta bronner and this week on the "washington journal" we're going to be focusing on president lyndon's johnson's vision. tune in at 7:00 a.m. eastern time and join the conversation by calling us or sending us an e-mail at c-span.org. u can send us a tweet on @cspanwj. >> next a look at the conflicts between russia and ukraine. talks include the potential implications for the u.s. this was held by the center for

national interest. it's an hour and a half. >> well, thank you very much, everyone, for joining us today. it is always a pleasure to have such a big crowd in the middle of august and on one level, i am very grate to feel have all of you here. on another level, i wish we had a little bit less perhaps to talk about. but i think we'll have a very good discussion today. we've got two excellent speakers. i'm paul saunders for those who don't know me. i'm the executive director for the national interest. i'm here to talk about russia's motives and policies in ukraine. we have got two really terrific speakers both of whom have written recently for our

magazine "the national interest." to my right is an associate professor in newport, rhode island, a former editor of "the national interest" magazine and has a cover story in the previous issue of the magazine that discusses some of russia's otives in ukraine. mick gronion directs the institute for democracy in corporation in new york, an organization that is connected to the russian government and under nick -- >> informly. >> informly, ok. ondernick is a

former advisor to russian government officials and has ery good insights into russian thinking and foreign policy. he's also written very frequently for the magazine particularly on our website one of his more recent pieces which got a lot of attention "what's at stake in ukraine." so we're very pleased to have both of them with us today. we do also have just out today actually the new issue of our magazine which we're very excited about with an important cover story about henry kissinger's new book, as a matter of fact. nickday we will start with on my left. each speaker will have 10 minutes. i will be firm and enforcing the

10 minutes because we'd like to preserve an opportunity for discussions among everybody here today. ondernick, please. >> thank you, folks. as always it's a pleasure to be here because i am repeating that this is the best place to discuss politics because of audience because of the people who really learn the roots of this institution and because always you have very good people who can argue your position and i like when somebody's challenging my positions which i'm formulating. i would like to be very short, but i would like to start from a couple of expo situations of the

meetings which is wildly going through the circles an through american media. it is important that we understand what is the narrative in washington. you have to know what is the narrative in moscow. rst, one of the biggest lies big lie of putin. it's just absurd. everything that happened in ukraine is happened because of yono kovic he was the riding source for this negotiation with the european union. to hen they came emple u. found e treaty, this guy out that europeans are ready to pay $1 billion.

and these corrupt guys decided that it's a joke. and they're friends and family. by the way, all these people today running ukraine were part democratic corrupt ifferent government. long time corrupted person under many, many investigations. yes. another member of previous circle of small number of corrupt officials in ukraine which means talks about purification, new starting, fight against corruption. it's a joke. and this is perceived in most as a joke. another thing that putin may be yanocovic idn't want

to sign that treaty. like i said it's lie. just e.u. couldn't offer anything. after which, and you'll know is most famous phrase are my good father which yanokovic coulden turn down. yanokovice result why decided not to sign. but he didn't mean he wanted to sign that. he just wanted to sus spence. t, you know, in reality most consider that after mediation of he european partners, authored several calls offered by president young violence. as a result.

of negotiator and on behalf three foreign ministers. and ovic was betrayed by left the country. it led you to the authors who is the power. f you look at this opportunity and declare its independence. . it's a joke whasm kind of annexation? >> no power legitimate pow tpwher kids cry mean government decides that they don't want to fall taller. from western part of ukraine. is it the hero? they decided that it's

the time to solve their own fate which is in their own hands. you know, some people consider that this is against ukrainian coast officials. it's another joke. we know we do not kill. we know the kosovo case against serbian constitution and you goss slavian constitution. anyone who was in the constitution it's going to be and now it could be urn british and because british crumb the united states was broke. it was desigh for them to be independent. this is at least the narrative -- i'm not going to because it will take too long. i don't want college. i will be ready to answer the questions.

second part which i would like to raise a cup of -- couple of sanctions. >> i think one of the worst things we are facing at this moment and in international regulations. this is for training that one great forward is deciding to punish another great forward. -- has uclear challenged japan to pacific to all these places. and even some leaders of this great power are, you know, announcing that they isolated and promised us. it's another joke. it is perceived in moscow as a joke. >> how can you isolate russia.

it's unbelievable. why when the leader of this country is not talking about these kind of things. there is a great immediate meting. before that i'm a dub deal. they shuled give him $400 billion deal with china. now, by the way, last week ussia sibed mem random for negotiations with iraq. it will have a very serious cons questions. because if you're out under desertion. you have no incentives to work alongside with the others who there. this could be crazy for russia to follow the line. he same thing -- other

countries. ich whom russia is, you know improving and increasing. it's the relations. a lot of articles were published and the national interest about america's policies, unintended cons questions. how washington is pushing russia and the embrace of china? sometimes times -- it's not a good thing to throw both both. many other states mentioned dock. that play -- i don't flunk and i just emphasize on this i have the national interest and but another important thing is that initially washington decided ha moscow is not going to retaliate. but it's not true. moscow isly rally.

-- italy. gor furrer in a -- or go further. china, iran, and, you know, russian retaliation to europe was very celebrate it. very cautious but very shark and ery low and this is the most sensitive area. many countries are just sbess pratt. baltics the most noises peopling in the woorled there. and they told them. they said the most noisy people they are hurt.

ends with more. and not toin trouble enforce sanctions on the friend term.e weighing for their that's why some this second for sub nomy is the most stanive. at the same time i pished i have more shirts. if you can store some songs. you can go to friends an family. they are just. learned that sanctions is one is one of the best in russia. economy didn't make it work. you went flew all of the seasons. russia. russia's lost as result of sanctions, harley a tasty woman.

might be 1-b. this would increed. but this response of moving him gave a below for 10. e.u. e russian trade with is 15000. only elect table fish this. all the things beat them show. >> i toik like them said -- it is television. finnish prime minister are complaining that they're fwining to stop going. after him on the russian sell ision appearsed yol william.

think said honestly blood is everywhere. and said that jen is very economy. the growth in europe is no becoming lower and hay are in trouble. russia is one of the biggest consumer in market if not the biggest in the area. first or second. i don't know. money? ink is the if you can't punish this kind tri. t's not of course -- it's very interesting. i would like to say a couple of words about the words and phrases used by american olitics. >> we've passed 10 minutes. > i'm coming underway.

the curn russia, leaders they have another culture. if even they are very unhappy with american policy. they never became personal. they never used condescending words against america. not amongst your leaders. once america keeps up with the tradition, that and at this moment we are witnessing unfortunate to this. into relations. the last thing i would like to say, is russia has a very clear end in ukraine. > clear for everybody. it was scheduled five years ago. a year ago. >> this is russia's washington -- they're watching him close.

it depends on -- they don't have anything and there you are totally incorrupt and then kill an they are totally military, economically, and washington and europe. the jurep not happier. .hey said the problem so many different people like . ssinger, and many others the turk made doubleization of power. that's it. a very mo and russia is going to go up to the end in achieving. it goes of this is very cloorly formulated in moscow.

if america didn't say anything about american aids. >> do you think -- which gives me an opportunity to see that to defeat russia. to help control over russian resources. as tfings in the 1990's. and use is this. further irconfrontation is dirty. i can only understand it. but everybody in we understood the classic race for a fight. for itself slow began and teach. i would like for them to finish each craig. why toast flead? because america has winners. i would like for everybody

to remember this. >> thank you. >> all right. nick. >> thank you. ake it away. >> paul noted that i'm at the u.s. olive work hall. i'm actually on leave. and i am speaking in my own personal capacity. we have a war college since that out of course is known for the department offense. we've reached a point in this crisis where today acrording to news reports we may have the first incidents ofment and ushing the military yunes. the ukrainian government making blases were destroyed. so we reached to a point and this is.ook back somber, faced.

spokesman and smokes woman. nd cam out and said. this is not -- we've had very clear indications all along that kraine matored the -- russia . uld enforce his way if and it doesn't mean that the united states has to agree with those red lines but sometimely, we, the united states have been much better surprise. they're reaction -- we wait for events to develop on the ground and then we react to them. without a sense of why these things matter in the big picture. it was very clear at that event that ukraine mattered under to a person point and the assessment

was that if russia was willing to loan the $15 billion to support the ukraineian policy bills. we, you cray. you know the situation where you have been educated apparently to the status of. there hasn't been much of a conversation bluzz of why. rerp moat relaxed. we had these loan storms to know where ukraine apanchtly has become scry lent. 's and european policy makes it. while that is taking place. i don't think from my purge o genlt. that has been met. that you sut len di found a

splay. he's not and with that because of reacting to two events. it makes me much more difficult to be able to find a way out. , can kor. if we can't articulate it too fash. what resources we're willing to commet that. makes it much more difficult to any le to engage any c-span. with that in mind, we will have to deal with. i'm going to mention a mention. and we've already had a flu ofment. nd former pracktigser ins.

that has the hue take status. >> he's -- more power deballs to the regions where they have a much greater. as a. we haven't answered this yesterday. barley from your marries. . o we to -- provide continued western support. you will have to do this. and and say whatever you wish to o we will support that way which is what the factor is the. we have sat extreme mixed messages. support for the westward path and then when the details need to be filled in in terms of

actual commitment. . e becomes a got -- and i think we need to be much clearer now. and to lay out exactly what happened. we are prepared to do one arm-we have to play our first you -- ian military, theyer combat operations against each other. . beyond obviously decrying those actions and condemning them. and again to people in the government in kiev, they need to have crystal clear showness sit. and that raises questions, of course, but i do think that there are going to be gaps

opening up between pretorial yit based on the economic data is now on the i tilling point that goes into russia. there been no gross in perhaps the beginnings of an intern session. this comes at. it's sun tage -- and you make the several years in economic terms whasm will happen to peeze unless you have the impact of that economic situation begin to take hold in the days or weeks ahead. if the ukrainian rather on its second reading. . that would suspend which would then. to help me. which of course, would certainly restrict the animal by surprise.

they would definitely pull yuped into reserks. sounds like the new trance atlantic. we want to be seen as a low cost or low cost, low income join. we have a political problem. those issues need to be worked out in the contest o a trance atlantic relationship between washington and new york which has been and we are not dealing . th a particularly with human. relaxes with. they definitely know it's not the. n the weeks an months i again. we need to look at, you know, another question which is simplistic. certainly a number of statements

ve to do and certainly split equal political fishers which is whaun did the her love it. and with regard to russia. because it is clear that we can not go back assuming that we can reach that's a reset. d informs the reset of 2009, 2010. you frainr >> trust me. was think the -- you've gained nuffs traction and took ukraine. and this competitive life. in terms of his outrage. thed a mintstrations policy defend dent. . maybe a younger cor bet.

this that could have been the river off the track. balancing about between east and nord. in ukraine yum when you -- what this is the u.s. policy. >> it's chirp toy ayess and to say whatever the gorse government. that is the perm approach that the additional will take. if it's not then that need to be communicated. the other players is this. e programs goes through that 4:30 not ally of zun- morning. . i love you --

and him and president obama don't get along. sb. but moving beyond that is d sensual direct of the cooling in i ks in that make leg roarer needed these two operations that but that is a real championship book. ccording the petses which is if? we lopt lost in the pay rain. she's fired on tuesday and wednesday. partner lie moscow and washington have different roenicke other than programs very childy relations.

as the governor elites in both countries remain the same. yeah's that the way your oornl. to which relakeses with -- >> it it's the story on that line. ertainly on that nayo, ally. they thads sickle years awe of. turks have agreed i believe that ey want to snls through blew screen. the downscreen are full speed .head on the soum try by the of .he indians was we're sacrifice their rip with

mom. and. . hopefully more than happen to get on -- and certainly asian not only did you trying to go to court. ss she wondering afterwards. to see if in the combocking just doims and you're definding new read.ees or sibblingt she has effort ink russian earth o . . exercise in the cent ma. the 2 pn 00, and to deal with our countries over ukraine

and ultimately it does come down to other question and we need to articulate why you crane matters and what its interest is to the united states and this band-aid approach and that reactive approach of reacting to a media crises won't serve us well in the next crucial months ahead. >> thank you very much, nick. and thank you both for your comments. t me maybe ask both of you a very pointed question just to start off the discussion. do you think russia will invade ukraine? and if so, what do you think would be the trigger for something like that? >> you know, initially at the beginning of the crisis when

president applied to council of federation to get power for use of force in case of russians and russia's people will be in dangerous. plus for sing nal to russia and used their force. it was clearly formulated. since that time after crimean as i , donnask might be formulated in my article. another option, you know, prevailed because russia can achieve the goals outdirect invasion. craft. is a near to ukrainians are fighting each

other in kiev, everywhere. they're like private armies fighting with the jeans. i think everything i depend bringing it to you? who's going to dirs. stay down horses. the di situation will then be made. as a result of this kind of event. it's real. it's not showing all it is in the frame. gaza i don't know. .verything but school is -- they destroyed. people killed. . they bait 100,000 for people to cross the russian. but this too nine

ladies in state department are showing fantastic level of cynicism. either this is ignorance, total ig no, sir on the ack dress. i would like to know it is about appointing not idiots but probably then since. this is the reaction from the governors. i sbi -- there is a very serious approach. all en russia can -- and leaders of political party. reck. direct military military supplies. but forting in jame.

but still trying to find an or tango we only need two. washington's two is in silence. >> you implied and i don't know whether you men to imply it. that if the rebels courses clapts. it looks like they're about to be defeated. >> mike? >> it is quite possible because ou know sh we know the these different battalions. and by the way there are a lot of outfits i didn't wore. nd how is it called -- calamuski.

they think to take that tease people within read. -- i ve to go to with don't know it's hard. the spsh forces. i don't 92. it's by thomas. it's not -- it could sound absurd but when i'm watching, you know, some of your senators and congressman men from copses. i hear so many, you know, lunatic drinks that we are discussing which kind of proposal. i'm probably not going do punish here.

circumstance, it's there -- and you mentioned is the krainian media still putting center. that but they're older than the ledger effect by rub yak. out of the people who organize more in odessa. in the other places. do we chillout. in this seeded, which they are king a grate, small business any cal. and toms against his words. what does that del me. these ain't lawyer?

>> the girl was not the song with her >> a lot of people are demanding mpingt. and it's always complaining for bun.source to kill, to if you charge people. and so d football average, they are very different prospectives n united states. . morgan was starting to go up, way. .ere here he is who needs nick, if you could programs briefly with bond also into my question. do you think the russians -- i middle eastern, i was wrong about cry anywherea.

interest would semble by ail gent. i was wrong about that. but sure, let me give you a stab atat this. on the one hand we've seen in ukraine as we've seen in other parts of the world. the 21st century post podern northwestern. i guess your question is more of traditional 20th several. identify unless serb conditions are met. one is if there is a complete collapse in the sense that there's a human tarnle energy which is we mentioned he wanted to be a president violence. he had looked at the one he does to that. . ere would certainly be

ink and all right we've been hairing something for. . the other wild card is d date if the ukrainian government does cut off the energy transit or mething happens to the enemy infrastructure. hat's been a real. . they are receiving their natural gas through ukraine from yushian services. and that helping you keep an eye popping afternoon. . on a day i think it changes the .ilt -- silt wation -- don't hold me back to a prediction on this either.

>> thank you very much, nick. let's open it up to questions. does anyone -- ambassador burke. . have a mike >> thank you. i want to kind of challenge a couple of your central thesis today. and the first being that and i think most important being that -- that somehow washington is the only place that counts in kind of thinking about a solution to this problem on the western side of this equation. thatthink you're waking up this crisis. from the very start by the way, this began, if you will, between a kind of confrontation for better for worst between the and from the association agreement. but i think in tems of how it's

developed, the europeans have crits cal aut. at one point they could happen the story that never happened in the course of this crisis. i don't -- the y lines in disarray is ar very important fact. for the most part, the united states an europe has senior stayed very close to challenge. this is because the idea that washington has forced these sort of craven europeans into a tough sanctions policy. the fact of the matter is i think if you look at the sanctions and how they can ranch et it up. basically because most pornly hill. i think you've seen over time the emergency of some real issue. impart that i think that is

ridiculous minute. had to do with malaysian airliner and the aftermath and he treatment of the victim victims. >> i think they'll show you boys. if i could focus just even more ed it t on the country will. >> we've seen attitudes in that country towards rush yab and. why do the polls show that there's almost 80% of his aproves. that's unheard of in recent years. so there's been this important opinion shift and if anything sent a strong message to the . ssian government

it was the e.u.'s decision to take over e.u. sanctions which were more comprehensive than the u.s. sanctions. and that was driven not only by the leadership of angela merkel but also by the british, the . ench and even the italians that leads me to conclude in your last remarks needs or wants. when you outline you were some sort of neutral status for ukraine. .ome protection for the russian i think maybe you shouldn't that look washington for a lot of reason has a lot of other issues on its plead.

he may not be able to get a very good audience. but what i would tell you to do is go to berlin and maybe that is the party that needs to take the lead here, and if the russian government looks at this purely through the lens of this is some kind of american run operation, you may lose a good bet to achieve a diplomatic solution to avoid a full-scale confrontation that would come from your escalated intervention in ukraine. >> ok. >> i agree and i think president putin understands there is no love for and -- from angela merkel.

and he is on the phone with her more often then with mr. obama. obama said a very interesting thing in his interview with the new york times, which i read at least -- i don't know what was the perception of the others -- he said it is not going to be a cold war with russia -- very strange, very interesting, but the rest of my term i will not be able to deal with russia on any issue, something i am explaining the meaning of what he said, which means moscow must write off washington as a constructive force, but this is not the case in kiev.

by the way, since secretary rumsfeld, europe is delighted -- divided. new europe and old europe. and people in moscow would like to get money. they would like to get euros, but they are not listening to washington. washington clearly formulated its position in favor of ukraine and that russian language must be the second national language. they accepted the idea. this country is federalized and nothing happened. and that's it. this is a case of how to get out of the crisis. everybody is saving their face. russia is saving their face, and kiev is saving their face.

as far as it concerns europe as a whole, i don't think, again, that -- this is from armenia. it might be the president. it's a joke. [laughter] i don't think that by themselves europeans would like to impose any sanctions. this is under enormous pressure of washington. all of this is intervention. that is why they are doing this. russia is not libya, to leave behind.

>> we have the finnish ambassador here, who i think has some useful comments on europe and european positions. i understand madam ambassador that your president may have just met with president putin if i am not mistaken. we have a microphone. >> thank you for this discussion. i was thinking i would not comment on anything. but i cannot help it. i cannot help commenting. the european union is 28 countries. when we have a discussion, it is always lively. we are not necessarily the same opinion. we are reaching compromise.

the foreign ministers of the european union released a press release before i came here. the european union is increasingly concerned about the crisis in ukraine and the humanitarian impact. it underscores its unwavering support to the sovereignty and unity of ukraine. and we stand side by side with the u.s. with the sanctions. and indeed, if you look at the economic relations, the u.s. is much more involved with the economic cooperation than with russia, so the sanctions are coming to our per for leo.

we are trying to understand. the sanctions are much bigger in some countries than in other countries. mine is one where the impact is relatively big. when the milk is not coming from finland or other countries, there is simply no milk because there is not production of the milk or you get very expensive milk. or her belarusian milk or kazakhstan milk. the sanctions seem to be getting more severe in russia.

russia has been asking for a big financial package. >> $41 billion. >> to work in the russian economy, not to be stored in russian coffers. >> my issue is -- i was looking, of course, at some of the decisions what we have been all of the crisis saying that it is a simple case that russia has violated the principles of international law and international commitment.

i remember in 1975, the soviet union was looking at what was nonchangeable. the u.s. and the west were claiming a backseat in the final act. it was a compromise, and i think a good compromise. you referred to the finnish prime minister. if you look at the finnish media, and i was looking directly at the finnish media, of course we have this discussion about the impact of the sanctions, but at the same

time, the prime minister was saying that we stand firmly as an eu member in the sanctions. president putin is in the hot seat today. i have not gotten the insights yet, but i was looking the first seven minutes, in the beginning, my president did call to discuss the ukrainian crisis. in the seven minutes of the first press release the press was thrown out of the room.

the press was coming to discuss the horrible situation in ukraine and whether we could find a political solution to this. my question would be -- and it's important to hear that this forum is assisting. it's sad to hear that the positions are so far away at the moment when we would need solutions and military support and there is a violation of some of the principles. at the same time, we should really find a solution where ukraine, russia, united states and european union are sitting at the table and really looking at the possibilities, how do we get out of that.

the european union has firmly decided to assist. the ukraine could not commit to fulfilling the criteria. this is now a different situation. we have been looking very carefully and there has been already action on that side also. i think we need urgently a political solution, and that is the key issue. my question to you, i would say it is not in russia's interest to have a divided europe or ukraine. or for ukraine to be unstable for a long time. ukraine is too important. so what is the action now to get to the table and reach a

solution? what are the red lines you foresee? >> thank you. i agree with what you said. since helsinki, 13 new countries have emerged. more than 20 or 25 in europe, which means borders are not unchangeable. they are changing. and as i said, russia's action in crimea is absolutely in accordance with international law. this is clear. this is crystal clear. territorial integrity and the right of a nation for

self-determination. that is what involved. and great powers, this is their habit. they are picking. if they like this, they take this. if they don't like this, they don't take this. second, i would like to tell you one thing which really very seriously struck me. it's for you to understand the modern russia. the grandson of molotov said on one of the programs that now he is the chairman of the education committee in russian parliament. very influential member of the circle of people.

he said isn't it a shame that russia supported the koreans, the vietnamese, arabs, latin americans, and the only ones they are not supporting our the russians in ukraine. russia supported all of them. by the way, america also is supporting so-called rebels in syria. cia is training them. we have nothing against that because this is a humanitarian catastrophe. it could be an absolute mess in the region.

we knew it would happen when you acted in libya, when you acted in europe, and now we see how the situation is developing. and again, this is not our choice. the ball is in the western court. russia's position is clear. i think on one of the tv programs i said what is necessary to do. it's very clearly known in washington, when you college wanted to use force -- janokowicz wanted to use force,

they picked up the phone and said don't do that. it's very easy. but you need to have political support and leadership qualities. this is the lack of political leadership, and this is commonplace, unfortunately, in western political discourse. unfortunately, the tribe of leaders is multiplying, unfortunately. >> chance freeman was next. >> i think the problem with

sanctions is that they entrench differences. they create market distortions, which in turn create vested interests in their continuation. they are hard to remove. unless they are clearly linked to a negotiation with clear objectives, that is the inevitable result. they also of course create fear, and we have seen that here, in a great deal of the public sphere. my question from the beginning has been, since it would seem to be in the interest of all concerned to remove ukraine is a point of contention between east and west and help ukraine achieve viability as a state and

prosperity, why isn't anyone talking about the president of the austrian state retreating. it took austria out of the east and west, established it as a neutral country. if that model were applied to ukraine, there's no eu, no nato membership. everybody in russia and the eu in particular are helping -- are pitching in to help ukraine with problems. why would that not be a logical solution, and why isn't this being discussed? we spend a lot of time talking about how we got in the mess we are in end no time talking about how to get out of it. so my question is what is wrong

with the austrian state treaty model? >> nick, perhaps we could start with you. >> in theory, there is nothing wrong with it, but that is what politicians on all sides would have to say they are ready to agree to. the block on our side is excepting the austrian model essentially says yes, there are limits to the growth of the community. for the last 20 years we have said the community can have unlimited growth, keep growing, keep going eastward. the austrian treaty said there is a limit to europe, a limit to the west, and here it is. i don't know that we have the political will on our side for someone to come out and say

that, to say this is the line over which nato does not cross. the president when he voted for the 2007 bill, which essentially said nato membership should continue going east as far as possible, he would have to then -- and his vice president and his former secretary of state who i voted for would have to say our vote in 2007 is -- we are repudiating it. it's a feasible option, but i there is a political cost. a and i don't know and that it is for this town to a and a say this is the limit and in a and in and in for the eu, this is the limit for nato.

i don't know that is a winning hand to play. >> i am sure russia will be very much in favor of this kind of treaty. by the way, during that period, every one was envious of finland because they were getting the best of both worlds. finland splurged and became one of the most advanced countries in the world due to their status. you could teach people in key of some lessons on this. >> madam ambassador, i understand you might want to respond to that, please. >> i wish finland were a model for ukraine, but our history is completely different. we had our own parliament before we were independent.

we had a democratic parliament. >> we had a russian czar who left all of this in place in finland. >> we were fighting a war also. the other one was after our independence, we were never conquered. we were one of the few countries in europe was not occupied. so the situation was -- of course we had a reality check after the second world war. but we were able to create very good relations to east and west. we have been now since 1995 as a member of the european union, we have the least corrupted democratic system in the world. >> and everybody is envious of you, including me.

>> it's not at all comparable. i wish it was. >> i have four people on my list. >> it's also a very advanced country. >> and the two keiths. i will write both down. we have five questions, 20 minutes. i want to make sure everybody has a chance to ask a question and get a response, so if i could encourage the two of you, really, to limit yourselves in giving answers. and they want to ask one question about the sanctions. just a one minute response. we had a discussion about the impact of russia's agricultural

sanctions on europe. you in your remarks said that russia's sanctions were very targeted. were those sanctions also targeted at the united states, because as i think back on the history of the u.s.-russia relationship, one very notable participant in our american debate was then senator joe biden, who for many years was in favor of russia's wto accession and at some point became opposed, and it related to a very specific issue of chicken. american chicken exports to russia. do you believe that the russian government was attempting to send any kind of signal to the

vice president through the state of delaware? has russian policy finally cracked it? >> we have a very serious program. 40% of our market was this poultry. now the number is 6% or even less. all in all, it's about one billion agricultural products. but i want 10 seconds to say another important thing that i will emphasize. what putin did in agriculture was long overdue. but he couldn't do it because he was afraid prices would go up,

some problems would happen. in order to stimulate local agriculture. but now, this is a fantastic incentive to do this, and people can take this because they have to do that. it was a silver lining. this was a chance. no crisis should go unused. >> would you say that it is mainly to the benefit of people who like president putin and live in rural areas and mainly

at the cost of some people in urban areas who do not particularly like the president? >> no, because the limitations concern some products, we get a lot of substitutes from different places. there is a long line of countries and companies who want to sell their product in russian market. there are a lot of sellers, a few buyers. this is the reality. >> let's move on. i wanted to get my question in. let's start with ruth. >> let me claim spiritual purity because i thought what happened in kosovo was not good. we said that because it was

preamp your language, territorial and -- free ambulatory -- preambular language, it was not a matter of territorial integrity. i was also not in favor of nato. i think you are seriously but perhaps mistakenly underestimating the spoiling for a fight of putin's own personality. this is a guy who likes crisis. this is not an ecumenical, evenhanded, contemplative what would it mean if france started landing troops in québec, announcing that the people were oppressed and mistreated? that's the analogy. it's not simply the spontaneous

uprising of an unhappy people. it is an outward imposition of a revolution and in that sense, a very dangerous, strategically dangerous spoiling for a fight from putin. this is not coming from the bottom-up, in my view. >> let's take susan's question and then get responses. >> that's a useful segue. you were mentioning, both of you, the narratives on both sides. there is a narrative in washington that putin's aspirations for ukraine are part

of a doctrine that may unfold throughout the former soviet union. i wonder what you would answer to the person who spoke to me yesterday and said the baltics are next and it would happen before the end of the year, and what would you say about that? >> let's try really to keep it brief. >> i think it's the fantasies of sikorsky and fantasies of the baltic republic leaders, because nobody is thinking to grab these territories. nobody needs them. they don't have any strategic, economic, or any other kind of interest. i was in kazakhstan, and i was asked the same question. next is cause extent, next is this, next is that, and i said yes, i know the fear and that right away people will say what was said here.

i am not going to repeat what was said until nazarbayev is a front runner for eurasian integration in former soviet space. he has nothing to worry about. he wants integration. people are living. russia is still very safe and protected and no problems. because we are solving problems when problems are becoming ripe. no problems. and everybody understands. i know that this is a provocative discussion that maybe nato article five is not

usable for the baltics. and even zukowski made an ugly and derogatory statement that they were doing different kinds of sexual services to americans but that they don't feel themselves secure. russia has nothing to do with these crazy people over there. it will take several generations for them to recover. >> i think it is less that it's going to be a test of the baltic states because there are legal commitments there, but it is a reminder that you don't make promises you don't intend to keep. i think the ukrainians are discovering that a virtual article five is not the same thing as an actual article five.

i think sometimes people are led to believe that. i think that's really where the dividing line is is the russians are not going to cross. they have an awareness of where redlines are and they are not going to cross that. they have tools in the baltic states and economies are one of them. but i don't think you're going to see an overt military challenge. >> we have andy and then keith. >> thanks. i will just make a couple of comments and you are free to respond. i have apologized for being late. i missed your presentation. >> it's unforgivable. >> i know, and i'm going to be

punished. you said that people in the state department are cynics, and maybe rightly so. i would respond that you're minister of foreign affairs is a pathological liar, and your president as well. it is well known by everyone that material from the russian federation, war material, has been crossing the border for months. it has been denied as a bald face lie by the russian government. now, there are problems with media, but i have to say, i spent six weeks of the past four months traveling through central asia and south pockets and had an opportunity to watch more russian tv than i ever wanted to. i also spent three days in

moscow in july, and in the 35 years i have been traveling to the soviet union and russia, never have i seen such unbelievable media propaganda as has been going on in russia in the past six months. i was there on july 13th when one of the most absurd stories was propagated. a woman claimed that when ukrainian authorities took over they hauled out the local population and had them witness [indiscernible] of a three-year-old boy. i was watching this going, please, someone is kidding me. i think what is being perpetrated to the russian

population is really at odds with reality. if we look to the future, i think we are in agreement that the best solution is for there to be some kind of peaceful negotiation to get out of this, because we are on the precipice of a total catastrophe. if there is an escalation between russia and ukraine, that is a complete catastrophe for ukraine, first and foremost, but for russia as well. it has been striking to me as to why the negotiating solution has not been pursued with greater vigor. if i were to call our government

and the west, i think we do need to sit down and be more realistic about what it could mean, and also simply that -- there are four scenarios. one, all-out invasion. least likely. two most likely scenarios aren't escalation that would not withstand sanctions or that would be met with increased sanctions, or supporting the insurgency and bleeding ukraine dry. and the ukrainian economy is not in a position to take a whole lot more of this. i would expect that would be the strategy of moscow, which is why i think it is more imperative than urgent for key of to try to reach a negotiated solution to get out of this. now, trying to figure out what

is russia's policy to see -- well, ok, stelkov has disappeared but he is replaced by a ukrainian. another guy disappears and is replaced by a ukrainian. humanitarian convoy, don't quite know what the story is there. there was a claim of a military convoy that came across the border and was destroyed by the ukrainian military. >> nick mentioned that. so, since we have just seven minutes, why don't we take comments from everybody i have left on my list, and then we will give you a chance to respond briefly at the end. >> first, on the economic side, i am an economist. the russian economy is about 6% of the eu. we have a situation where the russian economy is now in recession and higher levels than

the ukrainians. if russians really think the sanctions are cost less, i find that -- i don't understand that. it's quite expensive for russia. my sense was they were willing to incur the costs. but i would like to say what i think which is that russia is not a serious country. it has a conventional military about the size of germany's in poland's put together. this is a country that does not respect its agreements, so i think the view is you cannot

deal wuth them. >> thank you very much. let's go to keith darden next. >> keith darden, american university. what do you see as the future of the insurgency? five years down the road, what kind of ukraine do we have and how would that compare -- it seems that russia's involvement has not been producing a less nato aligned ukraine, and that the country has so many pathologies on its own that in action might be the best way to achieve a desirable result. >> we had one gentleman at the end very briefly, and then we will give everybody a second. >> to make everybody's life easier, i am just going to give

a comment. moscow is popping up in a number of comments here. i am going to refrain from the legal discussion, whether it is proper or not. i think what this shows is that what happened in coso's case is what you are saying it's sort of the opening of a pandora's box. essentially, we have entered a phase of very dangerous reorganization. various players can use this approach and make all of their cases. since we are trying to have some progress when it comes to our

own problem, that is one solution, but the problem is how long will it take and what sort of dialogue? the other question, if you have time. this is diplomacy. there was a mentioning of the regime change. that is one of the things that very often appears. is it realistic to talk about at this point? is it realistic to expect that someone who comes after this government might be more sensible or easier to talk with when it comes to

russian-american relations. >> thank you very much. i think we have several very important comments and questions from the group here. it's three minutes until 2:00. we should really end at 2:00. if each of you could just take literally one minute and make any final closing points you would like to make. >> it's easier to answer the question that was asked about what would happen with ukraine is russia just forget about ukraine. you know, i put that in my article, which was on national

interests. we could have the worst aggressive anti-russian country at russian borders. for the year since the last census until the census which was organized several years ago, 5 million russians disappeared and ukraine. it's going to be forced ukraine organization, and the russians will be kicked out. that is one option. the other is an extreme nationalistic russia and nato. this is exactly what russia expects. this is the biggest nightmare, which could be if moscow is thinking this way. i wrote about that, and this is exactly -- i know how it's going

to be because if anybody reads ukrainian history books, you can read that this war in nme since the beginning of ukraine russians. everybody is guilty. done form which was ukraine was done by russians. second, russia -- >> very brief. >> russia knows the economy hardships and problems. nobody has the rosy glasses. this is the choice. decreasing your economic influence or distraction of

russia is a country. this is the choice. this is the choice for russia. liberalsy, russian many provocations and russian media. people are uniting around the leader. the pain of russia is different in europe and america. it don't forget that. it is very important. only one case. i happen to see that. that was denounced.

i agree that there is a serious propaganda war. the truth is the first in a propaganda war. that is the level of lie here. in media. you have more outlets. >> anti-razor critical point. we have a compromise solution on the table. if you have people in the west who say, why compromise of putin will be gone in two years.

on the russian side, why compromise on ukraine if ukraine will collapse and that europeans leblanc. -- europeans will blink. as long as the prime minister think there's a military solution in the east, as long as he thinks that russia can be convinced to sell gas at the border. those are some illusions that he may have to part with. the prime minister is still quite influential. the president is not the sole actor we have to can bentz. -- convinced. >> thank you very much. i think a very provocative discussion. clear what amakes

big gap we have to bridge. thank you. >> on newsmakers today, our rock -- stephanie treat schriock. >> when democrats have talked about similar issues they have in the midterm election. young women is one of the groups that get mentioned most often. turn outmore likely to in the presidential year than a nonpresidential year. what are they doing to ensure that that group is going to show up at the polls? >> it's such an important part of a midterm game that we're playing here.

how do we ensure that voters get out to vote. there are a lot of young women voters that we need to get to. ago, we started our women vote program. we are not something that started recently. over those two decades now, we have been doing research on how women are thinking about voting. -- best to get their information. we are able to mobilize an education women voters across the country. at north carolina, your sings of our television spots. we're talking about issues that they want to talk about. areave candidates who supporting the issues that they see are going to provide them opportunities moving forward. that is a bi