live on the air on the news of the day and discuss policy issues that impact you. monday morning, discussing the results of a c-span survey. and the history of presidential libraries with the wall street journal. watch 7:00 eastern monday morning on c-span or c-span now. join the discussion with your phone calls, comments, texts, and tweets. is on the diplomatic efforts between the united states, ukraine and russia. we bring on alex ward, national security reporter at politico. alex, good morning. guest: thank you for having me. host: first of all, react to what vice president kamala harris said.

is that any new information? did we learn anything new from her talk earlier today? guest: not really. it is the stand the administration has taken this whole crisis. however, this is somewhat more about ukraine, european security, world order, this is about whether or not the nato alliance has weathered, if it is as strong. what she affirmed is this is how big the administration sees it. it is about european security. it is not only about ukraine but order and to affirm that the alliance is strong and stronger then when the crisis began. i think this is more signaling to put in than anything --putin more than anything that you have

strengthened your enemies, or perceived enemies. host: why should we care about ukraine and russia right now? is that something we should be concerned about or solely a european problem? guest: it depends on how far out you want to look. in the immediate term it does not look like there are going to be u.s. troops in ukraine. if that is your number one concern, you do not have to worry about it. if you're worried about refugees flooding into europe from ukraine, if you are worried about another land war in europe, the largest we might see since 1945, if you are worried about humanitarian suffering, you can care about ukraine. if that does not get you, the other thing you should think about is a more advancing russia and creating a fault line between eastern europe and western europe. or i should say, non-nato eastern europe and nato plus

western europe. this looks very cold warish and you do not want a standoff -- as many countries have nuclear weapons -- and a spiraling situation. if that does not get you, no, do not care about the situation. host: the president said last week an invasion of ukraine could happen any day now with russia. what do we know? is there more information than that now? is there a timetable we should be looking toward? guest: two things you should be looking at. today, february 20, is the day most analysts were looking at we would get a better sense of putin's intentions. it is when the military exercises and, it is the end of the munich conference, the end of the olympics, so this is about the time we will get a sense of where putin is at. it is mostly the belarus-russia

exercises. they promised, at least initially, russian troops would head home. that changed yesterday when it seems they were saying, no, we have to do inspections and only the presidents are the ones that can get them to leave. if they duly belarus, do they go back to their garrisons or elsewhere in ukraine? i cannot confirm this unless i am on the ground but if you believe in certain social media reporters have been showing indicated there is a large movement of russian military equipment on the ukraine border now. more than we have seen closer to the actual front. now that we have reached february 20 may be in the days ahead we will see an offensive

but diplomacy is still open and we have not seen a large-scale invasion yet. one can hope to avoid war. host: as you mentioned earlier president biden has stressed sanctions not american boots on the ground. are all of our allies and nato on board with sanctions instead of military action? guest: military action seems firmly off the table. you will even see republicans in the united states say we don't want that. if the u.s. is not willing to go in militarily, i doubt the europeans are. in terms of sanctions, i think we have to be careful when we talk about sanctions. i think there is agreement there will be certain actions taken against the russians. the one thing people will look for is, well, is the u.s., germany, france going in at once? that is not how that works. the u.s. can go in quickly with the first sanction. then you can expect certain european countries will do their

own sets of moves which are intricate shortly after. the eu, you can think of it as a tanker. but when sanctions go on they are hard to come off. i think you can expect a series of actions, especially when it comes to sanctions on russia, but we should be careful if you see the u.s. move first and the europeans move second and a larger eu move, do not think of that as disunity. those are technical steps that need to be taken. the short answer is i think there is unanimity that will not be uniformity in terms of the reaction. host: secretary of state antony blinken is supposed to be meeting with the russian foreign minister later on this week. what can we expect come out of this meeting and how important is this meeting? guest: it will happen only if there is not renewed larger invasion of ukraine.

if it is to happen, it is another opportunity for both sides to find a deal. and more russia to make a deal because the u.s. has put options on the table. arms control, military exercises, and are willing to discuss those. whether there is an outcome we don't know but we have been wondering, how serious are the russians? especially considering they have been offering maximalist positions. if they are willing to not invade ukraine and settle for arms control and scope of military exercises, maybe we can avoid the worst and this administration, rightly, is always leaving the door to diplomacy open. but it will shut the moment it looks like the russians have fully gone into ukraine and we heard from president biden last week and other u.s. and world leaders they feel the decision has been made already.

it is a slim chance but why not keep the door open until the last moment? host: one last question. outside of an actual invasion of ukraine this week by russia what should we be watching when it comes to the russia-ukraine border crisis? guest: you should be looking for increased fighting in the donb ass. you should be looking for where the troops line up in belarus which are supposed to be heading back to garrisons. you should look for citizen mobilization inside of kyiv. does the mayor organize his civilian movement? do you see a change in the ukrainian military's posture within the country? even before that the real telltale sign the russians are going at it is if you see a

large cyber attack on ukraine, missiles flying elsewhere in the country and if you see russian war jets flying above ukraine. it will not be tanks rolling in. it will be that initial barrage. if you see that, i think the door to diplomacy is closed and we will see, unfortunately, a large land war in europe. host: we would like to thank alex ward, national security reporter for politico, for walking us through what is going on with the russia-ukraine border crisis.

>>, connection and alliance between europe and the united states has been productive. the other meetings we had were in furtherance of the ongoing collaboration and partnership with our allies. it was important and that you all know this is a moment that is very dynamic. it is not every hour. certainly every day there seem to be new moments of interest and intelligence. so we have affirmed, that being

said, through these last couple of days that this alliance is strong. stronger than it was before. this alliance has purpose and meeting -- meaning founded on shared principles that are at play now. one of the most important is about mutual respect for territorial integrity, which is what is at play in terms of russian posturing as it relates to ukraine. at stake is the nato alliance in terms of our unity, joining together through sometimes compromise. certainly oh -- always through collaboration to be a unified voice, especially when these

principles are being compromised. reporter: during your meeting with president belinsky, could you talk about what he asked the united states for? vice president harris: so far we have transferred $650 million in aid and made loan guarantees and that is on top of the work we have done collectively through the nato alliance to provide support for ukraine. reporter: is there anything new you are offering ukraine? vice president harris: this is a dynamic situation and depending on what happens in the coming days, we will reevaluate the need ukraine has and our

continuing support. reporter: are you taking part in the nsc meeting? i wanted to follow up on your meeting with zelensky yesterday. after the meeting he shared frustration with countries like the u.s., saying an attack is likely to happen but the administration has said retaining sanctions holds onto leverage. but if you believe pickton has already made up his mind, what leverage do you have, why not put sanctions in place? vice president harris: the purpose of sanctions is deterrence. let's recognize the unique nature of the sanctions we have outlined. these are the strongest we have ever issued. it is directed at financial

institutions and individuals and will exact absolute harm for the russian economy. reporter: do you feel the looming threat will deter them? vice president harris: we strongly believe, and remember sanctions or product not just as the perspective of the united states, but a shared perspective of our allies and we have agreed the deterrence of the sanctions is still meaningful. we still sincerely believe there is a diplomatic path. the window was still open, but it is narrowing.

we believe the deterrence effect still has merit. reporter: would you talk about how the u.s. would get out of this potential conflict with russia? what is the endgame? after imposing sanctions and possible military action, how does the u.s. disentangle from this? vice president harris: i would characterize it to fit -- differently. we do not consider ourselves to be entangled. but we are allied with -- listen. we are talking about the potential for war in europe. let's take a moment to understand the significance of what we are talking about. it has been over 70 years and through those years, there has been peace and security. we are talking about the real

possibility of war in europe. so our position is clear. as a leader, which we have been, ringing together the allies, working together around our collective and unified position that we would all prefer, desire, belief it is in the best interest of all that there is a diplomatic and to this moment. that is where we want it to end. reporter: the president has already said that our citizens would be facing some economic hardship. what would we be facing? vice president harris: we are aware that when america stands

for her principles, it sometimes requires us to put ourselves out there in a way where we would maybe incur some costs, energy costs, for example. but we are taking specific and appropriate steps to medicate -- mitigate what that cost might be, if it happens. reporter: he seemed to question the sincerity of allies in terms of a desire to admit ukraine to nato. is there a reaction from those pointed comments from the president? vice president harris: i appreciate and admire president

zelensky's desire to join nato and one of the founding principles of nato is that each country must have the ability unimpaired, unimpeded, to determine their own future in terms of form of government and whether they desire to be a member of nato. therefore, no other country can tell anyone whether they should or should not join nato. that is the point of sovereignty. so why respect president zelensky's desire to be a member of nato. nate it was about nations coming together as a group, making decisions collectively around the principles and the conditions and standards of

membership. that is the process. it does not happen overnight. no country can say, i want to be, and therefore i will be. that is at the heart of the issue in terms of russian aggression towards ukraine. you planted the flag so firmly on that issue, given that putin's main demand is swearing that ukraine will not be admitted. is it a surprise that president zelensky would say it at this point vice president harris: i am not going to second-guess president zelensky's desire for sovereignty, but i will say this. let's recognize the position he is in now. his countries virtually

surrounded by russian troops. i believe he came here, this is my belief, he came here to make a very clear point. i told him in our meeting, the united states stands with you. this community of allies and partners, why he came here, i will not second-guess. but his country is virtually surrounded by what most reasonable people would believe are hostile troops.

reporter: it was said late last week that the swiss sanctions probably will not be part of this going forward. given the administration has said they will start high and stay high, how do you do that without the swiss sanctions? vice president harris: we will take us one moment at a time. reporter: does the u.s. have evidence that putin has give the order for attack and whether that evidence is shared and agreed upon by allies, including zelensky? vice president harris: as the president has said, we believe putin has made his decision. but i will also say as part of

our relationship and partnership in the context of the alliance, we do share information, certainly. we want to make sure we are all working with the same information when we make these very critical decisions. i said it yesterday on the stage, not everyone agreed about what the consequences should be if russia invades ukraine. we have to meet and discuss it. i spent time with the chancellor of germany yesterday and the president of e.u.. when we look at the significance of of the

we will obviously reassess depending on how the days and months ahead roll out. reporter: do you believe the u.s. and ukraine are more on the same page about what intelligence suggests and they have been in the past? vice president harris: there has been direct communication of the intelligence. and nothing is being held back. reporter: the prime minister of italy does not agree with all of the sanctions. yesterday he said he does not feel energy should be sanctioned. doesn't that undercut the u.s. approach to impose tough, severe

financial sanctions? vice president harris: as i said, this is an alliance of nations that each have their priorities and individual concerns about anything we do going forward and how it would impact their specific country, economy, and security. i would not deny italy from having their own concerns. we all do. that is part of the process. italy is very much on the table in terms of these conversations in terms of how we would do this in a way that it meets the intended purpose, which is about deterring russia from invading a sovereign nation. we'll understand, including every country in europe, what war in europe looks like and what it can mean for the

citizens of each of those countries. thank you. >> browse through the latest collection of products, books, accessories. there is something for every c-span fan. shop now, or anytime at c-spanshop.org. >> here is what is coming up tonight on c-span. q and a is next with ryan walters, in honor of president's day, he talks about warren harding, who often ranks near the bottom of rankings. walters argues that while harding had his faults, his accomplishments are overlooked.

afterwards, justice stephen breyer talks about his requirement -- retirement. later, an update from vice president harris from the munich security conference on the situation in ukraine. ♪ susan: ryan walters, a new book, "the jazz age president." you are asking americans to take a new look on warren g. harding. why? ryan: he is one of the most maligned presidents in american history.