university's jason bordoff shows his thoughts on the impact russia's invasion of ukraine will have on energy prices and supply. join the discussion with your phone calls, facebook comments, text messages and tweets. washington journal starts now. ♪ host: it is washington journal for february 27. an interview posted yesterday president biden believes efforts by the u.s. and nato has made the alliance more unified, adding it is the opposite effect of what vladimir putin was hoping for and lodging russia's attack on ukraine. more economic sanctions have been added. for the next hour you can register your thoughts on the invasion of ukraine and the u.s. role. here's how you can reach out to us. republicans call at

(202)-748-8001, democrats (202)-748-8000, independents (202)-748-8002. if you want to text us, you can do so at (202)-748-8003. facebook.com/c-span is how you reach us and if you want to post on twitter, you can do so @ c-spanwj. over the last few days much news about sanctions and the addition of sanctions by the u.s. and other countries. in the new york times it talks about china's role in possibly counteracting those sanctions. keith bradsher and anna swanson saying, china's state owned banks could face risk for continuing to lend to russia. they have been settling trade using the ruble and beijing is trying to develop the digital use of currency which could help russia limit the effect of

financial sanctions. but chinese banks are still reliant on the u.s. dollar. while major banks appear to be pulling back from financing beijing could choose to support russia using smaller state owned banks that do not do a lot of international business. even if chinese entities circumvent rules beijing is unlikely to publicize it. despite its distaste for sanctions it does through unannounced orders sent to customs officials to avoid clear violations. more available in the new york times. if you look at congress this week with the state of the union coming up and other issues, politico reporting about what congress will doing, or attempting to do, when it comes to additional aid. the white house asking congress on friday for $6.4 billion in

aid to ukraine, including $3.5 billion in pentagon funding and $2.9 billion for humanitarian assistance. adding the biden administration briefed congressional appropriations and leadership staff on the funding proposal, which is expected to evolve to assess on the ground needs. according to a white house budget official, adding the $2.9 billion would go to the state department to provide security assistance to ukraine, poland, lithuania, the baltics, and the eastern flank to fend off russian cyber attacks and assist with economic stabilization as well as provide humanitarian aid, including emergency food and energy. the administration identified 3.5 billion dollars in funding stemming from the deployment of thousands of troops from central and eastern europe to reassure nato allies. look for that to play out this

week as congress meets and discusses those issues. with the state of the union coming up news this week as far as the president's choice of supreme court, stay close to c-span.org for following that this week. c-span.org is our website. we are asking your latest or your thoughts on the issues going on between russia and ukraine this morning, particularly the u.s. involvement. (202)-748-8001 republicans, (202)-748-8000 democrats, an independents (202)-748-8002, you can text us at (202)-748-8003. one of the people speaking yesterday was the ukrainian ambassador talking about the ongoing preparations of the country and the assistance ukraine is getting from other countries. [video clip] >> we, first of all, during the past eight years we have worked

with our friends and allies in reforming the army and getting what we need for different situations. second, we work actively on what do we need in order to develop are capable village these? i will not be disclosing exactly what but the list is very wide and we are coordinating with other friends and allies. a number of countries announced they will support us in the addition to the support we are getting from the united states. estonia, you name it, germany,

we just had news after many discussions germany decided to provide ukraine with defensive weapons. europe and the transatlantic community is very united on this. we just need it faster so we can save more lives. host: more of that press conference available at our website at c-span.org. crystal in pennsylvania, democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning. i just wanted to say how proud i am of the ukrainians and how disappointed i am of trump and the rest of the republican party and their support for a tyrant like putin. i am so sad over this matter. it is more unnecessary war. the killing of people and children, i am just very sad. i am totally done with the

republican party. i mean, i don't want to hear one word about being a patriot and all this stuff. i am sick of all of them. thank you very much and ukraine, i am proud of you. have a good day. host: doug in north carolina also on the line for democrats. hello. caller: good morning and god bless the people of ukraine, fight hard. what made me mad was i was watching some fox news yesterday. i was going back and forth to get everybody's opinion and that guy named pete, he was praising trump, saying it was on trump's watch they got the javelin missiles. do you people have amnesia? he was trying to bribe the guy over there saying, do me a

favor. he even brought that up yesterday say, look at me, they got those javelin rockets because of me. bs, he did what he could to help delay -- host: so the current situation, how do you think of this administration's handling of it? caller: about as best as they can right now. biden was able to get everybody together in a way trump was trying to push away. trump had no problem with the dictators but nato, we can't have that. if trump was in, he would be helping putting out right now. host: vick in florida on the independent line. caller: hello? host: you are on. caller: congress has no business

spending american taxpayer money to ukraine. we should take all of russia's assets and give it to the ukrainian people. that will hit putin in the pocketbook. the second thing i want to see done is the oil needs to go back to where it was under trump. we need to tell these oil companies that you must, and if they say no, we will take it from their profits. host: as far as the first thing you brought up, what you think about the announced sanctions and their effectiveness to do that when it comes to russia and vladimir putin's pocketbook? caller: it will do some but it is not doing enough. they need to take his money out of the banks and all the assets the russians have in the united states and other places and give that to the ukrainian people for

the damage they have done to their country. they are war criminals. putin is a war criminal and has to be treated like one. we also need to start pumping our own oil. we need to be energy independent and this would not happen. host: that was vick in florida. yahoo! news reporting it was the u.s. and others agreeing to employ crippling penalties on russia over the invasion, going after central bank reserves and severing russian banks from the global financial network. the decision was announced as the forces battled saturday to hold russian forces back from the capitol has the potential to spread pain for retaliation. the european union, u.s., and u.k. have stepped at the intensity of sanctions since russia launched the invasion late last week.

let's hear from ralph, san antonio, texas, republican line. caller: good morning. i am a retired u.s. army. i think putin is a bully, gangster, and a dictator. the headbanging on the wall has been there since he tried to invade the last time. the number one thing is -- i don't know if people are aware, biden canceled all of our oil in america. we need to take the russian people out, the russian dictator out of the financial market so he does not have access to his finances. host: one of the things some of you mentioned this morning already and others mentioned was

the role of volunteers and ukraine fighting back against russian forces. that is in the washington post this morning out of ukraine saying it is the ukrainian territorial defense forces believed to have over 130,000 volunteers conducting weekend training sessions in preparation to defend its turf from russia. now that the attack i started the ukrainians across the country are mobilizing and turning toward the territorial defense forces to arm them and send them into the fight, anyone between 18 and 60. the story adding the defense forces are now part of the armed forces. they have been praised by the ukrainian defense minister for holding off the russian assault since friday. 90 miles north of kharkiv there was an armored vehicle and video

verified by the washington post and interrogated a russian soldier. jeremiah in alabama, independent line. caller: good morning. i support the ukrainian people. i have always been an independent which means i vote on political parties and i vote for those who are for the people and i think is good for the people. and if you break it down, who is for me. i will no longer support the republican party coming out and calling putin smart. supporting over freedom? i cannot do that ever again. i think the republican party is losing support on this issue. when you have donald trump who is calling putin smart, all of

these things affects my spirit. i am a war veteran. i've fought in the vietnam war. i was wounded in that war. i do not support the republican party and never will no matter what policies they come out with. i think it is disgraceful and anti-american and i totally oppose it. host: jeremiah in alabama. it was at the cpac convention you may have been watching this week on c-span. you can find it on our website, c-span.org, and the c-span now app. yesterday former president about the comments he made about calling vladimir putin smart. [video clip] >> i have no doubt president putin made his decision to ruthlessly attack ukraine only after watching the pathetic withdrawal from afghanistan, where the military was taken out first, our soldiers were killed,

and american hostages, plus $85 billion worth of the finest equipment worth in the world left behind. yesterday they asked me if i thought president putin was smart. i said, of course he is smart to which i was greeted with, oh, that is a terrible thing to say. yes he is smart. then nato nations and the world as he looks over what is happening strategically with no repercussions or threats whatsoever, they are not so smart. they are looking the opposite of smart. if you take over ukraine, we are going to sanction you, they say. sanction? that is a pretty weak statement. putin is saying, they are going to sanction me? they sanctioned me the last 25 years. i am going to take over a

country and they are going to sanction me? [laughter] they are not going to blow us to pieces, at least psychologically? the problem is not that putin is smart, which of course he is smart, but the real problem is our leaders are dumb. host: more of that available at the website and the c-span now app. stanley in pennsylvania, republican line talking about the invasion of ukraine. good morning. go ahead. caller: good morning. i am kind of blown away about why they would come down on trump like that. what he is saying is true. if nato have more got instead of sanctions, we would not be here. if our leadership was strong like trump was saying, we would not be here. if trump was president, this would not be happening. we republicans, we are for ukraine. we are for peaceful, loving people. if the democrats are that

brainwashed, i don't get it. host: as far as the way we have approached ukraine, do you agree with that? should stay the same? should i go further? caller: right now there is not a lot we can do. the guys threatening nuclear war. but we can surely throw everything we have at the borders and give them people help. if i was a younger man it did not have a family, i would be loading up myself and going over there to help. we are god loving people in this country. what the media does to the republican party is disgraceful. host: that is stanley in pennsylvania. to stanley's statements about the president and the activities and ukraine, there was a poll released by the harvard center for political studies saying it was released friday finding 62% believed vladimir putin would not move against ukraine as

president trump had been president. 85% of republicans and 38% of democrats answering that way. also saved 38% of all americans believed putin would have invaded even if trump had been president. you can go to the hill website if you want to read the details. russia's invasion of ukraine, you can comment on it. (202)-748-8001 for republicans, (202)-748-8002 independents, (202)-748-8000 democrats. you can also text us at (202)-748-8003. trish in seattle, washington, democrat line. caller: good morning. truly another sad day in the universe. i would like to make a comment. i heard larry summers make on bloomberg last night and i think

the americans, we are going to be facing a lot of economic challenges as a result of putin's actions and it is not going to be fun. i think everybody was really nice last night on saturday night live. they had a ukrainian choral group sing which was lovely and everybody is lighting up buildings in the ukrainian colors and that is lovely. but when this starts hitting us economically at the grocery store and the gas pump, which already started and will continue, how strong will america be and how supportive will america be to the ukrainians then? host: how would you answer that question? caller: i don't think the americans -- they are going to

go sideways on this and when i say sideways i think they are going to vote for the minority party right now which would be the republicans, because we are in it for ourselves. short-term, myopic thinking. just like at the start of the pandemic how everybody would go out banging pots and pans for the health care workers, well, look at where they are now. i just see that happening again and america is not going to be able to do the hard work and it is going to take a hit on everybody's wallets which are already hit. i would like to add this comment. he quoted and made a point about john f. kennedy at his inauguration speech and he said,

"americans, ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country." and larry summers, this is not verbatim, but he said, i don't know that we will be able to do that. host: that was trish in washington. let's hear from chris in florida, bonita springs, independent line. caller: good morning. i would like to say this all boils down to energy and the policies that joe biden has put in and erased from the previous administration are largely to blame for what is going on right now. putin was allowed to continue with his pipeline, yet the united states was prohibited from continuing theirs. not only that but has been denied further exploration and

drilling which has resulted in countries like germany being even more dependent upon russia for energy. and i'm sorry, john kerry, the moron, climate change is not the most important thing right now. and russia's climate carbon footprint is not the most import thing right now. host: ok. caller: let me finish. these people are dumb. host: that was chris in florida. later on at eight eastern standard you will hear from columbia university's jason bordoff talking about the role energy plays. you can bring that up as a topic when it comes to sanctions and how russia itself could respond. a couple of sentences from the washington post saying, when it comes to the sanction thing the

strategy is not without risk. experts note the move could be viewed in moscow as an escalation. it is possible the kremlin could as good hostilities against ukraine or possible they could attempt to take measures aimed at the west. there is no particular need for maintaining diplomatic relations, that was the former russian president who serves as the deputy chairman of russia's security council. he wrote on saturday adding, padlock the embassies. we may look at each other in binoculars and gun sites. more of that in the washington post. cassie in michigan, democrats line. you are next. caller: good morning, pager and c-span. -- pedro and c-span. i read something yesterday that

made a lot of good points i think we need to speak to as a country. vladimir putin is a very mentally ill individual, he is extremely dangerous. he has been involved in so many murders across the globe for so many decades now and i don't know if anyone at c-span read the article. it was pretty pointed. host: how does that relate to actions as it is playing out today? caller: well, i have read some of the newspapers today. i know the ukrainian people are fighting back. i know that people are taking shelter in a parking garage type situation. i think if there are going to be any troops that enter ukraine, i think they need to be european trips first. i read a few weeks ago if we are going to hit them cyberly, that is going to be a tough go. we just got through the pandemic

another starts up and i think it is planned. i think it is all about keeping people impoverished and not having peace. host: my apologies. let's go to david in kent, connecticut, independent line. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i speak as a retired naval officer who once served the personal staff of the chief of naval operations. i have also served as a republican local officeholder in two other connecticut towns before leaving the gop in 2016 knowing donald trump was unfit and becoming a registered democrat supporting president joe biden. we need, in addition to all the sanctions, to put forth a

stronger military defensive presence. nothing would strike mr. putin across the forehead quicker than to go in to western ukraine and have nato representatives stand with president zelensky and announce the ukraine's intent to join nato. and at the same time continue the broad nato pincer movements by having a naval presence in the black sea and in the baltics and a solid military presence on the borders. host: why do you think that will be a deterrent? caller: to tighten the noose. host: why do you think that

would be a deterrent? caller: because it speaks to putin in the only language that communists will understand and will force him to move quicker away from this absolutely insane move. host: ok. let's hear from carrie in louisville, texas, republican line. caller: good morning. we all know putin is a very dangerous man and i think we signed our death warrant -- we went into death warrant mode the day we gave him more power with energy and oil. i think cutting back -- becoming energy efficient was the first thing. we gave that manpower. we gave that man more money.

for us to put economic sanctions on him? we made ourselves a joke when we did that. we are sitting here on a gold mine to become energy-efficient. that is the first thing, we need to bring up our own power. host: why do you think the sanctions are not effective? caller: because it is an economic sanction. you just gave the man the ability to make millions and millions of dollars and control other people's energy and gases that are coming in. all of this is a joke for him. he already has his bank piled up with energy, money, and the control of it all. that right there he was like, ok, i have got the power now. i can do whatever i want and laugh. he thinks he has the gold mine. we need to get our own oil and

drilling back up and then go in. i think it was the guy from connecticut said, let's get our military over there. yes, we need to do that, but we need to have power behind us to be able to do that. host: that is carrie. similar thoughts playing out in the editorial section of the washington post. the editor says right now, the united states must reconsider its focus on china in light of the renewed geopolitical challenge from russia. we must match military budget resources to the combination of threats. nato should consider admitting sweden and finland and today russian sanctions could harden into long-term blockages which were already becoming less fluid because of the pandemic. u.s. supply chains may have to take geopolitical criteria into account. geopolitical criteria into account. no commodity is more

geopolitically significant that energy, including oil and gas, which the united states possesses in abundance, and with a long with low carbon energy, would bolster our security and that of our allies. for about half an hour, we have been getting your thoughts on the russian invasion on ukraine. we continue on for the. next. half hour (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8002 for independents. you can text us at (202) 748-8003. president biden, at his home in delaware this weekend, however before leaving the white house did an interview with a person described as a progressive social media influencer. that interview posted on his website online.

one of the things he did talk about was the united states' role in the nato alliance and how it is impacting, or at least could impact, actions by president putin. [video clip] >> i know these sanctions are the broadest sanctions in history. and economic sanctions and political sanctions. my goal, from the very beginning, was to make sure that i kept all of nato and the european union on the same page. the one thing i thought putin thought he could do was split nato, creating a great aperture for him to be able to walk through. that has not happened, if you noticed. it has been complete unanimity. russia will pay a serious price for this, short-term and long-term, particularly long-term.

it is not only in europe but in the pacific, japan, south korea, australia. i think it is the democracies of the world holding together, increases the prospect that we are going to have less chaos rather than more. >> the ultimate irony that if putin's goal was to undermine nato, and look at what is happening now, nato is more unified than ever. >> beyond that, look at what is going on in terms of finland, in terms of sweden, in terms of other countries. he is producing the exact opposite effect that he intended. host: speaking of actions by other nations, axios reporting germany will send 1000 antitank weapons and stinger missiles to

ukraine, marking a complete reversal in berlin's strict of arms export policy, according to the german chancellor of the wall street journal reporting that germany is planning on raising its defense spending. about 2% of its gdp in response to the ukraine war. let's hear from david in michigan, democrat line. caller: hi. i would like to say putin is really a war criminal. my fellow americans are not the enemy. but i watched the cpac speech of donald trump in horror. the idea this man could become president? again, he spent more time vilifying biden and trudeau that he did putin. he still has never criticized putin. he said the war was catastrophic and bad but did not say anything bad about putin. he said he was smart. his arguments are a tissue of lies made at a junior high level , and that is being generous. his continuing lies about the election, without proof. he lied again about the durham

report. even durham says there was not spying -- host: to the topic of russia and ukraine, how does that relate to the topic of today? caller: well, the idea that he could become president and enable putin? it is totally related. you should his speech twice. in 2016, he questioned the legitimacy of ukraine. he weakened nato. remember him pushing away so he could get in front of the photo? he acts like a mob boss. he destroys documents, incited an insurrection to steal the election. he is a weekly who acts like a bully, and people think he is strong. come on, republicans. you're becoming an anti-american fringe called -- host: -- cult -- host; ok. we'll go to the republican line. caller: good morning. first, i would like to say

ukraine has been trying for some time now to get to beyond nato and protect it. -- to be on nato and protect it. i think it strange that biden thinks what he has done will help the people of ukraine. i believe the reason why biden does not want to act against russia and china -- because the information that they both know on biden and his son. the united states has never stood by before and watched such killing go on without making a move. no president in the united states has ever stood by, like biden, and watched this. there is more behind this than americans know -- host: such as what? caller: well, i believe that

what is going on in years past with russia and china and biden and his son and his brother and his whole family is lying -- is why biden has not made a move. host: ok. off our twitter feed, "i am simultaneously heartbroken and inspired by the cleaning people." david roth off of our defeat saying that putin is here to reinstall his public, trump. perfectly fine with the republican party to kill thousands of it as a people for this goal. and this one saying that -- enjoy your weekend in delaware, mr. president. if you want to text us, do so at (202) 748-8003. post on twitter, as many of you have, at @cspanwj. facebook is available at

facebook.com/cspan. johnny up next in massachusetts, independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i just wanted to make a couple of comments. first of all, i do believe a lot of this is tied to energy markets and i agree with a lot of the previous callers that we ought to be adopting a policy whereby we strengthen our hand in that space, i.e. we begin to ramp up our own domestic production in order to become far more independent, from an energy perspective, and also begin to become a bigger player in the export market, thus competing with the russians' primary export commodity. the second thing i've of concern is all of this talk about removing the russians from the swift system, which would then prevent them from having access

to financing in u.s. dollars. i just think about the impact of the general law of supply and demand. if we are relating to reduce the demand on dollars because the russians will now be settling those energy trades in a different currency, the impact that this will have on the dollar thus is going to be something, in my estimation, that will further weaken our economic position as the role of the petrodollar will be undermined as a result of that policy. i am concerned with some of the approaches the biden administration has taken in that i do not think it will necessarily strengthen our hand from an economic perspective. host: this is chris in buffalo, new york, democrat line. caller: ukraine was --

the media do not talk about that, nor about -- it is funny to me how america supports neo-nazis on one side of the world but does not support them over here. america is the one whose aggression onto russian territory -- but we also port ukraine. host: john from watsonville, california, republican line. caller: hi, yeah. to me what the west and the ukrainian government has done to the ukrainian people is absolutely criminal. they blew smoke up the ukrainian people and said you defied putin, we got your back, we will be right there when something happens, all the while knowing we were not going to do nothing. and the ukrainian government knew we were not going to do anything. guess who else knew? putin.

that is why he is there. that is why he is there, because he knew we were nothing but a bunch of paper tigers. the ukrainian government is too corrupt to join nato. none of you guys and they media will say that. that is why they are not in nato. they are too corrupt. they are a miniature version of putin's government. and yeah, we will send them hats and rifles and ammunition and let them die. this is what is going on out there, and it is our leader's fault -- host: aside from what has been done, what would you propose the nations do? caller: the nations should have said we are not going to do anything and that the ukrainian people have real information to work on and press their leaders. the ukrainian government is an authoritarian government. it is not a real democracy. that is why they cannot join nato. ask a nato person why they are not in nato. the ukrainian government knew

they would never join nato with the government they have now. host: let's go to michael, saint petersburg, florida, democrats line. caller: yes, the thing that bothers me in this country -- i do not understand how people in leadership positions -- ex-leaders, politicians -- can speak positively on putin. how the will can you stand with that man? he is a criminal. that is what he is. the thing you need to do is just like i've always said. there is one thing people like that understand. you take their money or take them. that is what works. nothing else works with those kind of people. host: do you think sanctions will then be effective to take the money, so to speak? caller: hopefully it does. you hurt his pocketbook or you hurt him, one or the other. host: on the twitter feed of a

news reporter in london, she posted a bit of a protest, several protests breaking out across placing of the world, but london in particular yesterday, some of the protests supporting the people of ukraine. here is a sample of that protest from yesterday. [video clip] [indiscernible] [cheers] >> ukraine will win. ukraine will resist. ukraine will resist. ukraine will resist.

host: that is, again, from charlotte lynch's twitter feed. you can find that online on her twitter. let's go to linda, florida, independent line. caller: yes, hello? host: you're on. caller: i do not understand a lot of these comments. i am for ukraine. they are not like russia. but the simplest thing is biden is asking everybody to suffer and go in, cutting off putin. why are we still buying oil and stuff from them. all he will do is open up oil. it is very simple. host: next, james in new hampshire, independent line. caller: yes, hello.

there are two particular things about this. the most important thing representing our country is that the president right now and the administration is represent your interests best in supporting nato to offset what is going on there. it will be very important that nato remain intact. and they have to avoid any splitting on -- in the area of nato. it is going to be uniform if they are going to be as effective in the long-term as possible. the second thing is having been in the ukraine, i find some of the propaganda that russia is putting out is absolutely nonsense. zelensky is not an authoritarian. he is not a nazi.

he is a man of jewish origins. anyone who questions this -- many, many people were terminated, mainly jewish. 35,000 people during the second world war. a russian poet brought back memories of this in his poetry. those were my two important thoughts. host: that is james in new hampshire. speaking of topics of cyber warfare, disinformation as well, and about 15 minutes, we will hear from katerina sedova with georgetown's center for security and emerging technology.

we have about 50 minutes on the general topic of russia's invasion of ukraine. axios and others holding that the un security council is holding a rare sunday vote over issues of ukraine. if you want to see that, you can watch on our networks, c-span.org, or our c-span now app to watch live. it is archived there as well. look out for that u.n. secure to counsel vote later today. we will hear from jerry, columbus, ohio, independent line. hi. caller: hi. host: you are on. go ahead. caller: i was wondering what everybody's talking about, we should just go in there. and then the guy with from -- with trump -- shit's crazy. host: ok. speaking of the ukrainian

president, sunday, he rejected the kremlin's offer of talks in belarus. a spokesperson from the kremlin says the russian delegation is ready for talks, and they are waiting for the ukrainians in belarus. this is zelensky responding, saying that, if there had been no aggressive talks in your territory, we could talk in minsk. on the republican line, tim, hello. caller: my comment would be if putin would like to control ukraine, there is a more peaceful way he could have done it. he could've just looked to america, take a page out of our playbook, and just call for elections, get the guy he wants to run ukraine, set him up, and run him, then take these separatist areas and flood those

-- call for elections, take those separatist areas, and flood them with drop boxes, and that his guys stuff the drop boxes full of ballots, and then close down the counting of the vote in the middle of the night and that his guys count the ballot, and then, the next day or two, he is president. there is no need for this bloodshed. he could have taken a page out of our 2020 election. host: on our independent line from warsaw, poland. caller: hello. i am calling from warsaw as a u.s. citizen. i have to agree with previous callers about the energy sector, us being more dependent on our own resources. i am calling back to the united states, and people are so clueless as to what is going on out here. we have the largest refugee crisis brewing on the corner, a 149 from the kohler -- border of

belarus and ukraine. there are people with pact act on the streets. we should continue de-escalation and promote diplomatic resolution of this across the board. it is poor and, what is happening from the russian side of things. however, all the borders are open for refugees to come in. we need more help than ever and de-escalation. there should be no war, none of this -- what's being shown is abhorrent -- host: what brought you to poland? caller: i am living out here as a student. so i can see firsthand, traveling back and forth between the countries, and a lot of people do not know what is happening out here. they are completely clueless malaak i said. i am afraid these sanctions will blowback, like previous callers have stated, against us on the western economy.

poland has taken steps to strengthen its own dependency on its own resources, away from a russian influx of power, energy source. i do not know what germany's plan is after the nord stream, but i implore that people he'd a chinese u.n. representative about de-escalation promotion -- host: why do you think that is still an option at this point? caller: honestly, from what the representative said, they are saying they are bringing ukraine to the table now, zelensky, but he is refusing meeting in minsk -- host: he is refusing to meet in belarus, actually. caller: correct, in minsk. so i really implore them to continue to seek meetings at the

table and bring this pointless war to an end, please. i am on the frontline. let's finish this, america. let's depend on ourselves. please,

-- to be under nato's umbrella. what's more, it is not clear that nato's rules permit such a concession. nato's open-door policy holds out the promise of membership to any european country able to fulfill specific obligations, civilian control of the military, democratic government, and so on. why would putin believe a commitment throughout number ship for ukraine, if it seems on track -- it is a bit of a long op-ed this morning. caller: we went into kuwait in 1990. bush i went into kuwait and ran the iraqis out of that country.

i do not see why this is different. i think putin is fluffing if he is going to start a third world war. host: what do you think about the actions today? you do not think that could lead to something larger? caller: the actions by the russians today or the sanctions -- host: the actions by russians into ukraine, and do you think it could expand from there? caller: i think, if we do not go in now, the ukrainians will fight to the death. and i believe that china will try to annex taiwan after this, because there is nobody defending these people. and it is mainly because the russians have the nuke power. back when we went into iraq, saddam did not have nukes. that is why we went in. but i believe putin is bluffing. he's had these nukes for years, hasn't used them. host: indiana, independent line. caller: hello, thank you.

i just want to say i am really proud of the ukrainians for standing up the way they are. i hope they are a good sample to the russian people, who have also lived under a bunch of adversity. if they can stand up and unite together, they are the ones who can stop putin without having a nuclear war. and also, the people like donald and steve bannon praising putin in the way he is doing things and loving russian life, please go live there. see how much you like it. i particularly love being in america and having the freedoms we have. host: that his genii in indiana. one of the stories in the new york times looks at the topic of baca, same politicians in some states have called for bans on russian-made vodka.

new hampshire governor chris sununu announced that the removal of russian-made or aband -- or branded alcohol -- it's said l. louise lucas, a top democrat in the virginia state senate, is calling for the removal of all russian vodka or other russian-made products from virginias nearly 400 state run alcohol beverage control authority stories. the story adding while only 6.9 million 9 leader cases of vodka were sold in the united states in 2020, generating nearly $7 billion in revenue for distillers, russia's share of the market is not as large as popular imagination may suggest. rush accounted for a little more than 1% of the dollar amount of vodka imported into the u.s. in

2017, according to the website thrillist, citing data from the distilled spirits council of the united states. let's go to texas, democrats line. caller: yes, sir. this is about putin. if he goes to a council meeting later on, we do not know what he will do, why he is there. maybe we will charge him with war crimes later on? you got to think about his generals and who is doing all of this. later on. they will not be able to leave, because you never know what they will do to the ukrainian people. host: republican line next up, sally in north carolina. caller: hi. i just wanted to say that don't see much sense in the sanctions when all of nato is still buying

fuel and giving all of this money to russia. how are the sanctions going to hurt him? and also, nato -- not nato but biden is afraid of what putin will find out. there is all kinds of corruption with the clintons, the bidens, soros, and obama. host: rich in tennessee, independent line. caller: hi, pedro. i don't know if i've heard this mentioned or not kate i keep hearing trump, trump, trump, as usual. i have not heard people talk about biden's statement a few weeks back about a month or so ago about it depends on whether or not it is only a minor incursion, and then he had to

try to clean that comment up. if we were acting like every statement is driving russia's actions, we would have to say that that was a signal that nato is not united in that certain actions by russia would be permitted, and we will be holding biden accountable for that. sanctions are definitely the only thing we have going on now, other than supplying military aid to ukraine, and i think this situation has emphasized why we need to become so efficient with our own energy supplies. the cancellation of the pipeline, why that was an important decision, and why that needs to be rethought. but i think that minor incursion, it needs to be brought up, occasionally at least, every time someone blames

trump, who has not been in office for well over a year. host: ok. one more call, stephen from vero beach, florida, republican line. caller: good morning kade i know we are running out of time so i will try to talk quickly. i think this whole thing is setting up perfect for president trump. this will go on for another 10 days, two weeks, or whatever, then he will fly to moscow, and there will be de-escalation, and everything is going to work out. i think it is all set up that way. if you just give it time. that is the way i see it going down. host: what leads you to believe that? caller: trump is going to fly in and save the date. host: what leads you to believe that? caller: you just give it time. thank you. host: i finishing an hour of your calls. thank you to all of you who participated. a couple of comments.

one of those topics of cyber warfare, disinformation campaigns and the like. joining us next is katerina sedova, with georgetown university to talk about those specific issues. later on in the program, columbia university's jason bordoff to talk about the energy factors and supplies and prices and how it could be impacted by current events in ukraine. those conversations coming up on "washington journal." ♪ >> hundreds of thousands of children and teenagers were actively involved in the civil rights movement. they took part in boycotts, strikes, marches, demonstrations, and faced many of the same risks as adult participants. today on "q&a," professor of history emeritus v. p. franklin, author of "the young crusaders," will talk about the sometimes

unlooked stories. >> it was the teenagers who actually showed up for these protests, initially, because they were not under the constraints that their parents were or other leaders, who felt that, if they participated in this march, this protest, this sit-in, that would affect their livelihood. but for teenagers, they were not working. they were students. they would show up, and they would participate in the marches in the protests or sit-ins, and then they would be arrested. many of the teenagers would be arrested. they would be taken to jail. their parents would be called here their parents would come and bail them out or a team would bail them out, and then the parents would say if my son and daughter can do this, they are doing the right thing, i

need to participate as well. >> professor v. p. franklin, tonight at 8:00 eastern on "q&a." you can watch all of these on our c-span now app. >> weekends on c-span 2 are an intellectual feast. every saturday, you will find people explain our nations past. sunday, book tv brings the latest on nonfiction and authors. learn, discover, explore. weekends on c-span [applause] . -- weekends on c-span 2. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we welcome to the program katerina sedova, who is with georgetown's center for security and emerging technology. she is a research fellow with that organization, here to talk about cyberattacks and the like

when it comes to russia and ukraine. good morning. guest: before we start, the center for security and emerging technology, your role in it and specifically looking at cybersecurity and disinformation. guest: the center for security and emerging technology is a small, agile think tank based at georgetown university. we look at emerging threats and the impact of emerging threats on -- sorry, emerging technologies on national security and international security in particular. i, in particular, work on the saver -- on the cyberai project, where we look at the intersection of how cyber operations, cyber defenses, and information such as disinformation campaigns may be impacted by emerging technology, such as artificial intelligence. that is the area of my focus. host: i imagine, in the study

you do, there are things you are seeing play out in real time when it comes to those issues of russia and ukraine. what are you seeing as far as these of these types of avenues out of the van military warfare? guest: there has been a cyber mentioned to this conflict, but it has not been as large as we anticipated. obviously, leading up to the open invasion, other different scenarios were considered. one of the scenarios we thought maybe prominent that it would be cyber dimensions of this conflict, that russia may deploy cyber attacks on ukrainian critical infrastructure, for example, to try and compel them into making concessions. but actually, with the full invasion now, we have seen disruptive -- distributive denial of service attacks on ukrainian websites, on their banking websites. but those attacks are usually fairly temporary, because when the site goes down, it is fairly

easy to bring it up. we have seen russia deploy some malicious software on ukrainian systems, but again, that was discovered. all of that was happening in the lead up to the invasion. right now, we are not seeing as much cyber activity since the open war is upon us. host: would you say the disinformation portion of what is going on is the bigger piece to watch? guest: it has been interesting seeing how russia has used disinformation. a lot of it was focused on the russian public, because, as we have heard, president putin idea that neo-nazis are running the ukrainian government, when there is a democratically elected jewish ukrainian president is fairly absurd. but some of the disinformation campaigns have been used to justify the actions that he has

taken. as far as directing that to the american public and the european public, it really has not been as impactful. host: as far as i cyber portion or even disinformation portion, could it extend outside the borders of russia and ukraine, united states, perhaps, as a retaliations measure? guest: absolutely. we have had a lot of concern about cyberattacks on u.s. critical infrastructure. one of the ways in which actors like this can use cyberattacks is as an influence operation. they could use a cyber attack on a critical infrastructure to cause enough inconvenience for the united states public, to raise public concern about not having access to gas or high gas prices, etc., and really spin up and amplify that concern in order to try to influence the

decision-making of our administration, our leadership. that is really one of the things i am concerned about. host: katerina sedova joining us for this conversation. if you want to ask questions about the topic of cyberattacks or disinformation, you can call and ask her about it. (202) 748-8000 for those in eastern and central time zones. (202) 748-8001 in the mountain and pacific time zones. you can text us at (202) 748-8003. yesterday, there was a story on "the hill," an organization that issued a warning on its website. this is, in part, what it red. while there are no specific or credible cyber threats to the u.s. home and at this time, russia's unprovoked attack on ukraine, which has involved critical infrastructure, may impact as asians both within and beyond, particularly in the wake of sanctions imposed by our

allies. every organization, large and small, must be ready to respond to this disruptive cyber activity. the cybersecurity and of infrastructure security agency, can you start with that? what is it? guest: it is a fairly new government within the department of homeland security on shoring up the cyber defenses of the nation. they work a lot with the private sector, because a lot of our infrastructure is run on -- by the private sector pay they work with their private sector share share information, share best practices, and ensure our cyber defenses and shields are up. host: so then to the warning it issued when it said it could extend this, and they want organizations, particularly in the federal government, to protect itself, at what stage is the federal government able to do that? guest: a federal government has control over its own networks is quite vigilant and is able to do that.

obviously, sophisticated actors, such as russia, can, on occasion, penetrate our defenses. we have had examples of that recently. but at this moment, all of the information security and cyber security community, both in the government and private sector there, it is all hands on deck. that has been the case for the last couple of months. we have preparing for this moment. so i think, if anything, we need to be vigilant, but we should not worry. host: what about the private companies that the federal government allies itself with, especially when it comes to cybersecurity? could they be impacted, and, in turn, could the united states government be impacted? guest: there is some concern russia may target defense contractors, for example, or the critical if researcher operators, such as pipelines, water treatment abilities,

electric grid facilities. that remains a concern. but other parts of the government are watching for these types of attacks and sharing information with the private sector. we are in good hands. the main, important point, is that the private sector needs to be super vigilant itself he had obviously, the u.s. government does not run their networks. host: when it comes to the disinformation you talked about earlier, because a lot of it is done on social media, what do you think the responsibility he is, particularly for social media companies, in dealing with how this disinformation is transmitted? guest: they have a lot of responsibility, but they only control the peace they see on their particular social media network. campaigns these days go across many platforms. they may hatch on a small platform that does not have as

many trust and safety teams to monitor what is going on in the platform or have the political will to do so. then they may hatch on the small platforms and jump onto the mainstream platforms. once they jump onto the large, well-funded performs, teams usually find these campaigns and try to neutralize them as quickly as possible. that is their responsibility and is also in their interest to make sure that there platforms are not used for information warfare. host: we have seen congress particularly go after social media companies when it comes to the large topic of disinformation. do you think that will be stepped up in light of this in russia? or do you think it will be status quo as far as what the federal government requires from social media companies? guest: i think it depends on what we see over social media. russia, for example, uses broadcast media quite a bit as

well. yes, we are concerned with what they do over social media, but they are using their own state owned broadcast media that gets rebroadcast on occasion and reverberates in u.s. broadcast media. while the focus has been a lot on inauthentic state accounts on social media platforms, we have to be mindful that there are many avenues in which disinformation campaigns take. host: let's hear from joy in rhode island for our guest, katerina sedova with georgetown's center for security and emerging technology. caller: hi. i have -- to watch over my computer. it is from russia. i've had it years, and it is great. but because of this, i want to switch to norton, because it is from america.

that is the only reason for my call. host: to follow up on that, there is a viewer off of twitter who has the same type of question -- what advice regarding the average computer user you may offer in protecting ourselves online with software, if software is an avenue, or are there other ways? guest: i will say, if you are running a windows system or mac os, for example, they do have a lot of built-in protections. one of the most important things you can do is up at your computer to the latest version. enter it is patched -- ensure it's patched with the latest patch. use multifactor authentication. vary your password so you are not using a password for every site you go to. finally, really be mindful on the links you click, both in your emails and online. really be mindful where and

email may be coming from, who may have sent it. that is 90% how bad actors may get into your system. host: from dennis in las vegas, good morning. caller: good morning. i am over 70 years old, and i am not retired -- i am under collective are getting. but everything i do gets ach'd to my bank. i am concerned. my direct relationship now is with government backed securities, especially direct, which goes directly from thanks to treasury to government, then wall street, which is one of the trades, and then my bank. i've never been -- i change my passwords, and i am always warned by those three entities,

but i am thinking should i take more precautions, especially at my age? host: thanks, dennis. guest: i think all the things i just mentioned are applied. make sure you have multifactor authentication turned on when you log into your banking sites. i will say financial industry, particularly wall street, they are a critical infrastructure sector, and they have been on the frontline of understanding and defending themselves and their customers from sophisticated actors. they have some pretty sophisticated defenses, and if you do your part, do due diligence, don't click on links from people you do not know, be mindful of what emails you open,

attachments, and vary your passwords, you should be all right. host: our guest works here in the united states, but from what i understand, you have family in ukraine. guest: i do. host: how are they, if i may ask? guest: my family is in kyiv, the capital. they have been under quite a bit of shelling. they are safe, but for the time being. but they have been very worried and under a lot of stress, as you can imagine. because they have never -- and they are in their 70's, my aunt and uncle -- in their lifetime, they have never experienced this. host: what has been the type of communication between you and them and how secure has that been and how regular has that been? guest: i have mostly communicated with with them over social media. surprisingly, they still have conductivity. -- connectivity.

i was very surprised about that. but i've been in touch with them every few hours over social media, messaging. host: as far as the perspective they may offer as far as what we depend on as far as new sources and the like, is there anything interesting they point out as far as what they are experiencing versus what we see going on? guest: well, they are in it. they hear sirens every hour or even more often. they cannot necessarily sleep very well because of that. they hear explosions all around them. if you put yourself mentally into that situation, you can probably imagine what that may be like. host: as far as their information -- as far as their ability to get information in the country, have they stressed that to you? guest: information flow is still

going to the president of ukraine has gone out of his way to stay in touch with his people. he releases videos every so often. the news channels are still going. some of them are reporting from bomb shelters and makeshift studios. but they are still going. they are spreading information nonstop, both over social media and through broadcast media. host: this is from kurt, new jersey. you are next with our guest. caller: hi. thanks for speaking today. sorry to hear that your family is so close to this insanity. my question is of ai, artificial intelligence, data collection. i see putin mocking american news media and politicians. i see him defending himself against russia collusion for five years.

but my thing is of plausible deniability. has that been incorporated into ai? have we just been misled, how do we find the truth? guest: i think plausible deniability is something -- what is the origin of the message? with president putin, it is pretty clear when he is speaking and what he is saying, so i do not think we should worry necessarily that we do not know the source of information. we do not know why he is doing what he is doing necessarily. it is difficult to comprehend. but in terms of artificial intelligence, i do not think, necessarily in. . this conflict, it is a factor -- in this factor --

i do not think, necessarily in this conflict, it is a factor. host: katerina sedova georgetown university joining us to talk about cyber security, cyber warfare, and disinformation. if you want to ask her questions, (202) 748-8000 for those of you in the eastern and central time zones. (202) 748-8001 in the mountain and specific -- and pacific time zones. you can also text us at (202) 748-8003. here in the united states and other places in the world, when we talk about disinformation, there are fact-check sites, other sources you can check with, in order to establish truth. how much of that has existed in the country of ukraine and where do they turn to fbar the ability to check facts out -- and where do they turn to as far as the ability to check facts out? guest: they have been vigilant to keep disinformation campaigns

from taking hold. they have established an agency that is working full time to understand what is happening in the information environment, both on social media and broadcast media, what kind of narratives are starting to spread that are not accurate. they make a point to get ahead of that information -- that disinformation as much as possible. host: axios did a recent interview with senator mark warren of virginia. one of the things he said was that vladimir putin would deploy cyber weapons inside ukraine that take a life of their own and spread to the nato member states, adding that this is happened before, most notably 2017, when malware caused billions of dollars of damage worldwide. guest: there is always a

potential. the attack senator warner refers to, notpetya, was sort of indiscriminate pit it targeted ukraine initially, but it was clear that something in the automation behind this attack had spread to targets that perhaps he did not intend to spread to, such as russian companies operating in ukraine that ended up eating impacted to the order of $10 billion in damage. so it is quite possible, which is why the cybersecurity and infrastructure security agency has been warning u.s.-based companies that do business with ukraine to be hypervigilant about the kind of network traffic they are receiving from ukraine. and it has also been trying to get ahead of a lot of potential tactics. they have released a lot of information to the private

sector here, and i would imagine our partners in nato, in europe, are doing the same and other nato nations. yes, there is a potential of that happening. the good news is we know there is a potential and we have been preparing for this moment. host: he also added one of the things he was concerned about is direct retaliation because of sanctions by president putin and an order of cyberattacks rackley attacking the u.s. and other nato allies. guest: that is right, that is a possibility. i would say that would be a massive escalation. i think president putin knows that we would retaliate, because president biden has already said that, that that is the step -- that if that's the stuff they will take, they will be a response. there is a feeling in the cybersecurity field that the

u.s. has the biggest rocks but we have a glass house. russia knows we have the biggest rocks. russia has a lot to lose in this time when sanctions are coming online. they have pipelines that can be shut down too. host: let's hear from mary in arizona. good morning. caller: yes, ms. sedova. i have a general question about ai. are you aware about william poundstone's book? do you have anything to enlighten us about the urgency with which a professor from boston university has warned us about that we are closer to the destruction or the absolute change of the human condition through ai? that is my question. host: ok.

guest: i am not familiar with that specific book, but i understand the concern i think you are alluding to. artificial intelligence has been around for at least 60 years, 70 years or so, as a field. in recent years, machine learning, that part of it has really been taking off. by that part of ai that has been driving most of the innovation forward has limitations. it has limitations because it requires so much computing power that we may actually be coming up to the boundary of the development of some of the large language models, for example some of the systems that generate language, video, audio, and really impersonate humans. there is a lot happening in that field. there's a lot of possibility of

impersonation of humans online, a for example. you may have heard of deepfakes. the field is expanding. but this still represents what i think the author of that book probably referred to as narrow artificial intelligence and it is very specific. it has specific purposes. i do not think we are very close to having artificial intelligence replace the human brain. host: from mike, in fairbanks, alaska. caller: good morning, c-span and what is left of america. i, myself, am well aware of the cia and their coup in 2014, installing this puppet, zelensky . he was a comedian who performed a skit. becoming the president of ukraine. the ukrainians loved it so much they made him president. i think putin is defending his borders from nato.

i would not want to see nato put missiles on my borders in canada or down in mexico. i honestly believe ukraine has been attacking their own people. alex jones has been reporting that for years. i am glad putin went in to stop the biden crime family from laundering are trillions of dollars i've been going through the world bank and companies like burisma stealing our monthly -- money through hunter biden -- host: so do you have a direct pushing for our guest? caller: no -- well, yes, i do. do you think the cyberattack that may hit stoplights in america that these bum politicians are talking about, is that actually a false flag on the cia? host: ms. sedova.

guest: before i answer that question, there are a couple of things i want to address in that comment. the ukrainian people rose up to protest a corrupt leader they had, yanukovych. he fled ukraine. they then wanted to be part of european society when they wanted to pursue democratic values and when they wanted to have an economy that was not being robbed blind by their oligarchs, like yanukovych. there was no involvement of the cia in 2014. second part, zelensky was not installed. he was democratically elected in 2019, not 2014. third part, there are no missiles on the territory of

ukraine pointing at russia. to your point about the possibility of a false flag operation on the united states, i do not think that is a concern. and fifth point, alex jones is not a credible source of information. host: let's hear from george in new york. hello. caller: caller: thank you for your time and patience today. we have had attacks recently like solarwinds, the pipeline attributed to hacker groups said to have been backed by russia. is there a sense that since the tiber tax -- cyber attacks have not been as big as the industry thought they would be that we perhaps overestimated their

capabilities? guest: i don't think we are overestimating their capabilities. state actors are still in play. they are still a possible vector president putin could choose. you may have heard yesterday that one of the ransomware groups that had been attacking the united states targets for some time had publicly cannot in support of president putin and his policies in ukraine. we should not discount they will operate at the direction of the russian state. russia has an agreement with their ransomware actors and uses them at will as long as they don't attack russia.

ransomware is still a possibility. we know who these groups are. if push comes to shove, we can take them out. host: about 15 more minutes with our guest, katerina sedova. if you want to ask her questions . reading about this topic, i came across the phrase, open source intelligence." what is that? guest: they use publicly available information and augment other sources of intelligence with that intelligence. a lot of what we know about what

russia has been doing comes from tiktok videos the special operations folks have been posting about their movements. they use that as a form of information warfare to show how cool they are and where they are moving. that allows open source analysts to understand what kind of hardware they are bringing into the borders of ukraine, where they are moving, to an extent. obviously, the data needs to be verified through other sources as well. it is one way in which people can understand the movements. all of the stuff that we post online is a form of open source intelligence. host: what is the best practices when it comes to crosschecking? guest: for analysts not in the

u.s. government, who may not have access to other sources of intelligence, the best crosscheck is to see what other sources of a particular video are there. is it the only source of a picture or are there other people posting about the same event or same thing? usually, in the aggregate -- aggregate data helps us understand more and provides credibility. open source intelligence occurring outside of the u.s. government, you have to take it with a grain of salt. host: let's go to tom in new york. you are on. caller: good morning. i have a question and then a comment. who in the interim between 2014 and 2019, who was the president

of ukraine? was he ousted as well? was he just voted out? and why? my comment is i read an article recently the former budget director under reagan. he was talking about the history of ukraine and all of that. if i read it right, ukraine proper as it stands now has been in existence since 1922. he went into ukraine over the years, for centuries, who it belonged to, etc. i would like your comment on that. host: we will let her address what she wishes. ms. sedova, go ahead. guest: i think the first question was, who was president in 2014? after the revolution in ukraine in february of 2014, there was an interim government

established to hold things together because they were already under attack from russia. there was an interim government established for a few months and elections scheduled for may 20 5, 2014. it was a democratic election and the democratically elected president was president poroshenko. he was president for a five-year term until there was an election in 2019. again, it was a democratic election. president zelensky was elected at that point as president. to your second question about the history of ukraine, ukrainians go back a long way. [indiscernible] was baptized in 980 a.d. there are churches and kyiv that

are 1600 years old. ukrainians as a people have been in existence for some time. unfortunately come they were always part of a larger empire. those empires have shifted. the borders have shifted quite a bit. in its current form, this is funny because president putin had gone on a soliloquy about the history of ukraine and that is probably what inspired your question. but he is wrong that present-day ukraine was established in 1922. there are parts of ukraine that were joined afterward to -- after world war ii that were stolen by stalin and hitler. there are parts of ukraine that were added in 1954.

question of the history of ukraine is less relevant to this conflict than the question of, do we live in a world where sovereignty of a nation and its borders are taken by force or do we not live in that world? we settled that world in 1945, but here we are. host: we will go to claudia in gainesville, florida. caller: thanks for taking my call. my question has to do with any outsourcing of credit card usage for tax preparation. i'm thinking india specifically, and whether or not we should be concerned about our credit cards being processed in india or any tax preparation that goes through india.

thank you very much. guest: this is a little bit out of my area of expertise. i will secret card companies are pretty good at catching both fraud and customers from cyber attacks. from that perspective, i think you are in good hands. the financial industry has been on the forefront of being a target, so their shields have been up for quite some time. host: ms. sedova, the president last week addressed the topic of cyber attacks and what the u.s. will be prepared to do in case it occurred against us. it is brief. i will play you what he had to say. [video clip] pres. biden: if russia prepares cyber attacks, we are prepared to respond. for months, we have been working closely with the private sector to harden those cyber defenses

and strengthen our ability to respond. host: the defensive part is understandable. as far as if cyber attacks occurs in the united states, who determines that exactly? guest: well, the president decides. the president decides whether we will retaliate. host: who advises him on that? guest: we have an interagency process. there is any number of agencies involved in cyber protection, cyber defense. the department of defense has a cyber command that usually takes a leading role in offensive cyber operations. host: we will go to mike in rockford, illinois. caller: good morning. this comes down to one thing. land. it seems what we are doing by

regime change is a coup. let's go back to 2019. trump, china, taliban, one room. they are talking about handing over afghanistan. they want the troops we trained to leave. at the same time, we hand over the basis to taliban -- bases to taliban china. host: that is not exactly on topic. caller: i'm getting back to regime change. host: we don't have time for all that history. what is the question or comment? caller: could there be a regime change through camaraderie of the u.s. and russia working together? we find out on january 6 during biden's speech he promised to

work -- host: we will leave it there. let's go to ted in miami, florida. caller: do you have a clear understanding of what cyber attacks are happening in the u.s. today? could you explain that? also, i just wanted to pray for ukraine and hope everything else works out. thank you. guest: thank you for your prayers. i personally don't have a clear understanding, but there are people who work for the u.s. government who do have a good understanding of what attacks may be occurring. they are working around the clock to understand the full picture and make sure our private sector infrastructure actors and operators understand the picture. when they say there are no

active companions against the united states right now, i believe them. host: if the united states does engage in these things, could that be declared an act of war? guest: it depends. i think president biden clearly stated if there are any attacks on the united states in the cyber domain that we will retaliate. but we may not retaliate through kinetic means. we may retaliate through cyber. we may retaliate in kind. in terms of what determines an act of war, that is still a matter of international debate actually. generally speaking, if there is a loss of life as a result of cyber attacks, that may result -- it may be seen as an act of

war. so far, activity short of that threshold is in what is called the gray zone. it has not quite been decided that this is indeed the threshold. we are in early times there. host: this is katerina sedova with georgetown. research fellow at georgetown.edu, looking at the issues of russia and ukraine. the best to your family. hope all is well. guest: thank you. host: we will look at the energy portion of what is going on between russia and ukraine with jason bordoff. he will talk about energy supplies and prices and other things related to that. join us next on "washington journal."

>> july 23 of this year, 2022, will be the 55th anniversary of the detroit race riot. 43 people died during that chaotic week. 1189 were injured. our guest was there. his mother and sister were shot. we talk with the professor about his memory of the 12th street riot in a q&a interview in 2011. we invited him back to talk more about that moment in his young life and much more. >> howard university professor on the next episode, available on the c-span app or wherever you get your podcasts. pres. biden: i am pleased to nominate judge jackson, who will bring extraordinary qualifications, deep expense and

intellect, and a rigorous judicial record to the court. >> i am truly humbled by the extraordinary honor of this nomination, and i am especially grateful for the care that you have taken in discharging your constitutional duty in service of our democracy with all that is going on in the world today. >> president biden nominates judge ketanji brown jackson for the district of columbia circuit to succeed retiring justice stephen breyer on the supreme court. if confirmed, judge jackson would become the first african american woman to serve on the nation's highest court. follow this historic process from the announcement through the confirmation process on c-span, c-span.org, or by downloading the free c-span now app. >> "washington journal" to news. host: jason bordoff is with the

columbia university. he is a co-founding dean of the columbia climate school come here to talk about current events in russia and ukraine, particularly when it comes to energy. thanks for your time. for all the efforts involving vladimir putin and russia, how much power does he hold because of the energy that russia has? guest: i think this aggressive military action into ukraine is not about energy. it was not enabled by energy. a lot of the power and leverage wagner putin has comes in part because russia is one of the world's largest energy suppliers and producers along with the u.s. and saudi arabia. it exports about 5 million years a day in a market of 100 million. it is one of the top producers

in the world. even more important, it is a major supplier of natural gas into europe. you can move oil around the world more easily. a lot of natural gas is supplied by pipeline between point a and b. europe is dependent on russia for about 40% of its natural gas supplies. the threat of that natural gas applied being cut off is a source of leverage and power for vladimir putin. it is also a constraint on the west's ability to respond to the unacceptable aggression. we are trying to impose maximum economic pain through sanctions on russia. one of the things at the time being off the table is cutting off its sales of oil and gas and trying to take that revenue away simply because the rest of us need that energy. host: i was going to ask about the next steps of sanctions and everything else, how much impact on russia because of its energy

strength? guest: i think that is where we are right now. before this crisis came to a head, europe was already in the midst of an energy crisis. it was seeing some companies and utilities shut down. it was seeing industries close. energy prices were going through the roof for european consumers. as your viewers will know from going to the gas station, gasoline prices are high. markets are tight. it is a difficult time to take a big chunk of supply off the market. that would send prices up for all of us in the u.s. with gasoline and heating bills in europe. the trick with sanctions is to try to use them in a way that imposes maximum economic pain on the target while not having that

economic pain ricochet back onto yourself. in a globally integrated economy, that is especially difficult with energy and especially when supplies are tight. host: that is the reasoning for not targeting energy supplies directly? guest: that is right. if you were to target all of russia's natural gas sales, try to sanction russia's natural gas sales, you cause a real economic crisis in europe -- you would cause a real economic crisis in europe. there is no easy way to make up that supply in the short term. long-term, there are things you can do. in the short term, you would have industries shutting down and people struggling to keep the lights and heat on. we are just coming out of the winter season now so it is a little easier. europe is already going to be in a tough spot to be ready for next winter. during the summer, you fill up natural gas inventories and you

draw those down when it gets cold as you use natural gas for heat. if we sanctioned russian oil sales the way we did iranian oil sales, doing that with russia today would have economic pain for russia but would also cause economic pain on everyone that consumes oil. host: jason bordoff joining us for this conversation. if you have questions for him, you can call or send us a text. last week, the president referenced actions against russia, how it might impact those in the united states. i will play a portion of what he had to say and get your response. [video clip] pres. biden: as we respond, my

administration is using every tool lets its -- at its disposal to protect american families and businesses from rising prices at the gas pump. american oil and gas companies should not export this moment to hike prices to raise profits. in our sanctions package, we specifically designed to allow energy payments to continue. we are closely monitoring energy supplies for any disruption. we have been coordinating with major oil producing and consuming countries toward our common interest to secure global energy supplies. we are actively working with countries around the world to elevate collective release from the strategic petroleum reserves of major energy consuming countries. the united states will release additional barrels of oil as conditions warrant. host: with that in mind, is there a worst-case scenario or somewhat realistic scenario you

can see as far as supply and prices in the united states? guest: there are several scenarios that could cause russian oil to be pulled off the global market. that would cause gasoline prices to go up for everyone that consumes gasoline in the west and elsewhere. one would be that there is a policy shift on sanctions. eventually, the pressure to go as bold as possible rises so greatly that energy sanctions are back on the table. the second would be retaliation from russia toward the sanctions already being imposed where russia says if you are going to hurt us, we are going to hurt you too, for pulling its own global oil off the market. then there is military activity, important pipeline going up -- blowing up that could cause disruption in supply. in the near term, there are

relatively few options to try to do something about an oil disruption that large. we do have strategic stocks created after the arab oil embargo through the international agency -- energy agency. that is a powerful tool but for a short time. there is not enough oil in strategic stocks. the other dimension is how quickly supply can respond. when prices go up, will producers have more incentive to put more oil on the market. the u.s. is a new player because of the shale revolution in the last decade. not only is it a huge amount of oil but it is a type that can be ramped up more quickly than conventional oil. if prices go up, the u.s. will put more shale oil on the market.

some of that supply will come from the u.s. host: is there a strategy in united states or nato countries as far as natural gas to increase deliveries to europe to help them out that way? guest: there is. there has been a hefty amount of diplomacy with europeans and the united states trying to talk to large lng suppliers like qatar, including the u.s., the u.s. is the largest exporter of liquefied natural gas in the world, and also buyers in asia saying maybe you can forgo some purchases and free up some of that gas to flow into europe instead. there are some cargoes available. but it is nowhere close to what could be done to offset the loss of russian gas. there are potentially other sources of energy you could bring into the market. say, in germany, delaying the close of their plans.

only about 25% of natural gas in europe is used for electricity. a lot of it is used for heat and industry. that is harder and takes longer to find other sources of energy for. host: let's hear from michael in fort lauderdale for jason bordoff. go ahead with your question or comment. caller: you mentioned one of the dimensions was to put back production of u.s. oil and gas and bring that up to speed. but then you said, it would not be enough to offset the russian imports. whether it was misinformation or not, it seemed like a year ago we shut down keystone and that had a big impact. what is the real story? do we have enough to maintain ourselves and export? is that just a lot of misinformation out there on the market? guest: great question.

natural gas, where the largest exporter of liquefied natural gas in the world. those are large, expensive projects that you build. we have several on the u.s. gulf coast to supercool natural gas and then you can transported by ship rather than pipeline to places that have the ability to use it. what is maxed out in terms of the capacity we have to liquefied natural gas in the u.s. and export it, we are doing all we can. you can build new projects but that will take years and millions of dollars. on oil, it has been an extraordinary shift. today, we are just about zero on the net basis. that means we are importing a lot of oil but exporting a lot of oil. on a net basis, we are importing a lot and exporting a lot.

the u.s. might be exporting more than we import. that will largely be driven by market forces. you are right that the keystone pipeline from canada to the u.s. was blocked by two successive democratic presidents. i don't think that would meaningfully change the amount of oil canada is producing or how much oil russia is producing. what has happened is the flows have shifted. more canadian oil has gone elsewhere in the world instead of the united states. we should remember the keystone pipeline would've held about 800,000 barrels of day -- a day. the largest source of oil for the united states is canada. a lot of that is coming into the u.s. and then being exported. there is a global dynamic market. the oil we are getting from

camera, we are exporting some of it and importing some russian oil because refiners are looking for different kinds of crude. host: you served in the obama administration for energy matters. what did you do? guest: i was a senior director for energy and climate change on the staff of the national security council and special assistant to the president. host: let's hear from jeff in tennessee. caller: good morning. how are you guys doing? host: we are fine. go ahead. caller: i think the keystone pipeline was one of my points. i think if they would just take off the restrictions and let us drill here at home. people on the left dance around that. i do feel that would help a lot. it was a subject before joe biden got in. when he signed the executive orders to stop that, right away, stuff started going up. we are restrained that way.

i feel if the administration would take off the restrictions and let us drill here and quit being held hostage by a few on the left, it would help us, the people. just a comment. thanks for letting me talk. guest: thanks for the comment. it is an important point. my sense is that by far the largest factor in determining the outlook for u.s. oil and gas production is market forces and prices more than government regulation. we saw u.s. oil production collapse from 13 million barrels a day to 10 million barrels a day when president trump was in office. not because of anything he did, but because the u.s. oil production despite what you are you were just saying about president biden's policies is surging growing at a rapid rate, not as rapidly as

before. i think that's even more than policy because of the expectations from financial markets that they want to see profitability and so as the oil sector is a little more disciplined about making sure the barrels they're drilling are highly profitable. there are policies to be sure that affect oil and gas production. i think for this administration more have been about the long term. we won't allow leasing for new oil and gas activity on public lands, federal offshore and other federally owned public lands. that may affect production but probably further out. i don't know if it's affecting production today. so if you were to remove the set of biden administration policies in place today you might have some impact on production in the near term but i don't think it will be huge. host: as far as europe is concerned do they have the means to become energy independent and then not rely on russia so much as far as russia's influence over them?

guest: not in the near tem but in the medium to longer term. this is potentially severe energy crisis, we're not new to energy crises of course. there are problems where oil prices go up and down over the course of history and the arab oil embargo being one of the most prominent examples. and we look for what we can do in the immediate prices to bring oil prices down to provide some relief to make sure e we have energy security. there are some tools but limited in the near term. the more important thing is what we do in the immediate to longer term. but often when the crisis passes we have complacency. in the longer term for europe with natural gas they should be diverse if iing their sources that means investing to some extent in the infrastructure for lng, for pipelines, certainly they should be moving toward a low carbon economy and moving toward renewable sources of energy, debar bonizing

natural gas through other courses of low carbon gas like hydrogen or something. that's important for climate change, it's also going to help enhance european energy security. and we should be doing the same with oil, the shift to electrification of vehicles, fuel economy. those things are important for dealing with climate change. they're also going to reduce oil dependence. but they don't happen quickly. they take time. host: monty. hello you're next. wveragetsdz hello. no disrespect but i would like to point out some obvious things that have to do with this concept of energy security. and most of what you have spoken about you can find all of that in presidential state of the une anaddresses as far as consements going back to the 70s. of course they take time but shouldn't take 50 years. as long as oil is an international commodity and do not have domestic security initiative to meet our own

goals to provide our own fuel which we could do if we retool our refining capacity. but we don't have that so we have things where crew will drop to negative price per barrel and we have commodities brokers who influence the price of gas by purchasing power once a president whose policies may not be pro oil is elected. that's how the swing happens. it doesn't happen because of joe biden's policies. they make moves on the market. until people realize nationalism of domestic resources is not a dirty word. we can fulfill our own gas prices, i mean we can fill our own need and have stable gas prices without being a player to the market if these industries would retool our refining capacity. guest: it's an important point. as i said before we're a roughly net zero oil importer. we import a lot we export a lot.

you're making an important point that if we invested in changing around the refining capacity we have in the u.s. we might not need to export and import, we could use everything we produce here at home. and we would still, the consumer going to the gasoline pump i think you would agree, will still see prices go up and will still face that economic pain if the global oil price goes up as long as you are connected to a global market. so what we would need to do is what you just described, and we would have to cut ourselves off from the global market. you would have to restrict imports, exports, both for gasoline and oil. i think that's a risky strategy. we had import quotas throughout the 1950s in the united states, price control and rationing. that experiment didn't work particularly well just like the shale revolution was unexpected, many didn't expect how quickly we would go from being a large importer to exporting from the u.s.

you do derive a measure of resilience from being interconnected. so when hurricanes rita and katrina come and take out oil production in the gulf of mexico we're stronger because we can go into the global market and say we need to pull in barrels because our production is down our refining is down. so there is security but you're right you're also exposed to global price spikes. i think the former is probably better than the latter but people may disagree. host: during this whole discussion about energy, considering the current events, nord stream 2 that phrase repeatedly used what's the importance in all of this? guest: so nordstreem 2 is a very significant natural gas pipeline project that's been on the books for about a decade, a source of continued controversy in europe and in the west. it would bring russian natural gas to germany bypassing ukraine. so that a decade ago much more than today of the russian

natural gas that supplies europe was traveling through ukraine. and russia didn't want that and even some in europe said well maybe that's not the best thing for us because there has in the past been obviously tension and conflict between russia and ukraine given russian aggression. so there's this major pipeline project which many including some prominent members of congress here in the u.s. have opposed because they worried that it would increase europe's dependence on russia for natural gas and hurt ukraine because it would reduce the revenue that ukraine got from being a transit country and make them less relevant to the energy security conversation. so in response to russia's aggression last week, germany said we're going to -- we're putting that pipeline on ice. it was just about done. literally one more certification, it's basically built, and they said this is not moving forward at this time. and so that was a big shift and it doesn't fundamentally change

in the near term how much natural gas europe gets from russia but in the longer term it probably would have been higher if nord stream 2 had moved forward. host: we're showing folks a map of the various pipelines as it's being highlighted. also the longest through russia is yemal. but what's the importance? guest: well, i can't see the map i apologize but again you have a lot of infrastructure that's moving natural gas from russia to ukraine, i guess the most important point is to note that over the last decade the amount transitting through ukraine has come down significantly. so in the near term the potential risks to natural gas supply through ukraine are probably lower than they would have been a decade ago if you have a conflict there. but this is an important source of revenue for ukraine and then the question is how much geopolitical leverage russia has because it has strong

control of the pipeline routes that travel to europe. and you can just see how many pipelines there are. again, you have -- i just want to make one last point. oil is different from natural gas in a few ways. one important way is that it is harder to move than oil is. oil you can put on a tanker and easily take the tanker from one place and go to another if you need to. some natural gas, an increasing amount, moves by tanker on the water but most moves by pipeline and pipelines are fixed between a and b so there's a dependency that's created between buyer and seller that doesn't exist so much in the more if you thinkible oil market. host: from jeff in virginia. good morning. caller: thank you four taking the time to add this important detail. looking tat site and the increase of the oil imports from russia, i'm not sure if you're familiar through this from the spring and the summer

going from 10-15,000 mill barrels to 25 million barrels a month. a market increase from imports from oil so we're financing putin's aggression. i'm wondering if you ever look at the positive correlation between aggression and expansion of russia's military and the price of oil, for instance, i'm speaking about 2008 the aggression against georgia, 2014 crimea, is that something that academically your department, do you look at the interconnectedness in the interaction between those two variables of russian aggression? because for readers the quick summary is the higher the price of oil the more aggressive russia has gotten. thank you. guest: that's a really good question and there are a lot of people in academia and elsewhere who sort of study the connections between, for petro states and how they think about aggression, conflict. the higher price of oil, the more revenue russia is going to have the more revenue russia

has the more ability it has, the more physical ability it has, financial ability, to try to assert its will around the world. the more money it has to spend on the military. and then as we said, the more challenging it is, because if oil prices are high it means markets are tight and you're already worried say in the united states and europe about the price at the pump, the more constraints there are on your ability to cut off that source of oil for russia. you're right that the amount of oil the united states is importing from russia has gone up very recently. there are a couple reasons including some new rules about how much pollution you can emit in oil that's used for tanker ships around the world. if that oil wasn't coming here it would be going somewhere else. you do want to think of the global oil market as a big bathtub. it's if you thinkible most likely they would sell that

elsewhere. they will still get the revenue. that's why we need to reduce the oil we use. security comes not from producing more at home necessarily or buying it from one source as much as it does reducing our dependence on oil in the first place. host: you want to read a piece from the "new york times" just to give you the title. you wrote this within, saying can you explain? guest: the point i was trying to make in the piece with my friend and coauthor at harvard who served in the george w. bush administration also at the national security council was we are at the beginning of and need to have a much faster clean energy transition to deal

with the threat of climate change and we shouldn't forget about the importance and urgency of dealing with climate change not withstanding the crisis we're having. in the long term people often talk about the geopolitical implications of that transition and say, well, for many years, for decades when you said energy geopolitics or when you said energy security mostly what you meant was oil and gas, whether it was sending back to the arab oil embargo concerns or concerns about imports from natural gas from russia. so the idea is a clean energy world, a net zero carbon world will be one that no longer has those problems because we're not using oil and gas. so we made a few points about that. first even a net zero world means you're using a lot less oil and gas but still using some meaningful amounts. second, it's the process of transition. it's not the end state which hopefully might be 30 years from now but we're not on track for that but it could be decades from now. the question is between here and there. and if you were to see

shrinking investment in oil and gas as we have seen, if investments in supply goes down before demand goes down you could see more volatility and then you'll need countries with spare capacity, extra oil that can be brought to the market to help stabilize things. you're going to need it more before you need it less. and one of the interesting developments is russia joining forces with saudi arabia and other owe peck countries in a partnership to balance oil markets. that's a source of geopolitical influence when prices go up and we call on opec to increase supply you're asking riyadh and moscow. we'll zoo see if that continues after this conflict. and to the extent you have a lot of clean energy pressures and social pressure to pull back investment, the big banks are not investing as much in oil and gas. if demand doesn't go down that is going to come from somewhere and it might come from state owned enterprises in the middle east or russia. the russian oil company is

investing to increase oil production capacity moving forward because they think the world is going to need more not less. and so how much we use is not only importance for climate change but energy security. caller: good morning. i have a question. i hear people say that we can be dealing more or mr. biden stopping drilling but i can't help but remember and i would like to know if your group looked at when states using their own state rights, like california in the west and the east coast states on the east who went to court many times when mr. trump was president and don't want drilling on their coast. does the rest of the world look at the united states and kind of figure we really need to sit down and come down with a more

common-sense way of dealing with oil? because we have it. but we also have states exercising those states rights, which they have a right to do, saying we don't want this drilling. so you can't blame biden on that. can you comment on that, please? guest: it's a really important qualification, a sort of nuance that you're right often gets missed. the federal government when we talk about how much oil is being produced from the u.s. the texas caller might agree. most of the oil being produced in the u.s. onshore, the offshore is federally controlled, is produced on private lands, not public lands. but it's private land ownership and so the posture and the policy that states take toward production matters quite a bit and the caller is right that certain states say in the northeast where i am have taken the poss tour that they're not

always supportive of producing oil and gas, shale gas from fracking, for example. so that has an impact on production. this is not totally unique to the united states if you look to our north the debate playing out in canada is a major oil producer, it produces oil which can be particularly energy intensive oil to produce the oil sands, the tar sands people call it has been particularly controversial for environmentalists. so people have to strike a balance with some carbon price, with some emission caps that have been placed on the oil sector to try to clean things up. but the call ser right, the policies that states take matter a lot. they also matter a lot for climate change particularly since we have such deadlock in washington we're seeing climate action being led in some cases like states like california and new york. host: someone asked on twitter, if you want to elaborate, about

the current sanctions on iran and if they were allowed to -- iran allowed to supply europe with energy. guest: that's a really excellent question. and it wouldn't be just supplying europe. with natural gas you're think wrg can supplies get to europe. with oil who can put additional barrels into the global bathtub and where is that supply going to come from, whether it goes to europe or elsewhere. so your callers will probably know that sanctions were put in place against iran to try to prevent them from acquiring a nuclear weapon and a deal was struck by the obama administration. if they will lift those, you can export your oil you'll stop your nuclear weapons program and trump undid the deal. the biden administration is trying to put it back together and all indications they are close to doing that. and that will be controversial whether it's a good enough deal. but if a deal is reached and i think oil market participants,

traders and others are expecting that, right now. so to some extent that extra oil is being priced in, the expectation is reflected in today's price. but you can see another million, million-and-a-half barrels supply coming to the market relatively quickly if a deal is struck that would lift the sanctions on iranian oil exports. host: richard is next in iowa. hello. caller: good morning. this is a wonderful conversation and i can't help but think of the complexity near term and long-term of this infrastructure of oil and gas around the world. my question is, i'm wondering about nuclear power energy. it seems that france has made a decision to depend on nuclear power for their energy needs and there's some new technology now and there's a lot of advocates that are saying why don't we go nuclear power, and it's going to be a long view,

and i just wanted to get your insight on that. thank you. guest: excellent question. i think these have these conversations and too often forget to talk about nuclear power, it's very important, it's the largest source of zero carbon electricity in the united states, largest source of zero carbon energy that is firm and dispatchable. that means it can run 24/7. soler and wind have come down dramatically in cost we need a lot more but they don't work all the time. if the sun is not shining or if the wind is not blowing. so every analysis that i'm aware of you're going to need a lot more soler and wind but not only. you're going to need zero carbon electricity that can run 24/7. and nuclear is already and i think in the future can play a bigger role in meeting that. it's not of course without risks and safety concerns. new technologies are reducing those risks and safety concerns in way that is make me optimistic.

it's so expensive but i think the costs are coming down. i think the urgency of of getting to net zero and climate change is going to redouble our interest in nuclear power. you can already see that in some extent in the community. and national security. most are being built by russia and china. i don't think that's great from a national security standpoint. i think the u.s. and european countries need to show readership. as the caller says, we have the ability to reduce dependence on other sources of energy like natural gas. so i think it was a mistake, although it was the domestic politics of germany that led to it, shutting down it's nuclear power plants and planning to shut down more this year. and when you add up the amount of electricity those generate, they add up to roughly half of the gap. if you look at the gap between how much natural gas europe had in storage at the start of last winter and what it would have liked to have had, the gap, about half of that is the

equivalent of the amount of nuclear electricity it's planning to retire this year. so i think you could reduce dependence on russian gas if you have nuclear power in the mix. host: another viewer asked about the possibility of hydrogen still being an alternative to gasoline for automobiles. guest: it's a really important question and probably even less in my view for automobiles than for other uses. so the way to think about this is when you think about a transition away from fossil fuels you're going to need electricity, renewables, nuclear, they create electricity, and then you have to electrify some things that maybe aren't electric today like cars. you also need molecules, fuel, thing that is can be transported more easily, maybe like batteries aren't going to work in airplanes or for making cement and steel. and one of the most promising sources is hydrogen and ammonia. and there's different ways to make hydrogen. you can take zero carbon

electricity like renewables and then split water into its component parts and through something called intellectualizer and make hydrogen that way. so we're going to need a lot more hydrogen that can be negative -- anywhere you have cheap electricity and water so you can diverse if i your sources away from dominant petro states in the past. but that will take time to play out. we're just getting started with the conversation and a huge investment going into this. the type of investment is nazzive. the infrastructure bill that was passed in the u.s. included money to support hydrogen development but you're still talking years and decades into the future. host: a few more minutes with our guest. this is miriam, texas. hello. caller: hello. well, i am so happy, so glad that you have an expert on energy today because that issue is so complex that fox news just starts through the slogans

of energy independence while not really telling the viewers how the market works. so i am so -- i didn't know that we imported a lot of energy from russia but now that i know that i kind of know how the market works, well, i think that russia has nothing, russia has some resources but it's not going to benefit us if we start importing the gas from them. it's just going to hurt us. and it's like saying well let's become china independent, let's just make cars in the united states. well, that's not going to happen because then the cars will go high. it's the same thing with gas. it's a market deal and i don't know how to explain it but i hope that you have more people that can let us know that the gas issue is very complex and

fox news is going to dumb it up. host: ok. thank you for the call. go ahead. guest: i appreciate the words she had and it's an important point that is sort of lost and i think important to communicate. especially for oil, even more than natural gas. again, there's a global interconnected market. the vulnerability consumers face when they go to the pump is a reflection of how much oil we use and what the price is in this global market. so we are importing about half a million, a little more, barrels per day from russia right now. even if e we were importing zero, what matters for the insecurity, and the economic impact at the pump when people go to the gas station every day here in the u.s. is not how much oil comes from russia to the u.s. but how much oil russia provides to the world. and that is a really large number whether that oil is coming here or going somewhere else. if there's a disruption in russian supply you're going to feel that pain at the pump here

because global oil prices will rise whether the u.s. is importing from russia or not. host: from william in new jersey. caller: thank you. hello. my question to your guest considering we are currently importing oil from russia because of this current weak and ineffective president biden has shut down our energy sources like the keystone pipeline specifically and killed a lot of american jobs in the process. would -- which by the way this is also enriching russia, and god help the innocent people in ukraine. russia is making big bucks every day because our energy sources are shut down and russia is raking in the cash

with their energy. so basically my question to the guest, if we were to reinstate the successful keystone pipeline that president trump had, would this be helpful in not only lowering our gas prices but in hurting the russians with what they are doing in insanity they're doing to these innocent people in ukraine? thank you. guest: well, i agree with the caller on the insanity and the horror of what russia is inflicting on the people of ukraine right now. and we kind of talked about this a little earlier in the conversation, the keystone pipeline which had a capacity for about 800,000 barrels a day has never been operating so the obama administration opposed it, trump administration supported it, biden then opposed it again but it has not, never been operating. it wasn't that it was shut down, it was just never started. and if it were operating today

i think what you would see is potentially some more canadian oil flowing into the united states instead of going elsewhere and the u.s. might be getting some less oil from russia. but that russian oil would be going elsewhere. so the amount of leverage, the amount of revenue that russia gets, that is a reflection again not about whether the oil is coming to the united states but how much oil the world needs and how much russia produces. so we need to reduce energy use. as i mentioned, again it's, the idea that we are importing a lot of canadian oil already today and not even all of that is being used in the united states, some of it is coming to the gulf coast and then being exported, is just a reminder of how implex and interconnected these markets are. if the key stone pipeline were operating maybe some more canadian oil would come to the united states. whether that was used in the u.s., exported it, imported

different barrels defines on the complexity of the oil sector. host: one more call from tulsa, oklahoma. caller: glad to hear your background you were a climate change global warming guy in the obama administration and you're trying to dance around that issue. here we have an example of the biden administration seemingly willing to sacrifice 20 million ukrainian lives by not hitting putin where it hurts in his oil production. and sales. so we've got the green new deal , insane policies of decarbonizing the world so to speak while at the same time it's pointed out that the production is needed to keep people functional. so how do you resolve the

conflict of still advocating global warming policies that are any -- guest: well, i certainly would not and don't mean to dance around the fact that i played a role in the obama administration on climate change and now am working with people here at columbia university to build the first climate school in the country. i think climate change is and will remain an existential challenge and we need to walk and chew gum at the same time. we need to continue to make progress on climate change while we are also enshuring energy security. so you're right that i worked on climate policy in the obama administration. the fact that over the last year europe has been helped in its energy security by lots of american lick fid natural gas going from the united states to europe was also a policy, a set of permits and approvals that were given by the obama administration to allow the construction of lng export

terminals here in the u.s. so we need to do both and i think in the long term they are complementry. the steps we have to take to reduce emissions are also the ones that are going to reduce our dependence on oil and gas. i think if anything we've learned over the course of the last decade when the u.s. went from importing 60% to basically 0 and yet we are still worried about the price at the pump and the impact on the economy because what happens halfway around the world in russia is a reminder that our energy security comes not from how much oil we produce, also the economy and our geopolitical security can be enhanced and helped rather in the united states than russia to be sheer but the biggest thing we can do to enhance our security and deal with climate change depends on how much oil we use in the first place. host: jason bord of the founding center for global. works at the center for climate change and other issues.

thanks for your time today. guest: thank you for having me. i appreciate it. host: there are reports that ukrainian and russian fills are set to meet on the border to discuss the issues currently going on between the two countries. you can talk about that and other issues for the last half hour in open forium. the numbers are on your screen. we'll take that when "washington journal" continues. >> this is a premeditated attack. >> c span has unfiltered coverage. bringing you the latest from the president and other white house officials.

the pentagon and the state we have international perspectives from the united nations and statements from foreign leaders all on the c-span networks, online at c-span.org or on the free c-span now mobile video app.

"washington journal" continues. host: this is from the associated press being reported slightly earlier today the office of ukraine's president has confirmed that a delegation will meet with russian officials as moss do you troops draw close tore kiev. that's from the associated press. at the same time they are also reporting out of ue crane

so you can comment on that. other issues when it comes to the world of politics for the remainder of our time.

you can text us. we will start off with bob in jacksonville, texas. our line for democrats. go ahead. caller: good morning. let me mute my tv. the last guy, i have a couple of comments. the last fellow on there answered one of them. i was going to ask about the key stone pipeline but i think he explained that there was never any oil to come through the keystone pipeline that it was e never completed. but anyway, so if none ever came through it then we can't miss it. so anyway, and i have one other comment and that's, i know and you know, everybody knows there's a lot of wasted fuel. people use fuel like it's water

. and i remember back in -- i'm 87 years old so i remember world war ii and the gas rationing. if the government would just ration gas until we get through this thing -- and they don't have to go crazy with it but do a little gas rationing and i believe it would satisfy the problems that we're going through right now. host: bob in texas there. we'll hear from illinois, this is steve on our republican line. caller: hi. i wonder if anybody's aware that hunter biden is still being paid by the russian energy company. that's interesting. on another note i'm a retired millright. we used to get paid to go in and shut down electric dams.

buy them out, shut them down. and hired electric is way, way better than soler or wind. you never hear anybody talking about starting them up. all along the mississippi are dams already. it's a very simple fix to put generators on those. but can't justify the prices to do that. host: ok. next up, amanda in north carolina, independent line. caller: i had a a friend who was a chemist for atlantic richfield in california and signal hill they have shut down because of leaks into the pacific ocean. why don't they get in and clean all that up so that gas can be pumped out again? it's ridiculous we're having to go through all of this and the price raising and like he

always said there has never been a shortage of gasoline and there never will be. and that's my response. host: ok. the hill reporting we'll go to cindy, new jersey democratics line. caller: i would just like to say people calling in and basically saying that biden shut down the keystone pipeline, which is a lie, it's been shut down since 2017 and the reason why it was shut down is because of the leaks that happened in south dakota which would have affected our native indians. also, i believe biden has done

a lot and we only have one president give him the respect that he should have. thank you, c-span. host: the president will take part in the state of the union speech this week. watch it on c-span and also the response to it as that takes place on other polls about the president coming out from the "washington post" and abc news saying this poll that was taken says mr. biden's presidential approval rating at a new low, 37% approving of the job he's doing and 55% saying they disapprove. 44% say they strongly disapprove, republicans overwhelmingly disapprove but most independents 61% also rate him negatively among democrats 77% give biden positive marks. let's hear from doug next in maryland, independent line. caller: i feel for the people

in that country but we're not without enough of our own problems. i mean, deregulations in this country has let mobs run rampant. the israeli mob, the russian mob, and the cartel own our service industry, the communications companies with google took over everything and until the work flows down through the communications companies you have to buy everything from angie's list, yell p, and all these other people. we're under our own form of electronic communism. i understand that russia's worried about what's going to happen if they let democracy keep on. you can't listen to the news without being driven crazy about the racial things here and about lesbian and guy rights and about all the other things that are happening in

this country. i wouldn't want to put up with it if i was putin. you can't hardly watch tv any more. host: ok. ron, illinois. republican line. caller: i would like to say that if the white house, if biden would release our own energy sources it would solve all these problems. host: such as what? caller: the cars, the electric cars. host: when you say release our energy sources, what do you mean by that? caller: produce our own oils, make our own gas instead of depending on russia. host: ok. let's go to henry in california, democrats line. caller: you guys are part of the problem, c-span. you bring all these russian marathons and i'm going to tell

you we're supposed to feel sympathy for the people who shot down a civilian airliner? did you forget that? back in 2014, it was 283 people on that plane. we're supposed to feel sympathy for these people? host: how does that relate to the events of today? how does that relate to the events of today? caller: well, i'm bringing it up because no one else is bringing it up. host: you brought it up but how does it relate? caller: we're the aggressors, we're starting a war. get out of here. host: we'll go to tom in virginia, independent line. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. i'm a huge fan. i think you do a real service for the american people. i am concerned that this is just one more thing that's breaking up our country. i mean, i just watched the thing this morning where you had these people talking down in florida at this conference, and the former president was

there. i would love anybody to give me an example of a former president taking on a current president. i mean, it's only been what biden's been in there a year, whatever your politics are we can't have former presidents typing up like this. i go back, i was born when kennedy was in, i can't remember any time where within one year of a presidency a new president gets in there and whoever the former one is, even at some of the worst times, i don't remember clinton sniping at bush or the other bush or reagan, or at people in the middle, especially in the middle of a crisis like this. this is a crisis that can have a huge impact on the u.s. it just concerns me. you know, you can't have all this sniping. we're america, we're one country, we should be one people and people can have their political differences but the anonymity of some of this stuff now with the social media and everything people can sit there and suddenly become the toughest dog in the yard and i don't think it's right. i think people should have to

-- you know, people should have to identify themselves. but i appreciate everybody's commentsdz. host: tom referencing our coverage of the political action conference cpac and it's normally known as former president trump speaking at that event yesterday. donald trump jr. amongst others speaking today. last day of coverage. you can see it on c-span at 1:20 if you're interested in hearing from the president's son. hear that on c-span, c-span.org and our c-span.now app. you can look at the map and website if you want to see other coverage from earlier in the week again, open forium for the next 15 minutes. from denver, colorado, democrats line, this is man wul, hello. caller: good morning. i'm calling in about the energy part of the show you had today. we're talking about everybody's

talking about the price of oil going up. the price of gas at the pump. i ride the bus, i have an electric bike and a mountain bike. i don't have a car. but what i would like to say is let's think more positively about electric vehicles. all the companies are pushing it, our president, his make america better plan i guess it's called. more emphasis on that. gas, oil fossil fuels -- oil, fossil fuels, we don't -- we have to phase it out but we can't -- we'll need it. it's obvious. but now is the time to really push solar and electrical. and let's get off all the negativity and get moving forward. this is america. that's what we're made for. host: let's go to gordon, wyoming, republican line.

caller: i think electric vehicles are the way to go. chevy's got the new silver addo electric. i would sure like to have one. i'm a proud, supporting liz cheney. i think cpac like she says is the putin wing of the g.o.p. but over in ukraine now, changing the subject, if we can get stockpiles of jave lins and stingers up to that border, then these trains that were taking all the folks towards poland are going back empty can be filled up with jave lin missiles and stingers. host: back to liz cheney for a second. why do you support her? caller: she's courageous, she's right. she's right on. it's the constitution, a peaceful transfer of power. that's the issue. and she stuck with it and we're hoping the constituency here in

wyoming will vote for her. host: were you a big supporter of hers before the statements she made about the president or her serving on the january 6 select committee? caller: oh yeah back in 2016 i went to two of her campaigns events and i noticed she has an altrustic facet to her character. she probably got it from her mom. and she's got good leadership qualities from her dad also. host: let's hear from dean, north carolina, democrat's line. caller: host: one more time for dean. caller: hey. host: you'll have to turn down your television that's what's keeping us delayed. caller: am i ready? host: go ahead.

caller: what we need to do our congress needs to pass a bill that, tomorrow when they go in, what's he saying? host: i'm going to put you on hold for a second. and then if you could turn down your television it keeps the delay from happening. we'll try to get you back on before the end of the phone segment. this is from srk, republican line. caller: thank you for having me. following our withdrawal from afghanistan i think most americans didn't want to get involved with the ground war in ukraine. but now given the change in sentiment for the americans, i wonder if we would now have some appetite to get more involved like trying to create a no fly zone in ukraine to try

to limit some of the russian's ability to destroy much of ukraine. i understand that we've been concerned about their, about putin's possible implementation of nuclear weapons but i don't understand where that would stop. are we going to allow him to invade poland because we're afraid he's going to use nuclear weapons or other baltic states? thank you. host: we've got about ten minutes left. if you want to call us you can call us regarding issues of russia and ukraine. other matters of politics though you can comment on perhaps the president's state of the union expected later this week, the process that the senate will undertake in approving the president's nominee to the supreme court. the numbers are on your screen.

we'll hear from patrick from virginia, independent line. caller: good morning. thanks. i have f itch great concern that fact that the russians are in possession of the chernobal site. i feel like that is something that is probably going to come back and haunt the rest of the world if it's not already. i don't trust the russians there. i do feel like the united states has been weak there on russia on ukraine. particularly like afghanistan, it cast a real big shadow on the biden agenda. we look at all the of the social justice initiatives and concerns and focus what's happening. and from a security standpoint of the united states, and the other part being the, what i call virtue signaling as far as

green technology initiatives and, the import that is placed on the green revolution is it in fact green? are all of these -- are any of these green new technologies? some of them are. how green are they? i know we have to transition to lower carbon but it seems like we're trying to do it too quickly and at what cost? and the phones that we're using , green. host: gotcha. caller: they're not. and chernobal worries me a lot and can be used as a proxy kind of -- putin can do anything to make it look like something else, but it's a real bad deal that they've got that. host: patrick in virginia. npr posting a story two days ago looking at the chernoblee which the caller brings up why russia's chapter might not be the biggest nuclear concern in ukraine.

this is quoting james acten the codrecker at the carnegie endowment. there's more on this story if you want to check it out for yourself. from massachusetts, democrats line we'll hear from maria. caller: good morning. a little nervous my first time so i apologize. what i'm worried about is i would like to ask everybody that calls in a question. putin is from a communist cun country. so when people here say that he's a genius, are you proud of

that? because i am not proud of that. i think what he did going into ukraine and without provocation and going in there just to make russia get back what they had in the cold war, my history is a little bit not good but from what i understand that's what he's trying to do. he's murdering people and we call him a genius. i don't call him a genius. ok? number one. number two, people that want to flee, that flee communist countries like i would ask mr. rubio from florida i think his parents came from cuba, somebody should ask him what he thinks about a communist dictater which that is putin. i don't think they would say that they would like to live there. i'm very grateful and blessed and humbled that i live here in the united states. i came from europe. i'm not going to say which country. but our country also went through, we had a period, we

had a communist leader. thank god it was before my time, my parents were alive, the people and we got lucky. the armed forces rose up and took that person out. didn't kill him but just took him out of power. host: maria in massachusetts speaking of senator rubio, you can still catch it on our website or app here's things he said about the russia-ukraine conflict. >> no matter where you stand on this ukraine-russia situation what we should have done beforehand what we should do now the one thing i think everybody can agree upon is that the people of ukraine are inspiring to the world. i don't know if you watched the images in the last 48 hours. [applause] you have 70-something old men, elderly women, children taking up arms. i don't know if you heard the aud i don't have of those 13 defenders of snake island where the russian ship said surrender

and they respond in french about what the russian ship should go do. no matter how -- and here's what it reminds you of. it reminds you how valuable freedom and liberty. these are people basically saying we refuse to be putin's slaves, we refuse to live under tyranny and we're prepared to give our lives and die for it. and what it reminds us of. [applause] it should remind us of two things. how precious freedom and liberty is. how quickly it can be lost. and the second thing it should remind us is that the reason why we've had freedom and we've had liberty is because people at one point were willing to do that for our country here. they were willing to die and they were willing to sacrifice here. [applause] host: that's marco rubio from cpac again that coverage still available at our website. go to our c-span now app.

the final coverage today we've told you about later this afternoon the meeting over issues of russia and ukraine 3:00 this afternoon is that meeting, you could watch that on c-span as well. go to our website for more information. in california, yvonne. hello. caller: good morning. i am a first-time caller. i would like to speak about the gentleman that said that he can't remember any previous administration talking about of a former president administration. well, obama's administration, his whole administration including biden while trump was in office, they did everything they could to undermine his presidency and it's all coming out now. also, i would like to say that the whole time that president trump was in office we didn't have none of this. we did not have any.

and so once again thank you for allowing me to call. thank you so much. host: yvonne in california. kentucky, democrat's line. caller: hello. all right. people talk about a peaceful transfer of power, how quickly we forget democrats what's going on television along with celebrities and doing these psas asking the electers to change their voted and vote for hillary. do you remember that? host: i don't remember that specifically. you're calling on our democrats line you're talking about your fellow party members? caller: yeah. host: are you a member of the democratic party? caller: that was a disgrace. they're saying that we shouldn't be doing. host: just to confirm you're a member of the democratic party? caller: absolutely. host: go ahead. caller: absolutely.

host: you can go ahead and finish your thought. caller: this comes from both sides. it doesn't come from one side it comes from both sides. what i want to hear is joe biden announced that we're going to open up every bit of oil production that we could possibly do right now because that's what we need to hurt russia. host: ok. anthony in jacksonville, florida. you're next up, republican line. caller: i don't have much to say about putin but i do want to tell you guys i love donald trump, the best president ever. host: ok. we'll hear one more call. this will be mary, las vegas, nevada democrat's line. caller: good morning. the guy from virginia brought up afghanistan. might i remind people that the fix was already in. trump negotiated a one-sided surrender to the taliban.

now, as far as trump goes, like putin he is a serial liar, a practiced criminal, and the big lie was manufactured out of whole cloth by the big g. now, in virginia your governor just put in wheeler from trump's administration, the guy's a coal industry lobbyist who disbanded nuclear scientific communications and restrictions, gut it had clean air and water act, suppressed form elledhide. he ignored the asbestos, weakened the rule, resinneded the clean air plan. he had -- putin had no reason to do anything under trump because trump was doing everything putin wanted. host: mary there in las vegas nevada finishing out the round of calls. for all who participated thank you for doing so.

another edition of "washington journal" comes your way at 7:00 tomorrow morning. we'll see you then. >> today is the last day of the conservative political action conference being held in orlando, florida. donald trump jr. is among the speakers. live coverage begins 1:20 p.m. eastern on c-span, online at c-span. org or on our full video app c-span now. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we're funded by these television companies and more, including comcast.

>> you think this is just a community center. no. it's way more than that. comcast is partnering with a thousands community centers to create wi-fi enabled lists so students from low income families can get the tools they need to be ready for anything. >> comcast supports c-span as a public service along with these other television providers giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> the united nations security council meets today and will take up a measure compelling the general assembly to meet within 24 hours to debate and vote on whether russia violated the u.n. charter with its invasion of ukraine. the measure cannot be vetoed by any of the five members including russia. watch live at 3:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. online at c-span. org or watch full coverage on c-span now, our free video app. ♪