♪♪ fill your medicare prescriptions with walgreens and save. at fidelity, your dedicated advisor will help you create a comprehensive wealth plan for your full financial picture. with the right balance of risk and reward. so you can enjoy more of...this. this is the planning effect. good morning. 10:00 a.m. eastern, 7:00 a.m. pacific. i'm jose diaz-balart. we're keeping a close eye on the pentagon where press secretary john kirby is expected to hold a briefing at any moment. it comes as nbc news as learned that he is expected to officially announce that some u.s. troops on heightened alert will be heading to eastern europe. with me now as we wait for the pentagon briefing to begin, nbc

news chief white house correspondent, peter alexander. nbc news foreign correspondent, matt bradley in eastern ukraine, jonathan la mir, politico white house bureau chief as well as host of "way too early" here on msnbc. and he lane cooper, "the new york times" pentagon correspondent. both jonathan and helane are msnbc contributors. peter, what more can you tell us about the president's decision to u.s. moves troops already on standby to europe? >> reporter: that's exactly right. we have now learned that it's a total of 3,000 u.s. troops who will be moving, about a thousand of them already in europe will be going to romania, a native member nation. another 2,000 presently here in the u.s. will be going to germany and to poland, as well. this comes, according to a senior administration official at the president's direction, and following the recommendation of the defense secretary, secretary austin. i think you're going to hear this officially from john kirby, the press secretary at the pentagon, within the next few moments here. >> and peter, i think here he is. peter, sorry to interrupt you.

here's john kirby. >> just some things at the top. i think, as you heard secretary austin address just last friday in his remarks with the chairman here in the briefing room, we remain focused on the evolving situation in europe and russia's actions on the ukrainian border and belarus. as the secretary said, the united states stands shoulder-to-shoulder with our nato allies. the current situation demands that we reinforce the deterrent and defensive posture on nato's eastern flank. president biden has been clear that the united states will respond to the growing threat to europe's security and stability. our commitment to nato, article v, and collective defense, remains ironclad. as part of this commitment and to be prepared for a range of contingencies, the united states will soon move additional forces to romania, poland, and germany.

i want to be very clear about something. these are not permanent moves. they are moves designed to respond to the current security environment. moreover, these forces are not going to fight in ukraine. they are going to ensure the robust defense of our nato allies. now, let me lay this out for you in a series of three steps. first, 1,000 soldiers that are currently based in germany will reposition to romania in the coming days. now, this is a striker squadron. a mounted cavalry unit that's designed to deploy in short order and to move quickly once in place. and they will augment the sum of 900 u.s. forces that are currently in romania. now, this force is designed to deter aggression and enhance our defensive capabilities in frontline allied states. and we expect them, as i said, to move in coming days.

secretary austin discussed this repositioning to romania just last week in his conversation with the romanian minister of defense. and again, i want to stress that this move is coming at the express invitation of the romanian government. additionally, we welcome french president macron's announcement that france intends to deploy forces to romania, under nato command, which secretary austin discussed with the french defense minister, florence parley, just last week. the united states will continue to consult and coordinate with france and all of our allies to ensure that we complement each other in our respective deployments. and of course, we'll continue to work through nato to make appropriate defensive and non-escalatory force posture alignments. second, we are moving an additional force of about approximately 2,000 troops from the united states to europe in

the next few days. the 82nd airborne division is deploying components of an infantry brigade combat team and key enablers to poland, and the 18th airborne corps is moving a joint task force-capable headquarters to germany. both of them, as you know, are based in ft. bragg, north carolina. collectively, this force is trained and equipped for a variety of missions to deter aggression and to reassure and to defend our allies. not surprisingly, we work very closely with our polish and german allies to set the stage for these movements and we absolutely appreciate their support. again, these are not permanent moves. they respond to current conditions. we will adjust our posture as those conditions evolve. third and finally, all of neersz these forces are separate and in addition to the personnel in the united states on heightened alert posture.

those 8,500 are not currently being deployed, but remain ready to move if called for the nato response force, or as needed for other contingencies, as directed by the secretary or by president biden. we continue to review our force posture in the situation in europe and we will make adjustments as the situation warrants. i also want to take this opportunity to correct some misconceptions around last week's announcement, nato as an organization does not have veto power over u.s. troops deployments and media reports to the contrary represent a mischaracterization of that. nothing precludes the united states from making its own decisions on force movements, including those forces that are being placed on heightened readiness. that said, any movement of u.s. forces involves consultation with the host nation, as we have done with romania and poland and germany. prior to today's announcements. and we're mindful of the competing needs of security and our obligation to be transparent

and will provide you additional information on these and other movements as available and as appropriate. as we have long said, we are continuously reviewing our posture so there may soon be additional posture decisions to announce, including movements that are part of ongoing military exercises. this is not the sum total of the deterrence actions we will take, or those to reassure our allies. i think it won't surprise you that we take a theater-wide approach to theater and defense and welcome the additional announcements by spain, denmark, the uk, and the netherlands of their consideration to deploy additional forces to reinforce nato's eastern flank. the united states has robust capabilities distributed across europe, including in the baltic region, and we will continue to assess needs in that area in cooperation with the relevant allies and, of course, the full nato alliance. we stand united. we have said that repeatedly. we say it again today. these movements are unmistakable signals to the world that we stand ready to reassure our nato

allies and deter and defend against any aggression. now, as the secretary said friday, we do not know if russia has made a final decision to further invade ukraine. but it clearly has that capability. the department of defense will continue to support diplomatic efforts, led by the white house and the state department to press for resolution. we do not believe conflict is inevitable. the united states in lockstep with our allies and partners, has offered russia a path to de-escalate. but we will take all prudent measures to assure our own security and that of our allies. finally, just one note. i note that in the past few hours, a proposal made by the united states leaked to a european news outlet. we did not make this document public. but now that it is, it confirms

to the entire world that we have always been saying. there is no daylight between our public safeties and our private discussions. nato and its partners are unified in their resolve and open to constructive and serious diplomacy. the united states has gone the extra mule to find a diplomatic solution. and if russia wants to negotiate a diplomatic solution, as it claims it does, this document certainly makes clear that there is a path forward to do so. and with that, we'll take questions, starting with you, lita. >> hi, john, thanks. just a couple of details on some of this. is it still 8,500 total that are on prepare to deploy orders, or are there additional ones? and there's a brigade at ft. carson that's already scheduled to move into europe. are you including them -- there's been some confusion. are you including that person brigade in the

prepare-to-display order, or are they completely separate because they're an already scheduled deployment? and one other, are there more -- are these troops that are going, are they under nato or are these all unilateral u.s. moves? thank you. >> well, let me see if i can remember all of those. the troops that i'm talking about today will be going under u.s. command. as i said in the case of romania, they'll begin to deploy troops there. we'll begin that in full consultation with romania. i wouldn't describe these as unilateral moves. this is a bilateral arrangement between the united states and romania, but they'll be going under u.s. command. the 8,500 remain on prepare-to-deploy orders, as i

said, when i talked about it last month, the vast majority of them are designed for the nato response force. as i said in my opening statement, that force has not been activated. so they aren't going anywhere. the secretary has, as you might imagine, as we have worked towards these troop movements, there have been additional forces put on the prepare-to-deploy orders or shortened at the timetethers. you can expect that that could continue to happen going forward. we're going to constantly look at the conditions in the region and consult with allies on partners. and if we feel we need to make additional forces more ready, we'll do that. if we feel that we need to send more forces to certain eastern flank countries, we'll do that too. in full consultation with nato and in full consultation with the specific allies and partners. and i think i missed one of your

questions. i'm going to have to take that one, lita, i don't have the breakdown of every single unit in that origin 8,500 in front of me. so let me just take that, rather than speculate and guess. jen? >> john, do you have any evidence that putin plans to move beyond ukraine's borders? why are you bolstering these eastern flank allies if you do not have evidence of that? >> because it's important that we send a strong signal to mr. putin and frankly to the world that nato matters to the united states, it matters to our allies. and we have ironclad article v commitments. an attack on one is an attack on all. and so we know that he also bristles at nato, about nato. and he has made no secret of that. we are making it clear that we're going to be prepared to defend our nato allies if it comes to that. hopefully it won't come to that. nobody wants to see -- as i

said, conflict is not inevitable. there's no reason for there to be armed conflict, in ukraine or anywhere else on the european continent. and mr. putin can go a long way to serving that end by taking seriously the proposes that we have put forward, diplomatically, and by de-escalating by moving some of those troops away. >> but is there any evidence that he plans to -- that anything you're seeing, that suggests those troops that are outside ukraine might carry on to poland, romania? >> what we see, jen, is clear evidence, every day, that he continues to destabilize the environment by adding more forces in the western part of his country and along belarus. in addition to additional naval activity in the mediterranean and in the north atlantic. so he clearly is providing himself many options, lots more capabilities, for exactly what purpose? we don't know right now. and because we don't know exactly what his purpose is, we

want to make sure we're ready on the nato front to defend our allies. barbara? >> i want to follow up on jen's question. you said at the beginning, the current situation demands we reinforce so what specifically demands the reinforcement that you are laying out today? and the reason i ask this, this is bilateral, as you said, originally you spoke at length about the nato reserve force, you are moving ahead bilaterally, not under a nato umbrella anyhow, so what signal does that accepted that you're not waiting for a nato vote and what is the current situation that demands this reinforcement outside of russia, outside of ukraine. i don't think i heard a specific answer. >> i think the signal it sends that we're moving additional

u.s. forces into allied territory, at the request and with the invitation of those countries is that we take our nato commitments very, very seriously. and i put that right in the opening statement. and as for, i think your question is, why now -- >> why are you -- i don't hear -- i don't understand -- i don't -- i would like an explanation why you're doing this now without the vote at nato, which does not appear readily apparent for them to activate the response force. what has led you to say, okay, the united states will act on a bilateral basis. you have the invitations. you could have waited for a nato vote. you decided not to. so what is the -- >> well, it's not just us, barb. other nations, and denmark, the uk, france. other nato nations are likewise discussing in bilateral ways with eastern flank nations the

addition of capabilities to those nations. it's not just the united states. it's other nato allies that are doing this. you talk about this vote thing. let's be clear. what i think you're getting at is the nato response force. that's a 40,000-person-strong force that is designed for high readiness. and that is a decision that the alliance and only the alliance can make. we have a contribution to that. we have gotten those forces alerted to be ready to go, if needed. and they still will be. we also can, if the president decides, as commander in chief, to take some of those alerted forces and move them in a bilateral arrangement, as well, we can do that. as i said at the top, it's not like the alliance has a veto authority on any of those troops that were put on prepare to deploy. in terms of why now, here's a couple of factors. mr. putin continues to add forces, combined arms, offensive capabilities, even over just the last 24 hours. he continues to add in western

russia and in belarus and the north atlantic. he has no signs of being interested or willing to de-escalate the attentions. it's not just the united states that's noticed this. our nato allies have noticed this. and they have expressed their concerns. we have shared our perspectives on what we're seeing with them. they have shared their perspectives on what they're seeing with us. and as a result of these bilateral discussions, we are now prepared to make these moves. i say again, two things. these are temporary moves, not permanent deployments, not permanent basing. and two, we're not ruling out the possibility that there will be more coming up in future days and weeks. >> so my last question. the bottom line here is you cannot -- the united states, the pentagon, the white house, now right now could not rule out the possibility that putin could make a move outside of ukraine, into an eastern european country

that's friendly with nato, friendly with the u.s. and allies. you can't rule out that he's going to make an additional move beyond ukraine? >> we're not ruling anything in or out with this announcement, barb. this isn't about -- this isn't about an intel assessment about what mr. putin will or won't do. as i said again in my opening statement, we still don't believe he's made a decision to further invade ukraine. and if he does further invade ukraine, obviously, there's going to be consequences for that, but he has many options and capabilities available to him, as to how he might do that. and we simply don't know. we want to make sure that he knows any move on nato is going to be resisted. and it's going to trigger article v and we're going to be committed to the defense of our allies. that's what this is all about. yeah, david? >> when president biden

previewed this last week and he said he would be sending forces into near-term, he also said, not a lot. do you consider 3,000 not a lot? and how does -- how do 1,000 troops, infantry troops, stop the kind of force that you've been describing that russia has been amassing in western russia and belarus? >> we think that these orders that the secretary is giving today are very much in keeping with the president's comments. and to your other question, i remind, again, that we hold the option open of additional force movements if that's desired and needed. so the steps i'm talking about today could very well be

preliminary steps to fwuc futurs we might take. to your other question about, is that stuff? again, it's worth reminding that romania as a sovereign state has their own military and a very capable one at that. and it's not just the united states sending this striker squadron. the french will be sending additional troops. i'll let them speak to what they're going to do and what timeline and much and as i also said in my opening statement, other countries are likewise moving forward to provide bolstering capabilities to nato allies on the eastern flank. >> how long will it take these troops to get in position and do you expect the infantry combat team from ft. bragg to jump in? >> i'm not going to talk about the specifics of their movement, but as i said in my opening statement, we expect them to start moving in coming days. i don't have a more specific timeline for you in terms of

exactly departure date and exact arrival. obviously, it will be obvious when they get there and certainly, we'll try to keep you informed all the way. >> i just want to say, you've made it clear, several times, that these troops won't be brought into ukraine and that they won't be in combat. but can you rule out that any of these troops, specifically some from the 82nd airborne, might be brought into ukraine in the coming days to help with the non-combatant evacuation. is it possible they could be used for that? >> as i think you heard the secretary say on friday, our troops are multi-mission capable and they will be prepared for a range of contingencies and i won't go any further than that. >> is that one reason, though, that the 82nd specifically was identified as one of the units to go forward early? is that because of that capability? >> they are, as you know, already a ready force. they are already at a heightened state of alert. that's the reason for that force. and they are multi-military capable. they can do a lot of things.

it's a very versatile force. and i think their versatility, their ability to move quickly and to conduct a range of missions across a range of contingencies, which is well proven, that's the reason why the secretary has ordered them to go. okay? let me get to -- i promise i'll get there, but i haven't done -- other than lita, i haven't done anybody on the phone and i need to do that. silvie. >> thank you. i would like to know how many sergeant you are going to send to poland. because you said 2,000 from u.s. to germany and poland. so how many soldiers will you have in poland all in all? >> majority of the 2,000 that will be moving from ft. bragg will be going to poland. the 18th airborne corps, as i said in my opening statement,

that's going to germany, they are going to form a joint task force headquarters, and that's usually depending on the need and the task at hand, several hundred people. so the majority of the 2,000 that i mentioned, that comprise the 82nd airborne brigade combat team, that leading element, they'll be going to poland. kelly from news nation? >> hi, john, thanks for taking my question. i know you said we will adjust this posture, as conditions evolve. i was curious, because we're seeing, you know, order ukrainians, teachers, moms, dads, dentists learning to use guns to defend themselves. there are calls in washington for the pentagon to support them. are any of these troops going to help them? and how will th president's order change the mission of the florida national guard troops currently in ukraine? >> as i said at the top, kelly, the president is being clear and

i think we made it eminently clear in my opening statement, these troops will not be going to ukraine to participate in the defense of ukraine. the president has been very clear about that. these forces are going to reassure and to bolster capabilities inside nato's eastern flank. and as for the florida national guard trainers, they are still in ukraine. there's been no decision to change their status. they are still there, providing advice and assist to ukrainian armed forces. and if and when there's a need to make a decision different decision about their presence there, the secretary will absolutely do that in consultation with the european commander, general walters, but no decision has been made yet. tony? >> hey, john. when you said it will be obviously that the 82nd airborne arrives, i want to piggyback on david martin's question. is it likely they're going to parachute in as a symbolic drop to send a mission to putin? >> again, i'm not going to talk

about their travel there and how they're going to arrive. i don't anticipate it will be a tactical operate in that regard, though, tony. >> did you just rule it out? >> david, i said, i don't expect it's going to be some sort of tactical operation. but i don't have additional information today about that. and quite frankly, i don't think that's all that relevant. they're going and they're going to bolster our capabilities in nato, and that's the most important part here. >> you just seemed to say no. did you say "no"? >> david, i didn't say "no," i said, "i don't expect" that there'll be some type of tactical operation here. >> who will command these troops? is it general walters, and is that splitting his role? >> he already has a split role as a supreme allied commander in europe. ultimately, he will be the top of the chain of command for them

while he's in europe. i don't have more additional information about the c2 arrangement right now. but we can get that. let me go back to the phones here. tara cop? karla beb? >> hey, thanks -- >> sorry, john -- i'm on. i didn't unmute myself. can you talk about whatever additional airlift capacity might be needed to shift these troops and what role air mobility command would play in this? >> i don't have specifics on the airlift, tara. obviously, this is a reasonable amount of forces that will -- that air mobility command will be able to transport. i don't foresee a need for some sort of surge of airlift

activity to get these folks over there. go ahead, karla. >> thanks for doing this, john. most of my questions were answered, so i just need a couple of clarifications. the 8,500 forces that now remain on heightened readiness, that means that 2,000 additional troops were put on readiness. where are they located? and my second follow-up is concerning the national guard forces that remain in ukraine. does that mean that since you're not sending anymore and they're not pulling out, that d.o.d. does not feel their safety is threatened? thanks. >> on the numbers, i think i'm just going to leave it the way i couched in my opening statement, because, you know, i don't -- there's really no changes here. as i said, the 8,500 are still on prepare-to-deploy orders. they have not been activated. we have, as you clearly know now, activated others to move them, as a u.s. decision.

so -- and as i said, i think earlier, to, i think, silvie's question, there are, in addition to the 8,500, the secretary has put on prepare-to-deploy additional u.s. forces. i'm not prepared to go into detail about that today. when and if we are able to speak to future movements, we will speak to future movements. we will be as transparent with you as we possibly can. but we're also going to need to be, as you might understand, a little careful with the amount of detail that we put out there ahead of time. we'll do the best we can to be transparent with you. on the national guard, again, no change to their presence or posture in ukraine. as i've said many times, the secretary takes their safety and their security to be a paramount concern. we are in constant communication with european command about their presence, what they're doing, and if and when the secretary believes that it is the appropriate time for them to

leave, if it's sooner than their deployment is up, then he'll make that decision and again, we'll let you know. but right now, they're still there, still providing training, advice, and assistance to the ukrainian armed forces. helane cooper? >> hey, kirby, thanks for doing this. i'm still trying to figure out the -- i'm still a little bit stuck on the numbers. you said you're not ruling out possible additional troops to being zploied to europe. you saying that would be in addition to the 8,500 that are on higher alert? >> that's exactly what i'm saying. the vast majority of 8,500 are designed for the nato response force. that response force has not been activated, as i mentioned in the opening. but we are not ruling out the possibility that there will be other u.s. moves inside europe, in other words, just like we're

moving the striker squadron from germany to romania. there could be other movements inside europe, intra-theater moves, that we would speak to. we're not ruling that out and we're not ruling out the possibility that additional forces from the united states could deploy to europe. all we can speak to today are the troops that we've announced, and as decisions get made, if there's a need, as i said in my opening, we're constantly looking at the conditions there. if we believe the conditions warrant, if we believe consultations with the allies also would demand admirable u.s. force capability, we'll entertain those discussions and we'll make those decisions and then we'll announce them. louis martinez? >> -- on higher alert right now? >> sorry, helane, i cut you off, i think. >> are there additional troops in the u.s. who are higher alert right now? >> paul mccleary? i'm sorry, louis martinez?

>> hey, john. the question is about your comments earlier, saying nato matters. you're saying that these troops are going under unilateral u.s. control, that this is a u.s. mission. are you inferring that these troops would immediately transition to nato control should nato decide to activate the nato response force. and another question as well about the -- there's a deployment ongoing right now in estonia, some f-15s. have they been extended beyond the current end date of this week? thank you? >> i don't have anything on the f-15s, louis. i can ask about that, but my hunch is that, no, there's no plans to extend them. let me just check on that. and to your other question, these forces are going under bilateral arrangements between the united states and the

country, in the countries, in question. in this case, germany, poland, and romania, and they are main under u.s. chain of command. that is a separate and distinct mission than nato response force, where we've talked about our contribution to that being the bulk of that 8,500 that we talked about last week. that under, you know, nato command and control structure. i'm not going to hypothesize or speculate about the future for these u.s. units and what it's going to look like going forward. there's no expectation at this time that they would necessarily have to fall under some sort of nato command and control. they are going as a u.s. contribution in consultation with the allies in question to help bolster their defenses and to prove and to show and to demonstrate our commitment to the defense of our nato allies. and again, i don't foresee any command and control changes for them going forward. paul mccleary?

>> hi, john. is the united states prepared to negotiate with the russians over the shore sights in poland and romania or allow -- possibly allow for russian inspections of those sites? >> look, i'm not going to speak to the -- i'm not going to negotiate here in public. we have laid out a very serious set of proposals, diplomatically, to russia. as i said at the outset, a european news outlet decided to publish that proposal. you can go look for it yourself, but it demonstrates that we've said publicly is the samz what we've been saying privately to the russians. that we are willing, with an eye towards reciprocity, to consider addressing mutual security concerns on the european continent. and i would leave it at that and refer you to my state department colleagues. again, i'm not going to

negotiate here in public. let me go back into the room. janie. >> thank you, john. on korea issues, it was reported that united states and south korea are coordinating the postponement of a joint exercise. you know that north korea continues to conduct winter military exercises. why u.s. and south korea exercises is always postponed or canceled? >> john kirby at the pentagon giving a briefing and this first segment of the press conference is to detail plans that nbc news was able to confirm just before this news conference of additional troops sent to europe. back with me is nbc news chief white house correspondent, peter alexander, nbc news foreign correspondent, matt bradley, in eastern ukraine. jonathan lemire, politico white

house bureau chief as well as host of "way too early" here on msnbc. and in just a little while, helane cooper, she asked kirby a question just a moment ago. peter and helane are both msnbc contributors. peter, let's hear what you learned, you gave us the headlines before this news conference, but it is an american unilateral force under american leadership heading into eastern europe. >> that's exactly right. a total of 3,000 troops, as you heard, the pentagon spokesperson john kirby just detail as nbc news reported. within the last hour, a thousand of these service members will be going from germany to romania. 2,000 of them would be going from the united states to poland and germany. he said the vast majority of those going to poland, notably all of those 3,000 troops or the 2,000 troops, i should say, in the united states, were traveling overseas will be coming from ft. bragg. he detailed their specific

units. the 18th airborne corps, the 82nd airborne division, among those who will be contributing forces to this effort. a big takeaway, here, jose, is that none of these forces will be going to ukraine. there are some american troops already in ukraine right now, serving in the capacity of helping train ukrainian forces there. and as he said, this process was not permanent. that these were temporary moves, effectively, this was being done bilaterally in terms of relationships directly with those countries to further reassure america's nato allies there that we stand with them. but this is not being done under the umbrella of nato, which is why john kirby said among other things that the 8,500 u.s. troops that we've reported in recent weeks were already on a heightened state of alert, could still go overseas, and that that number could grow, going forward. but this is following up on the president's own public comments if recent days, saying that he would be sending american troops

in the near-term. he said it wouldn't be a lot, but that there was a real urgency to this, given the fact that if the u.s. were to act too late, belatedly, they wouldn't be in any position to help any forces, any of those countries there. one other struck that thought me was a question wisely asked by one of my colleagues, which was whether or not the u.s. any indication that russia would try to further expand any potential invasion beyond ukraine and into those countries, and john kirby said that he would not rule anything out. the real center of concern remains ukraine as the u.s. tries to fortify its allies in that region surrounding it. >> peter, fact that this is distinctly separate from the 8,500 troops that have been put on essentially prepare-for-deploying orders in the united states. those continue to be in the united states, preparing to deploy. but that's not part of this force being sent to europe. >> yeah, that's what he said.

he said that those 8,500 remain on a heightened state of alert. that that number could grow, but that this was 3,000 forces, 1,000 again in europe already, 2,000 here in the u.s. that would be traveling to help support, the word he kept using throughout this was to deter aggression and to be there to help defend our allies. none of this was an offensive positioning. it was all in defense or in an effort to deter russia from trying to invade or expand any invasion to some of our allies in that region. most notably, as he said today, romania, poland, and ultimately germany. >> and jonathan, what's the message they're trying to send with this deployment? >> certainly, it's a tougher tone. they're not going to let vladimir putin just walk into ukraine unopposed. the obama administration came under sharp criticism in 2014 for not doing enough, for not readying more forces in a defensive posture when putin moved in on crimea and president biden doesn't want to be seen as

repeating that mistake. he's been clear, the u.s. troops are not going to go into ukraine or engage with russian soldiers there, but this is to bolster allies. to send the message here that the west, including the u.s. and europe, is a united front. that there are still also hopes for diplomacy. and white house officials and administration officials i've talked to in the last day were somewhat encouraged, what they heard from president putin of russia yesterday, in a news conference. sure, there was plenty of bell coast rhetoric from the president and a lot of blame as he pointed fingers at everybody but russia for causing this crisis, suggesting it was nato's escalation that led to it. but at the same time, putin said that he would be open for further talks. that he kept the door open for diplomacy, which is the first tyke he said said that in a stretch. and aides that i talked to took that as something as a hopeful signal, that there could be further discussions, perhaps between blinken and lavrov in the coming days and maybe even at the presidential level and another phone call or virtual meeting. but one last point here, the

date to watch on the calendar, they seem to point to, administration officials is february 20th. the end of the winter olympics, which are about to kick off, because there's a sense that putin wouldn't want to mount an offensive in ukraine prior to that for fear of overshadowing china's winter olympics and upsetting his close allies in beijing. >> and helane, you're just back from that news conference where you were able to ask a question. what's the question you industrial unanswered? >> yeah, he didn't answer my question, jose. i'm trying to figure out, as you heard pentagon press secretary john kirby say that the administration is not ruling out the deployment of additional troops. that's the $100 million question, is this the beginning of an escalation, where we see american troops starting to, you

know, really ramp up towards eastern europe, because that would forecast just how dangerous a situation the biden administration thinks that we are in. it's really -- i mean, jonathan is really getting at sort of one of the profound conundrums that is facing the administration. because on one hand, and you hear this from a lot of russian hands as well, but vladimir putin has said, a russian deployment said at the u.n. that they don't intend to -- they're not positioned to invade, they're not looking to invade ukraine. but on the other hand, when you look at the map of ukraine and the russian diplomats right now and you look at just how russian troops have encircled the country of ukraine from crimea, which vladimir putin annexed in 2014, the black sea, you see them in belarus, you see them all along the russia/ukraine

border, it's sort of, you know, the russians are saying, believe what we say, not what we do. and right now the biden administration is saying, look, look, look at what their doing right now. can you imagine you being in ukraine or imagine despite the ukrainian government saying, everybody should stay calm, you know, the efforts to keep a lid on things, ukraine right now is essentially encircled by russia. and that is what has pentagon officials so concerned. not that we're sending american troops over there, but just that this could be the start of something a lot more escalatory. >> and interesting, helene, and kirby referred to i think twice on this leaked document that the united states sent to russia as a way -- a path forward to de-escalation. it was leaked by spain. and among the things that the united states is telling russia they're willing to consider is remouaing any offensive ground

missiles from ukraine or anywhere near there. so, in a way, could russia just be saying, put everything on the line there and let's see what we can get from the united states and europe, without having to invade. >> it's very possible. vladimir putin is nope around the world for his ability to play a very poor hand, very strongly. he, you know, he has an innate haggling ability, you know, according to diplomats who have dealt with him to extract every little concession he possibly can. he's willing to bluff, so it's quite possible that this is all part of an elaborate effort to get the west and get europe, get nato, and get the united states to do as much as he possibly sees that he can to make nato a little smaller, to make them a little less -- a little less

threatening to russia. and he can go back to the russian people and say, look at what i've extracted, with nato, you know, have x, x, x, defensive weaponry in ukraine and now they've gone to -- it's a tough line he's walking, though. because he's got a lot to, you know, in encircling ukraine, you showed that map just a second ago. the way he has, this is general mark milley, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff said last friday that he has not seen anything of this level, militarily, since the cold war. he said you would have to go back to cold war days to see anything like this. so that's quite a bluff he's put on. >> indeed, matt, you're there, you spent the last couple of days on the front line in eastern ukraine, what are you seeing on the ground? >> look, jose, when it comes to what we've heard from government official in kyiv, they're saying that, you know, they know that they are alone. they know that u.s. troops and nato troops are not going to be

going to -- running to the rescue to save ukraine. and the troops are on the ground that we're talking to here on the border, they know that just as well. for them, this is just another turn of the screw in an eight-year-long conflic. this is not new for them. this has been grinding on for a very long time. for them, this is about ant individual movements or diplomacy or shifts in tone, to them, this is always going to be a threat, so they have this feeling of resigned boredom. one said that they were going to be sitting in this foxhole for quite a while longer. jose? >> jonathan bradley, peter alexander, helene cooper, thank you all this morning. now joining us is mikey sherell. it's a pleasure to see you this morning. what do you make of this news of 3,000 u.s. troops being sent to

eastern europe? >> i think it makes sense, given that russia has over 100,000 troops now encircling ukraine. so certainly to send some support to our allies, defensive support to make sure that russia doesn't think that they can continue these aggressive acts, not just against ukraine, but against the other states in the region. >> and tell me what you've learned from your visit there, just last week. >> as i mentioned, i just returned back, i went as a member of the house armed services committee on the foreign affairs delegation to really talk to our allies and nato, make sure that we were presenting a unified front in the face of this russian aggression, and then to go meet with the ministry of defense, the foreign affairs ministry, the president, to really ensure that they had the support they

needed. and i'll tell you, being on the ground in ukraine, speaking to the ukrainian people, it really brought to my mind the fact that i think putin has underestimated the will of the ukrainian people to fight against this aggression. this is not 2014. these are people that understand what freedom is. they can look in crimea, they can look in the donbas where people are occupying their territory. they know what they're fighting for and they're ready to do so. >> but in 2014, i think they knew what they were fighting for. they knew what it meant. they knew what the russians were doing, they knew what it meant for their un, but the world didn't really support them. so has that changed? >> i think what we were looking at in 2014 was really an aberration from the post-world war ii order.

it was the first time that the sovereign territory of european nation had been invaded since world war ii. i think we see russia just trying to go backwards, really, to a less-settled era, an era where they have more influence, to promote their ideas in a region. to sort of promote this idea that if somehow, you were unfortunate enough to find yourself behind the iron curtain in post-world war ii, or in other words, under russia or soviet influence, that that's forever your fate. and now we see ukraine, and really, the european union and nato uniting together to say that that is simply not the case. >> congresswoman, it's a pleasure to see you this morning. i so appreciate your time. thanks for being with me. >> thanks so much. still ahead, how many migrant families separated under trump have been reunited? jacob soboroff brings us his exclusive interview with dhs

secretary alejandra mayorkas next. you're watching "jose diaz-balart reports." a mayorkas next you're watchin"jg ose you're watchin"jg ose diaz-balart reports. has skin-strengthening nutrients and moisturizers that help rebuild your skin. dove men+care. smoother, healthier skin with every shower.

there's a different way to treat hiv. it's once-monthly injectable cabenuva. cabenuva is the only once-a-month, complete hiv treatment for adults who are undetectable. cabenuva helps keep me undetectable. it's two injections, given by a healthcare provider once a month. hiv pills aren't on my mind. i love being able to pick up and go. don't receive cabenuva if you're allergic to its ingredients or taking certain medicines, which may interact with cabenuva. serious side effects include allergic reactions post-injection reactions, liver problems,...and depression. if you have a rash and other allergic reaction symptoms, stop cabenuva and get medical help right away.

tell your doctor if you have liver problems or mental health concerns, and if you are pregnant, breastfeeding, or considering pregnancy. some of the most common side effects include injection site reactions, fever, and tiredness. if you switch to cabenuva, attend all treatment appointments. with once-a-month cabenuva, i'm good to go. ask your doctor about once-monthly cabenuva.

year ago today president biden created the task force dedicated to reuniting migrant families separated at the border during the trump administration. under president trump's zero tolerance policy, more than 5,600 children were separated from their parents. right now as many as 1,200 families remain separated according to the biden administration's task force. since biden came into office, approximately 130 families have been reunited, 400 families are in the process of being reunited. joining me now, jacob soboroff. how is this process going one year? >> reporter: the fact that families are getting back together here in the united states is wonderful news, but there are big outstanding questions, namely, will families be able to stay in the united states permanently once they get

back here after what positions for human rights called torture of the american pediatric called government-sanctioned child abuse. this is what i was told earlier this week. you said publicly you support allow these families, which are now only allowed here on a renewable rolling basis, humanitarian parole, to stay in the country. you said you want these countries to be able to stay here permanently. what's the hold up? is the without supportive of this as well? >> the white house is 100% supportive of it, as am i and we continue to advocate vigorously for it. that requires legislation. we are advocating to congress that they provide these individuals with legal status. that requires a statuary change. so, jose, that's some news right there, that the white

house is 100% supportive of permanent legal status of allowing families to remain in the united states permanently. jen psaki confirmed that yesterday. there is one other big unanswered question, however, which is will there be accountable for members of the trump administration for something the president himself called criminal and on that the secretary wouldn't answer, he said that's an issue for department of justice ultimately to address. >> as we said at the beginning, as many as 1,200 families remain separated one year in. thank you for being with me this morning. >> and now to another story we've been following very closely, the worsening humanitarian crisis in afghanistan. right now the secretary of state and secretary of defense are testifying about this. now more than half the families surveyed don't have health care

access. joining me from save the children in kabul and afghanistan. fiona, over a million children could lose their lives to malnutrition this year? it's a crisis. >> this is a crisis. there's very little that gives people hope at the moment in afghanistan. everything is really difficult. the number of cases that save the children are seeing of pneumonia and malnutrition are really high now. there's a lot more children running around the streets

begging, looking for things to sell and the weather is getting rough. it's going to be very cold. i'm sure there's 1 million of those children at thought to be at risk. >> how do you process that? and you're doing extraordinary work there. how do you process that? how do we even help? >> so i think from a save the children perspective, this is very much -- 50% of the population of afghanistan are children. save the children and other aid agencies are asking governments such as the united states of america to bring more money to afghanistan, to increase the amount of funding but to also unblock the funding lines that at the moment are blocked that makes it very difficult for

agencies to access funding from outside of afghanistan. the banks outside of afghanistan are not willing to bring money into afghanistan and it's the single biggest at the moment, the worsening of the situation crisis arising. it's incredibly bleak here honestly. >> it is incredibly bleak and so tragic. the taliban you remember, we all remember promised a new start. the united states has been negotiating with the taliban and did so with president trump. taliban gave the united states security at the airport yet according to the u.n., the taliban has killed more than 100 afghan officials despite their promise of amnesty. this is not the taliban of 2.0. >> no, it's not the taliban of

2.0 but it's the taliban we know. this is nothing that should surprise us. this also doesn't excuse the fact of what's going on in afghanistan, what's being allowed to go on by u.s. governments, by governments all over the world who had made promises to our so-called afghan allies for the last 20 years, what's going on right now is criminal. it's absolutely criminal that these children are dying, that families are watching each other starve to death. this is a different type of death from bullets and bombs. this is a slow, torturous death, something that we could possibly do something about after 20 years of making promises to the afghan people to just let them die there, to let them starve to death. even the taliban reluctantly are allowing organizations to bypass them to help the afghan people. for some reason our government and governments around the world

are still not helping and they saw this coming. the children, the women, the men are dying right now, people who supported our governments for the last 20 years, we just allowed them to sit there and watch each other starve to death. families selling their children. imagine being so desperate to sell one child so you could feed your other children. this isn't a situation that should be happening in 2022, especially in a country that we promised to help for the last two decades. >> if there is no light be shone to think that it not happening. you are there making a difference. thank you both for being with me. thank you for the privilege of your time. thank you for the privilege of your time.

s. good wednesday morning, everybody. there is major breaking news with the crisis in ukraine. the president just approved the deployed of addition props to eastern europe. in just the last few minutes saying they have added more troops. and the supreme court how will this work? and now millions of americans are under another winter weather alert.