good to be with you. i am katy tur. we are watching the white house where any moment now the white house security adviser will be joining jen psaki at today's press briefing. it's not just a drop-by, according to our own kelly o'donnell, he only comes to the briefing when he has news to deliver. let's consider the timing. last night president biden's security team met, and leaders of the uk, france, germany, and more showing putin the west is in lockstep. an invasion can happen,

something secretary of state anthony blinken eluded to today while on a visit to australia. >> we are in a window when an invasion could begin at anytime, and to be clear that includes during the olympics. >> there are new details on how that invasion could possibly unfold, and u.s. military and intelligence assessment has identified nine possible russian routes into ukraine in a full-scale invasion, and here's national security adviser, jake sullivan. >> what scenarios would you put american troops to rescue and get americans out? >> we're not, that's a world war -- >> to see signs of russian escalation, including new forces arriving at the ukrainian border. as we said before, we are in the

window of when an invasion could begin anytime should vladimir putin decide to order it, and i want to be clear, it could begin during the olympics despite a lot of speculation that it would only happen after the olympics. as we have said before, we are ready either way. we are ready to continue results-oriented diplomacy that addresses the currency concerns of the united states, russia and europe consistent with our values, and we continued to make that clear with russia and close coordination with the european partners. our response would include severe economic sanctions with similar packages imposed by the european union, the united kingdom, canada and other countries. it would also include changes to nato and american force posture along the eastern flank of nato,

and it would include continued support to ukraine. the president held a secured video conference today with key allies and partners to coordinate our approach to this crisis. the participants were the uk, france, poland, romania, the secretary general of nato and the presidents of the european union. we have achieved a remarkable level of unity and common purpose from the broad strategy down to the technical details. if russia precedes its long term power will be diminished and not enhanced by an invasion and face a more atlantic transit community, and make more concessions to china, and face massive pressure on it's economy and export controls that will erode it's industrial base, and face a wave of condemnation around the world, but if russia

truly seeks a diplomatic outcome, it should not just say so but pursue that outcome, and we have put concrete proposals out there, and it's for the world to see and we are ready to engage on them to secure the parameters of the european security and with russia. whatever happens next, the west is more united than it has been in years, and nato is strengthened and more dynamic than anytime in recent memory. in terms of immediate next steps, president biden and his team will remain in close contact with allies and partners on any response necessary should putin decide on military action. i now want to take a moment to echo what president biden and

secretary blinken have already said, we encourage all american citizens who remain in ukraine to depart immediately. we want to be crystal clear on this point. any american in ukraine should leave as possible, and we cannot predict the future, we don't know exactly what is going to happen, but the risk is now high enough and the threat is now immediate enough that this is what prudence demands. if you stay there will be risks with no other opportunity to leave and no prospect of a u.s. military rescue. a subsequent ground invasion

would involve a ground force with no notice, communications to arrange departure could be severed and nobody would be able to count on rail, or air departures, and i am saying the risk is now high enough and the threat is immediate enough that the prudence demands it's time to leave now, while commercial options, commercial air and rail service exists and while the roads are open. the president will not put the lives of our men and women in uniform at risk by sending them into a war zone to rescue people that could have left now but chose not to, so we are asking people to make the responsible choice. with that i will take your questions. >> i know you don't want to get into the intelligence, but what has changed over the last 24 to

48 hours to lead to your new concerns? >> when i appeared on the sunday shows last weekend i made the point that we were in the window, that russian military action could begin any day now, and that remains true, it could remain any day now and it could occur before the olympics have ended. i will not get into intelligence information, but if you look at the disposition of forces in belarus and in russia on the other side of the ukrainian border from the north, from the east, the russians are in a position to be able to mount a major military action in ukraine any day now, and for that reason we believe that it is important for us to communicate to our allies and partners, to the ukrainians and to the american citizens who are still there. i want to be crystal clear though, we are not saying a final decision has been taken by president putin, but what we are seeing is we have a sufficient level of concern based on what we are seeing on the ground and

when what our intelligence analysts have picked up where we send this message and it's a message that we have been sending for sometime, and it's urgent because we are in a urgent situation. >> you believe russia has all the forces it needs to mount a full scale invasion of ukraine? >> it has all the forces it needs for military action, and i am not sure what you mean by a full-scale invasion, but it can advance in ukraine, yes. >> it will call up the nato response list of americans, and will the president send unilateral forces, and is putin

behaving as a rational actor at this point? >> on the question of president authorizing unilateral forces, and he has been open as circumstances warrant, and the deployment of service members to poland and romania, these are not soldiers are that going to war in ukraine or to war with russia, but they are going to defend nato territory consistent with our article 5 obligation, and they are defensive and they are meant to detour aggression against nato territory. in terms of the forces put on heightened readiness to be ready for deployment, and no decisions have been taken in that regard but those forces stand by should a decision be taken by the north

atlantic council to call up the nato response force and a request comes in for american forces to be part of that. finally, i can't get inside the head of president putin and i will not speculate as to his motivations, intentions or decision, and all i will say is we are ready either way. if president putin wants to engage in diplomacy, we are prepared to engage in diplomacy, and we have sketched out the paw -- parameter for that. >> it sounds like you are saying the assessment that putin has not made a decision still stands, and based on that is it your opinion that it's more likely an invasion could happen now than previously believed? >> look, it's hard to assign percentage probabilities in any of this. we have to think about the range of scenarios that we confront and it's our job to be ready for

all of them. what i will say is the way he has built-up his forces and put them in place along with the other indicators that we have collected through intelligence makes it clear to us that there's a very distinct possibility that russia will choose to act militarily, and there's reason to believe that that could happen on a reasonably swift timeframe. now we can't pinpoint the day at this point and we can't pinpoint the hour, but what we can say is there's a credible prospect that a russian military action would take place even before the end of the olympics. >> and you are saying americans should get out while they can, and do you have a picture of how many americans are in ukraine? >> i would refer you to the state department on the specifics of this because i don't want to do this off the top of my head, and there are two categories, those that registered with the embassy and those that have not registered with the embassy, and some of

those folks left and did not deregister, and in the second category, we don't know because no american is obligated or required, but you can't fix a perfect number but they are in the best position to explain what our current picture is of american citizens in ukraine. what i can stand do is stand before the world media, any american that needs financial help or logistical help to take advantage of a commercial option to get out, please call the embassy in kyiv. >> are you seeing an attack on kyiv or on another region? what is the level of confidence of the intelligence community have in what they are hearing about the plan -- >> when you say -- can you

repeat the second question? >> just the confidence the world intelligence has whether this will happen. >> the intelligence community has sufficient confidence that i can stand before you today and say what i have said, which is there's a distinct possibility vladimir putin would order a military action, an invasion of ukraine in this window, in this time period, and that could include the time period before february 20th, before the beijing olympics have been completed. they believe that everything i have just said is well grounded in both what they are seeing on the ground and what they are picking up through all of their various sources. now to your question about what type of action would it be, we have heard it could take a range of different forms and one of those forms is a rapid assault,

line of attack or course of action the russians could choose to take. they could also choose to move in other parts of ukraine as well. the last point i would make, and i know this has been a subject of a fair amount of back and forth between the administration and the press over the course of the past week, we are firmly convined the russians, should they decide to move forward with the invasion are looking forward to a false pretext, a false flag, something they create and blame on the ukrainians as a trigger for military action, and we are calling that out publicly because we believe if russia chooses to do that, they should be held to account, and the world should not believe the false flag they created should be cause to go into ukraine. >> you said you did not want to say putin has made a decision, but does the united states

believe that president putin has made a decision. pbs news reported a few minutes ago said the united states does believe putin has made a decision. >> the report you just mentioned does not capture our few today. our view is we don't know that he has made any final decision and we have not communicated that to anybody. >> he's citing three western defense officials that says the u.s. does believe that putin has made up his mind and communicated that to the military and they are showing intelligence on that, and you are saying that's not true? >> what we have communicated to our allies and partners, our latest intelligence information, and that does not include a

statement that vladimir putin has given an order to proceed with the invasion. >> you have not been shown any evidence or briefed on intelligence that speaks to that otherwise? >> we have not seen anything come to us that says a final decision has been taken and the go order as been given. what i will say, and the reason i am up here talking the way i am to american citizens and the reasons we are taking the actions we are taking and the reason the president convened our closest allies and partners and the alliance and union, we believe he very may well give the order, and that's a distinct possibility, and we are not saying today the order has been given and the invasion iso and it may well and may happen soon, but i have not seen the pbs report yet, but as you characterized it it does not capture the communication we are

making to our allies or what we understand internally. >> you have laid out we are not 100% certain putin made the decision yet. has president biden engaged with him yet? >> i don't have anything to announce for you on that right now. >> the precipice is getting so close and the concern you are weighing towards the american people, is there a need to provide underlying evidence of just what you are seeing that shows americans, this is a country that went through iraq and is concerned about what the intelligence is showing, and does the administration see a need to provide underlying intelligence? >> let me just start with a fundamental distinction between the situation in iraq and the situation today. the situation in iraq, intelligence was used and deployed from this very podium to start a war.

we are trying to stop a war, to prevent a war, to avert a war. all we can do is come here before you in good faith and share everything that we know to the best of our ability while protecting sources and methods so we continue to have access to the intelligence we need. there's another big difference between what happened in 2003 and what is happening in 2022, and in that case it was information about intelligence, hidden things and stuff that could not be seen, and today we are talking about 100,000 russian troops amassed along the ukraine border with america to see, and it's all over the media and your news sites, so you can believe your own eyes that russia could amass an attack against ukraine if they so choose to do so.

we did say we predict there will be a build up of this kind, and thursday far in november, in december, in january, that has borne out. i think when you take all that together and we put forward a credible case. it's not my job to stand up here to convince any of you of anything, and it's your job to ask questions and what i can do, based on the best information i have that i can share and the president can share and the secretary of state can share, put that out there in close consultation with our partners and allies. >> do you have information -- >> first, the country has heard from the country on the ukraine subject many times over the past few months and they will continue to. it's not like president biden has been silent on this question. he has been vocal and spoken to every aspect of it. he has read out his calls on it

with world leaders and meetings and et cetera, but he will continue to speak to the american people as we watch the situation unfold. >> any plans for an address to the nation, from the oval office, any speech with respect to this issue, any prepared remarks? >> i don't have information with a prepared speech or remarks at this point. >> in describing the strategy for ukraine, do you believe that strategy is actually helping to reduce tensions or do you feel that that may be part of the reason why it's pushing putin further into strategies like this? >> only one country amassed more than 100,000 troops on the border of another country with all of the capabilities and capacities to have an invasion, and that country was russia and not the united states.

russia could choose to de-escalate its forces. the united states is responding to the active sustained buildup of military pressure on ukraine. we are doing so in lockstep with allies and partners, and at the same time we have been extremely forward leaning in our willingness to engage in diplomacy and address the concerns of europe concerns when it comes to security. >> next week the president is going to germany for a conference, and why isn't president biden going? wouldn't it be a good time to engage with our allies in person? and the brazilian president is going to russia to meet with putin. how does the white house see this visit and the timing of this visit, and do you expect

anything from the brazilian president? >> if you look at the catalogue of meetings, that would be a rebuttal to the proposition he is not doing enough to rally the best and offer russia a creditable diplomatic way out of this, and 7 includes phone calls and video conferences and countless sustained efforts over the course of several months, and we are proud to have the vice president representing the delegation there. >> and the brazilian president is meeting with putin next week? >> the brazilian president, he is free to conduct whatever meetings he wants to and i don't have anything else to say on that. >> what is your sense if putin does decide to invade ukraine?

is he looking to take over the country or just part like in 2014? how do you explain the rhetoric between -- the warnings here hearing from you and other western countries and -- >> i won't speak to the decisions the ukrainian leadership is communicating, and i speak nearly every day with senior aides to zelensky, and we will continue that level of coordination sharing of information across every dimension of our government, but i can't characterize why it is that they are choosing their course, only based on the information we have we have chosen to transparent as

possible. i can't predict what the shape or scope the military action will be. it could take a variety of forms. it could be more limited or expansive, but there are very real possibilities that it will insolve the seizure. >> if people want to leave, they want to leave now? >> if people want to leave, they should leave now. [ inaudible ] >> sorry, i am just going to give people a moment if they have to -- >> thank you.

>> i will wait until -- >> okay. >> thank you for taking my question. >> did the u.s. wait too long to arm ukraine especially -- did they wait too long to move u.s. forces to nato countries? does the president still view the idea of preinvasion sanctions as a stupid question? >> so as to the question of waiting too long on arming the ukrainians, over the course of the past year, the united states provided more than half a billion, $650 billion in assistance to ukraine and that's more given by any president at anytime and that began more than a year ago under the presidency of joe biden. we have made good on the commitment to get those into the hands of ukrainian weapons, and

those are defensive weapons and are not meant for offensive purposes against any country. we feel very proud of the contribution and the commitment we have had to helping the ukrainians defend themselves. with the question of the deployment of forces to defend nato territory. our view is in addition to the 80,000 strong u.s. force presence in europe today that is showing in poland and romania in particular, and also through the deployment of air squadrons to the baltics as we had a few days ago, and other significant moves, a carrier in the mediterranean, for the first time in 30 years actually flew the nato flag and american flag, that we have been forward-leaning and robust in defending and assuring our nato allies. you don't have to take it from me, talk to the president of poland or the president of romania about the satisfaction that the united states stepped

up alongside other nato allies to detour and ensure our presence along the flank. >> is the president looking at sanctions ahead of an invasion any differently to this point? >> the president believes sanctions are intended to detour, and they have to be set up in a way where if putin moves then the costs are imposed, and we believe that has logic on it's own merits, and we believe the most important fundamental for anything that unfolds in this crisis, whether through diplomacy or as a result of military actions the west be strong and united and determined to operate with common purpose, and he believes the sanctions

imposed take why in lockstep with others puts us in a position to respond in the most united way possible, and that will pay dividends for us immediately and in the years to come. >> our understanding is there was a meeting last night in the situation room to talk about russia and that you and secretary blinken are using sharper language in the timing, and is there something that prompted the meeting last night and changed the administration's assessment overnight? >> i will not speak to internal deliberations and not getting into the specifics of intelligence information, but what i will say is for sometime now, including out of my own very mouth, we have been talking about how we had entered the window where any day now a military action could be taken. that was the formula i was using several days ago.

now, as we gain more information, our view that military action could occur any day now and could occur before the end of the olympics is only growing in terms of its robustness so i could stand here and say that's a very distinct possibility. i just want to say two things. first, we can't predict the exact determination that putin would make if and when he makes a determination, so all we can say is that the strong possibility of action, the distinct possibility of action in a relatively near term timeframe including along the timeframe i laid out and blinken blade out, it's backed up by information that we continue to acquire day by day, including over the course of the past few days. >> do you believe that -- can

you delve into it a little bit, why would russia risk provoking china during the olympics? can you speak more broadly to the china and russia emerging alliance here on certain issues and how much does that concern you? >> i would say three things about this. first, russia's calculous, vesa vis-a-vis china, whether they are going to upset china, and to the extent they are giving a win wink and a not to an invasion, and i believe china will come to suffer consequences for that, and finally i would say we do not believe china can compensate

russia for the losses due to sanctions and export controls and the like. just one more thing, on the broader issue of china and russia, because there was a lot of hype about the statement they put out and it was a notable statement that we have taken a careful look at. i said this before and i want to say it again and then i will leave because jen is standing up, and it's well past my time to go. the united states under the biden administration has confidence in us and in the west. we are 50% plus of global gdp, and china and russia are less than 20%. we have innovation and entrepreneurship, and now we are more united and more purposeful and dynamic than we have been in a long time, we are well situated to deal with a threat

posed to us by those two you just mentioned. >> to be clear, you can come as long as you want. i just don't want to get in trouble with your team when we ask you to come back the next time. >> i apologize for the confusion. the president is still in a meeting, and we will monitor when he gets out of the meeting. if you want to come back, sorry, we did not want you to miss the president's departure. he is still meeting, so -- >> they are clearing up some of the logistics, some of the press wanted to leave to go with the president as part of the pool for the president's travel, and that's what that disruption was there in the middle. curious to see what she's being asked right now. let's listen. >> is the president going to be talking to european leaders?

>> the president just spoke with a number of european counterparts, as well as trudeau. have you seen the readout of the call with prime minister trudeau? this is what happens when you don't bring your phone out here. here you go. today prime minister trudeau was obviously part of the planned meeting as well and he also had a separate meeting with him where they discussed the ongoing block aid of key bridges in united states, including sweetwater, and emerson, and the leaders agreed the individuals obstructing the bridges, and it's causing serious affects including slowdowns and production and plant closures and the prime minister promised quick action in enforcing the

law and the president thanked him for the steps he and other canadian authorities are taking to restore the passages and bridges. to resolve the disruption, the two leaders agreed to stay in close lunch. i wanted to have you that component. in terms of this weekend, as you know the president will be at camp david which is fully equipped to have engagements of all sorts including with his national security team or counterparts, and we will keep you all abreast of that as we have done to date, but he will be at camp david. i would expect he will be engaged closely with his teams here as well as his foreign counterparts. >> when will president biden meet with senate republicans and the judiciary committee -- >> let's talk about what we just heard from the national security

adviser, jake sullivan on russia and ukraine. he is imploring americans to leave ukraine, just as president biden did in an interview with our own lester holt, imploring americans to leave tphour, and jake saying the risk is high enough and the threat immediate enough, and the president telling lester holt that american troops are not going to go into ukraine in order to get americans out. american troops will not be in a fight with russia. he says that would start world war iii. let's go to chief foreign affairs correspondent, andrea mitchell. kelly o'donnell noted earlier in the day that jake sullivan doesn't just drop by the press briefings just to say hello, when he comes he has news, and certainly today this is the most serious we have seen this administration on the threat from russia. what they believe now seems to

be an immediate threat from russia. >> absolutely. first of all, i think he wanted to clarify and deny published reports on two other networks that there had been intelligence showing a decision by vladimir putin to invade. he said they have not seen that final decision, but what they have seen from the information they gathered in the last few days, and information obviously can be intelligence, as well as what you are seeing from your own eyes on the ground, the massive escalation that continues day by day on all sides, land, sea and air, all sides of the -- three sides of ukraine as well as the black sea. what they are seeing literally is enough for russia to be capable for a significant military action which would advance with artillery and bombing as well as a march on kyiv, and taking kyiv and other

signature cities and territory. this is about as clear a warning and that the window is closing, the window as secretary blinken just said overnight in australia does not have to wait for the end of the olympics on the 20th, that the window is now, it could be immediate, in the near future or anytime this week before the 20th. this is as clear of a warning, as you just pointed out. president biden first said to lester yesterday, and what he emphasized now, he said the president will not risk the lives of american men and women, soldiers, to go in and rescue people that had many warnings to leave, and you should leave now while you have commercial air and rail travel, and the hours, they can turn off the lights in

kyiv, theoretically. they could interrupt cell service. you won't be able to get an airplane or any commercial planes because they would stop because of the insurance considerations, and we have seen that before in and around iraq and afghanistan, and no question to american civilians, people sometimes tend to not believe these warnings, and some listen to russian propaganda and say it's the americans and the ukrainians and nato who are precipitating this, but he emphasized any deployments so far have been to defend and detour a russian aggression. i rarely have seen this kind of warning in past military engagements where whether we were about to do it, or whether we were anticipating an attack.

this kind of warning from the national security adviser in the briefing room is a serious warning, indeed. >> the tone of it alone, and the fact that the national security adviser would come out to say to americans, movement may not be hindered but cut off entirely, and then to detail what could happen, saying russia has the capacity for aerial bombing, that's what jake sullivan said, for missile attacks that would not be more indiscriminate. >> you were saying there would be a change in the way people were feeling about what was about to happen. hearing jake sullivan today, hearing that briefing by him, what can you tell us about what it feels like where you are? >> reporter: well, here it doesn't feel like very much.

this is not an area where many people speak english. they are not watching the briefing rooms and the white house, but they are watching russian-language television, and we are close to the russia border here and many people speak russian rather than ukrainian, and they are following the line in general that the government, that president zelensky has been following, this is not a big deal and ukraine has gone through this before. just a few hours ago i was out talking to people, and i would ask the question, do you think russia will invade? they looked at me like i was crazy. what are you talking about? that could never happen. there's almost two kinds of reality, and i think you are seeing that with the zelensky

administration, and he's relying the threats to them, and he said he would not be responsible or couldn't comment on how they are messaging it to the ukrainian people. the way they are messaging it to the ukrainian people consistently, and we will see if that changes tonight, but it's we have seen this before and don't panic because they don't have a panic, and so far we have not seen a panic. i was out today with the civil defense forces in the city and they tested the emergency response system just to see that it worked. they only tested one lamp post for 15 seconds and they didn't ring the alarm because they did not want to frighten anybody. when i asked the self defense official whether he thought russia would invade, he looked to the left and right and did not want to contradict his government with his answer.

what we are seeing and hearing here is different than what we just saw with the national security adviser. >> do you think the lines of the government will change now that we have had the national security adviser of this country that gave a warning to americans still there? >> president zelensky is trying not to panic his people and keep the economy going, and there were others that were more closely aligned with the american point of view, and i assume the national security adviser and military, they can see what is surrounding them. president zelensky as a novelist

politician, and so he wants the help, he wants the military support, but he doesn't want to acknowledge the vulnerability of his own government. one of the scenarios, one of the most likely scenarios is whatever russia does do, if they do take military action, even if they don't do something as aggressive as occupying and taking the capitol is they will still try through cyber and propaganda and through false flags and protests that they will try to undercut the zelensky government, bring it down and replace it with more, you know, pro moscow ukrainians, of which there are many, particularly from the east, which is already, you know, for all intents and purposes, russian territory. >> jake sullivan was also reiterating what we heard from this administration, that russia would have a false flag, a

pretense for invading ukraine. has anything changed in the recent days? >> reporter: it hasn't changed dramatically, the tone that is coming out of russia. the tone has always been that russia has forward deployed because it needs to save russians, it needs to save the pro russian community here. and vladimir putin's argument that ukraine should never be part of nato, from his perspective is a peace-making argument, and he says russia holds crimea, and if ukraine were to join nato, ukraine would feel so powerful and emboldened that it would try and take back crimea and therefore world war iii erupts, and he saying by

denning nato membership, he's saving the world from world war iii, and by building up this presence he's protecting the pro russia ukrainian population. we have not seen a particular incident, the false flag, the spark where russia could use to say all bets are off now and we have to go in and cross that line to save our fellow russian patriots inside ukraine, and that could come, and russia could decide to do this by surprise. it's just one possible scenario. the other thing we have not been talking about this in all of this that has become central, today, and it's the world olympics. a lot of the intelligence guesstimates as to whether putin would invade now, later in the month, and some are talking

about troop buildup or the topography, and others say the olympics. ukraine and the olympics are deeply tied together. when russia hosted the games, when putin himself was the master of ceremonies in sochi, in 2014, that is when the ukraine broke away. that's when the pro russian president -- this was right before the closing ceremonies, by the way, when the pro-russian president left the country and proeuropean and prodemocracy or revolutionaries took over and run that today. there's a symmetry, putin was

personally humiliated because he lost it during the closing ceremonies, and now eight years later, he took it back. >> that is interesting timing. richard, i want to ask you about the ukrainian military and how prepared they are and what they are doing. jake sullivan said a few moments ago that russia could take a significant amount of ukraine, and that includes major cities like kyiv. >> reporter: the russian military is vast, it is well-equipped and if it were to go against the ukrainian military, the assessment is ukrainian military would fight for days and then have to go underground and form a resistance. there's a difference between taking a city and occupying a city, and some of the scenarios that are out there, and, again, they are all scenarios, and they

are to cut off cities and surround them, but not to go in house to house. these battalion tactical groups russia assembled, there's a lot of teeth and not much tail. good for attacking but not for occupying. to get occupy a city, you have to get out of the city and get out of your vehicles and go in and know the population, and it's different than cutting off a city or country or roads and attacking military targets and forcing a government collapse. yes, the russian military force has a lot of power, a lot of power to overwhelm this country should they choose to do it, but occupying it is a different prospect and would involve russia send more troops and set up a local administration. most analysts i have been speaking to is more likely they want to change the government by pressure from within and pressure from outside as well,

and how much pressure from the outside? i think we'll see soon. >> one more question on nato and what the united states is doing. the administration has been abundantly clear they are not go into ukraine with soldiers, it's not going to happen, and they have put soldiers in places like poland for nato defense, and why is the united states feel they need to build up nato defense is russia is on the border of ukraine. >> nato can and most likely will take a meeting of its council, the nato atlantic council, which is the unit that decides on a military action, and at that point they would ask for the

rapid deployment force, which would involve the other 8,500 standby american troops, who were standing by and placed on that order more than a week ago, and they would be deployed to the rapid reaction force. so poland and other naught yoe members. but they will not engage inside ukraine because ukraine is not a nato member. >> andrea mitchell will and richard engel, thank you for breaking that down. >> i just a message which we're going share. israel told its people, the citizens to get out of ukraine. given the threat level and the reducing the footprint of its embassy and family members from the embassy to go home. they're telling all civilians to leave right away. >> andrea mitchell and richard engel, thank you. ukraine prepares for a potential

russian unsahratian. ukrainian military and the people who live near the front line are bracing themselves for the horrors that can come. 14,000 people have died in clashes between the ukrainian army and the russian separatists. sky news reports from a small town in the contested dombas in eastern ukraine. >> war is the only business in this industrial park. the once bustling factory now a bristling front line separatists are only a few dozen meters away. almost daily they mach their presence known including as a top general paid a visit. >> what is that noise? >> what is that noise? >> translator: russian forces

firing. >> slim shelter here. >> we've been told to move out of this area quite quickly. we heard gunfire from the russia backed separatists. the front line is very close to where we are. we move to a safer distance. incidents like this are routine. they're starting new exercises in the north and south of the country, a response to russia massing more than 100,000 troops around its borders. the head of all ground forces had a message for the russian soldiers. n soldiers

>> but this is a town that's already suffered so much. a partner scarred after separatists tried but failed to take control of this area in 2017. lufz shattered like those of this 9-year-old sasha and her grandmother. she was 4 when a shell exploded near a house she was visiting with her mom. with her mom >> marcia was just 33. >> marcia was just 33. >> they only have each other now. a priceless bond with so much else broken. deborah hanes, sky news, eastern

ukraine. >> our thanks to deborah hanes. now turning to the other breaking news. this one on pediatric vaccines. pfizer pulled the emergency use application for covid-19 vaccines for kids under 5. there was not enough evidence to move forward with the process. fuser asks the fda to review the data on two doses earlier this month. even then the drug maker new older churn would ultimately require a third dose. still pfizer was hoping to get the green light and start the rollout before that third dose was fully reviewed. joining me now is the director of the vaccine education center and children's hospital of philadelphia. he is also a member of the fda vaccine ands related biological products advisory committee. thank you. i think people were confused when they initially asked for this approval for these two doses even though they studied a third. what does it mean to visit pulled? >> it is delayed more than

pulled. we were about to be asked next tuesday was would we agree with allowing for a rollout on what is clearly a three dose product after having data on only two doses? and so that was an unusual request. frankly, i'm glad they pulled back, let's forget all the data on three dose which will be in hand by april. now we can make a more informed choice. >> there are a lot of parents out there now saying this feels like a dagger. they were waiting for these vaccines for their little ones. how disappointed should parents be that this is going to be delayed? >> i think they should be encouraged by the fact that we want to look at all the data. we want to make sure this vaccine is safe before we roll it out. this is just being cautious at a time when we need to be cautious. these children -- we want to make sure if we vaccinate people, we're going to protect them in a safe manner. pulling back right now, getting the data is the right thing to do. it should be encouraging that we're not trying to push this too quickly. >> the children between 6 months and 2 years old, they had a

better reaction to the two doses. tell me if i'm wrong. why did they just not segment then to 6-year-olds to try to get approval for them and leave the 2 to 5-year-olds for another batch of research? >> right. the child who was left 2 years of age and less had a better immune response. but not necessarily better efficacy. the 3 to 4-year-old didn't meet the defind criteria for immune response. who knows? once we see all the data, we haven't seen in i data yet. we're in an age of science by press release. i think once we see all the data that we can make a better -- give better advice to the fda. >> are you seeing many young kids in the hospital with covid-19? >> the last time i was on service was a few weeks ago, yeah, we made it to almost two dozen children. but right now the numbers in our hospitals dramatically decline. not just in terms of people, children admitted for covid-19, but children admitted with

covid. in other words, coming into hospital infected with covid-19 even though that's not really the reason they're coming in. the numbers are definitely dropping dramatically in philadelphia. >> to go back to the pfizer delay, it is about effectiveness or is it about safety here? is it that the vaccine wasn't safe or was it about the vaccine not yet being proven to be effective? >> i think it's just not having all the data yet. this was always going to be a vaccine. so why approve it as a two dose vaccine when you know there is a third dose out there? you don't know about the safety or efficacy of the third dose. makes sense to wait. i'm glad they've done this. >> thank you so much for joining us, doctor, and helping us understand what happened here today. parents are disappointed. delay is better. >> that's going to do it for me today. what a wild day. garret haake picks our coverage next. haake picks our coverage next

why don't you do cool spins? uh, people need to read it. i can't read it. [ chuckles ] that's 'cause you're like 4. 4 1/2. switch to progressive, and you can save hundreds. you know, like the sign says. age is just a number. and mine's unlisted. try boost® high protein with 20 grams of protein for muscle health. versus 16 grams in ensure high protein. boost® high protein also has key nutrients for immune support. boost® high protein.

inner voice (furniture maker): i'm constantly nodding... ...because i know everything about furniture ...but with the business side... ...i'm feeling a little lost. quickbooks can help. an easy way to get paid, pay your staff, and know where your business stands. new business? no problem. success starts with intuit quickbooks. switching wireless carriers is easy with xfinity. s just lean on ourh helpful switch squad to help you save with xfinity mobile.

they can help break up with your current carrier for you and transfer your info to your new phone. giving you a fast and easy experience that can save you hundreds a year on your wireless bill. visit your nearest xfinity store and see how the switch squad can help you switch and save. switch to xfinity mobile and get connected to the most reliable 5g network. talk with our helpful switch squad at your local xfinity store today. as we come on the air, the biden administration and multiple world leaders rushing to prepare for and deescalate what could be a russian invasion in ukraine. what we're learning about the two new top level meetings inside the white house and the new warnings to americans still in ukraine. >> we're in the window when an invasion could begin at any time. any american in ukraine should