so a lot is happening as we come on the air this monday afternoon. you're looking at all of it on one side of your screen. any minute at the white house we expect to hear from press secretary jen psaki and the national security advisor, jake sullivan, with president biden today calling russian president vladimir putin a war criminal after those reports and images from the ukrainian city of bucha, doubling down on his position. we also expect to hear from the

pentagon for their update. that's set for about 30 minutes from now with a senior defense official telling nbc news today while the u.s. can't independently confirm the reports out of bucha, they have no reason to doubt ukraine's claims of what they call atrocities. we're also following two live meetings on capitol hill. the rules committee voting whether to recommend find two aides to former president trump in contempt of congress because they refused to go along with subpoenas of the january 6th committee. the senate judiciary committee about to returning from recess for a vote on the nomination of judge ketanji brown jackson to the supreme court. we are watching all of it. we've got our team here for it all. i'm hallie jackson. good to be with you, along with kelly o'donnell at the white house. ali arouzi is in ukraine. courtney kube is at the pentagon and we have the senior advisor to nato's supreme allied commander. here is what we are watching

this hour. fury from the rest of the world, looking at those horrific images out of the kyiv suburb of bucha where president zelenskyy was today saying what happened there is genocide. those images are disturbing. they are disturbing. it's important to show them but we're only going to show them once. bodies of what appear to be innocent ukrainians lining the streets. some victims had their hands tied behind their backs. russian troops shot them execution style at close range. some apparently just riding their bikes when they were shot. president biden now threatening more sanctions on russia and pointing to what happened in bucha as evidence that vladimir putin is indeed a war criminal, he says. >> i got criticized for calling putin a war criminal. well, the truth of the matter, we saw what happened at bucha. this warrants him -- he is a war criminal. this guy is brutal. what's happening in bucha is outrageous. and everyone has seen it.

>> we just got a new assessment in from the pentagon which says about two-thirds of the russian military has left kyiv, but a senior u.s. defense official is warning russia may be getting refitted, resupplied and possibly reinforced with more manpower. let me go straight to kelly o'connell there at the white house. i have to imagine that the situation in this ukrainian town of bucha is going to be front and center in this discussion. >> reporter: we expect that is why that jake sullivan was added to this afternoon's briefing. the president, when he got off of marine one this morning, made a point of coming over to reporters instead of reporters trying to draw him in. that's an important distinction in the rhythms of the president. he wanted to make that statement about what has happened in ukraine and specifically the events that he is calling new events of war crimes. and he was asked specifically if he thinks it is genocide. he made a distinction. it will be interesting to see

how the white house describes where they draw the line and under what sort of legal authority between war crimes and genocide. ukrainians certainly take it very personally and believe that they are as a people the victims of this russian assault and the president is viewing it in a somewhat different context. but the key thing from the president is he is saying this needs to not just be talked about as war crimes, but the information needs to be assessed, documented and ultimately brought toward trial, which is a step up from the president in what he has said about the conduct of this war from vladimir putin. he also talked about bringing new sanctions in response to these attacks and the savagery toward civilians that has been documented by some of the images that we have seen coming out of ukraine. so we expect to learn more from the national security advisor about that and perhaps some additional information they have about how they would proceed on

sanctions and maybe some new details about what they have learned, hallie. >> we are inside the two-minute warning for that briefing. >> reporter: i need to go as well. >> kelly, thank you. ali, let me go to you on what we saw from president zelenskyy this morning. he considers this genocide and it is going to be very difficult to negotiate with the russians when you look at what russia has done here. >> reporter: that's right, hallie. he's saying sanctions isn't enough given what's happened in bucha and the surrounding areas. he's saying the ukrainians need more defense. they need the migs to fight the russians in the air and the systems to intercept missiles. he's calling this genocide what's happened there. he went to visit bucha today. he walked around and is seeing those scenes we've seen on video

and he's been very upset by them. he's calling this a slaughter of civilians in the city of bucha. the mayor of bucha had said at least 20 people had been shot execution-style in the back of their hand some of them with their hands tied behind their backs. i don't know if we have time but we can take a listen to what one witness saw there. let's take a listen. >> reporter: all of a sudden the russians started shooting. they hit him above the heel, crushing the bone, and he fell down. the shooter shouted "don't scream, or i will shoot" and they turned away. then they shot off his left leg completely. then they shot him all over the chest. and another shot went slightly below the temple. it was a controlled shot to the

head. >> reporter: i mean just horrifying accounts. not only do they have to witness these sort of accounts, these people are being buried in mass graves or very shallow graves because there is no time to give them a proper burial, a proper funeral. so just distressing account out of distressing account out of bucha and many of the other cities around the suburbs around bucha as well. >> it is distressing to say the least, horrific to hear. courtney and angie, courtney, een you have the briefing to get to. jake sullivan has just taken the white house podium. we want to listen in. >> we had already concluded that russia committed war crimes in ukraine and the evidence from bucha shows further evidence of war crimes. as the president said, we will work with the world to ensure there is full accountability for these crimes. we are also working intensively with our european allies on further sanctions to raise the pressure and raise the cost on putin and on russia.

today i'd like to take a step back and talk about where we are and where we think we are going. russia wants its invasion of ukraine more than a month ago. when russia started this war, its initial aims were to seize the capital of kyiv, replace the zelenskyy government, and take control of much, if not all of ukraine. russia believed that it could accomplish these objectives swiftly and efficiently. but russia did not account for the strength of the ukrainian military and the ukrainian people or the amount or effectiveness of military assistance provided by the united states and its allies and partners. the ukrainian people backed resolutely by the united states and other nations have held firm. kyiv and other cities still stand. the ukrainian military has performed exceptionally well. many ukrainian civilians have joined local militias in addition to using nonviolent means to resist.

vladimir putin also believed that the west would not hold together in support of ukraine. russia was surprised that president biden and the united states were so effective in rallying the world to prepare for and respond to the invasion. and after president biden reinforced and reinvigorated western unity at a series of summits in brussels just 11 days ago, the russians have now realized that the west will not break. at this juncture, we believe that russia is revising its war aims. russia is repositioning its forces to concentrate its offensive operations in eastern and parts of southern ukraine, rather than target most of the territory. all indications are that russia will seek to surround and overwhelm ukrainian forces in eastern ukraine. we anticipate that russian commanders are now executing their redeployment from northern ukraine to the region around the donbas in eastern ukraine. russian forces are already well

on their way of retreating from kyiv to belarus, as russia likely prepares to deploy dozens of additional battalion tactical groups, constituting tens of thousands of soldiers to the front line in ukraine's east. we assess russia will focus on defeating ukrainian forces in the broader donesk provinces which is more territory than russian proxies controlled before the invasion began in late february. russia could use any tactical successes it achieves to propagate a narrative of progress and try to discount or downplay prior military failures. in order to protect any territory it seizes in the east, we expect that russia could potentially extend its force projection and presence even deeper into ukraine beyond those

provinces, at least that is their intention and their plan. in the south, we also expect that russian military forces will do what they can to try to hold the city of kherson, to enable their water flow to crimea and block mykolaiv. in the north russia will likely keep pressure on kharkiv. during this renewed grounding offensive in eastern ukraine, moscow will continue to launch air and missile strikes across the rest of the country to cause military and economic damage and, frankly, to cause terror, including against cities like kyiv, odesa, kharkiv and lviv. russia's goal in the ending is to weaken ukraine as much as possible. russia still has forces available to outnumber ukraine's and they are concentrating its military power on fewer lines of attack. but this does not mean that

russia will succeed in the east. so far russia's military has struggled to achieve its war aims while ukraine's military has done an extraordinary and courageous job, demonstrating its will to fight and putting its considerable capabilities to use. the next stage of this conflict may very well be protracted. we should be under no illusions that russia will adjust its tactics, which have included and will likely continue to include wanton and brazen attacks on civilian targets. and while moscow may be interested now in using military pressure to find a political settlement, if this offensive in the east proves to gain some traction, russia could regenerate forces for additional goals, including trying to gain control of more territory within ukraine. now, as the images of bucha so powerly reinforce, now is not the time for complacency. the ukrainians are defending their homeland courageously and

the united states will continue to back them with military assistance, humanitarian aid and economic support. we know that military assistance is having a critical impact on this conflict. ukrainians are effectively defending themselves with u.s.-produced air defense systems and anti-tank systems such as stingers and javelins as well as radar systems that give the ukrainians early warning and target data and multiple other forms of arms and munitions. the administration is working around the clock to fulfill ukraine's main security assistance requests, delivering weapons from u.s. stocks where they are available and facilitating the delivery of weapons by allies, where allied systems better suit ukraine's needs. this is happening at what the pentagon described as an unprecedented pace. last friday we announced than additional $300 million in security assistance, bringing the u.s. commitment to $1.65

billion in weapons and ammunition since russia's invasion and $2.3 billion since the beginning of the administration. the latest package includes laser-guided rocket systems, puma unmanned aerial systems, armored high mobility multi-purpose wheeled vehicles and more. material is arriving every single day, including today, from the united states and our allies and partners. we will have further announcements of additional military assistance in the coming days. we are working with ukrainians, as i said, to identify solutions to their priority requests. in some cases, that means sourcing systems from other countries, because the u.s. either doesn't have the system or doesn't have a version that could effectively be integrated into the fight. sorts of systems like this include longer range antiaircraft systems, coastal

defense systems. let's take coastal defense systems as an example. president biden went to brussels to talk to key allies 11 days ago about how to get coastal defense systems to ukraine because there is not at the moment a good u.s. option. last week, the uk announced at the close of its donor conference that coastal defense systems would be provided to the ukrainians. it is a good example how working with allies and partners we are successfully responding to ukraine's requests. we expect additional new capabilities to be delivered in the near future. we can't always advertise what is being delivered out of deference for our allies and partners but we are moving with speed and efficiency to deliver. even as russia acknowledges the failure of its initial plans and shifts its goals, three elements of this war remain constant. first, russia will continue to use its military to try to

conquer and occupy sovereign ukrainian territory. second, the ukrainian military and people will continue to effectively and bravely defend their homeland. and third, the united states will stand by them for as long as it takes. russia has tried to subjugate ukraine and it's failed. it may succeed in taking some territory through sheer force and brutality, but no matter what happens over the coming weeks, it is clear that russia will never be welcome by the ukrainian people. instead, its gains will be temporary as the brave ukrainian people resist russian occupation and carry on their fight for an independent, sovereign nation that they so richly deserve. with that, i'd be happy to take your questions. >> jake, can i ask you about the president's call for a war crimes trial for vladimir putin. what are the mechanics of how the presidenies that playing

out? would it be at the international court? >> we have to consult with our allies and partners on what makes most sense as a mechanism moving forward. obviously the icc is one venue where war crimes have been tried in the past but there have been other examples in other conflicts of other mechanisms to be set up. there's work to be done to set up the specifics of that. between now and then every day what we are focused on is continuing to apply pressure to the russian economy and provide weapons to the ukrainian people to defend themselves. >> forgive me, are there other forums that might include something like the u.n. security council might adopt, is that what you're suggesting, the u.n. security council? >> well, obviously with russia as a permanent member of the u.n. security council, it would be difficult to imagine that they would not attempt to exercise their veto to block something. but there have been creative solutions to the question of accountability in the past and i'm not going to prejudge what solution would be applied here or what forum or venue would be applied here. what i will say is there has to

be accountability for these war crimes. that accountability has to be felt at every level of the russian system and the united states will work with the international community to ensure that accountability is applied at the appropriate time. >> the president was careful to say he does not see this as genocide. many ukrainians believe that it is because their nation, their people are being attacked. where is the line in your view, and how have you counseled the president between genocide and war crimes? >> this is something we of course continue to monitor every day. based on what we have seen, we have seen atrocities, we have seen war crimes. we have not yet seen a level of systematic deprivation of life of the ukrainian people to rise to the level of genocide. but again, that's something we will continue to monitor. there is not a mechanical formula for this. there is a process that we have run just recently at the state department to ultimately determine that the killing, the mass killing of rohingya in burma constituted genocide.

that was a lengthy process based on amassing evidence over a considerable period of time and involving, frankly, mass death, mass incarceration of significant portion of the rohingya population. we will look to a series of indicators along those lines to ultimately make a determination in ukraine. but as the president said today, we have not arrived at that conclusion today. >> i just have three quick questions. when you say the next date will be protracted. do you mean years? russia has been in donbas since 2014. what's protracted? >> we can't predict. but so far this conflict has lasted a little more than five weeks. yet in that time we've seen an enormous amount of killing and death and also an enormous amount of bravery and success on the part of the ukrainian forces. what i'm saying when i say protracted, it may not be a matter of just a few more weeks before all is said and done.

that first, quote, unquote, phase of the conflict as the russians have put it was measured in weeks. this next phase could be measured in months or longer. >> in the beginning the consensus seemed to be russia was unstoppable, we just had to make the price as high as possible. is the new thinking that ukraine could actually win? do you agree with that? and what would winning look like? >> we believe that our job is to support the ukrainians. they will set the military objectives, they will set the objectives at the bargaining table and i'm quite certain they'll set those at success and we'll give them every tool that we can to help them achieve that success but we are not going to define the outcome of this for the ukrainians. that is up to them to define and us to support. we do have confidence in the bravery, skill and capacity of the ukrainian armed forces. >> one quick thing on chemical weapons. the president and other allies have promised consequences without saying what they would be. last time russia used chemical weapons, there were sanctions

but not very stiff ones. are you ready to define consequences? >> so i'm going to say the same thing i've said from this podium that the president has said from a podium down the hall in this same building, which is russia will pay a severe price. we have communicated to them directly. we have coordinated with our allies and partners and i'm not going further in terms of the specifics. >> the administration initially did not call this war crimes. eventually they did after what they saw on the ground. do you think that's going to be the case with calling it a genocide? >> well, so, first, it's not just that we sit around and debate terms and ultimately decide to apply a term based against static circumstances. we watch as things unfold. we gather evidence. we continue to develop facts. as we gather evidence and as we got the facts together, we ultimately came to the conclusion that war crimes were committed. in fact i would say on this front president biden was a leader. he went out and said putin is a war criminal. many of you raised your eyebrows

at that. many people out in the public raised their eyebrows at that. and now you see the scenes coming out of bucha today. so he's not going hesitate to call a spade a spade, to call it like he sees it and neither is the u.s. government. as the facts develop, could we see ourselves reaching a different conclusion? of course we could but it will be based on evidence and facts. >> two more quick ones. on the sanctions that the president was talking about today, should we expect those this week or what's the timing? >> you can expect further sanctions announcements this week and we are coordinating with our allies and partners on what the exact parameters of that will be. but this week we will have additional economic pressure elements to announce. >> my last question quickly, you keep using the word retreat instead of reposition. how much is that due to the spring conditions, the muddy conditions that are on the grounding in ukraine? >> the reason i use the word retreat is quite simple common sense. it's not some fancy technical

military term. it's a term all of us understand. if you run pell mell for an objective and you get stopped and you pull back. that's what i would call retreat. that's what happened to the russians in kyiv. they attacked kyiv, they failed. they started to get beaten backwards by the ukrainian military and they ultimately retreated back across the border into belarus. now, with those forces, as i said in my opening comments, they are not intending to stand pat. they are going to reposition those forces to go after a different objective, a scaled-down objective but nonetheless a dangerous and disturbing objective, which is to conquer and occupy territory in eastern ukraine. and now it's our job to help the ukrainian people have the tools they need to stymie that objective. that is what we're intent on doing at this point. >> i know you're not going to call it a genocide, but does the u.s. government have information that you can use to

independently corroborate ukraine's allegations about atrocities? >> so we have obviously got access to a lot of the information that you all have. we also have information that the ukrainians have provided us directly, and we will also work with fact-finders, independent fact-finders as we go forward to get to a level of documentation that allows us to help build very strong dossiers of evidence for war crimes prosecutions and that is what we intend to do. on the question of the genocide determination, obviously we will continue on a daily basis to have consultations with ukrainians to reach determinations. if at some point we reach the judgment that there in fact has been a level of atrocity, a level of killing, a level of intentional activity that rises to meet our definition of genocide, we'll call it for what it is. we have never hesitated to call out the russians for what they have done in ukraine and we will

not start now. >> one more question on france, jake. they are -- they have suggested a hefty eu-wide tariff should be imposed as opposed to a blanket ban on russian imports into the eu. does the u.s. support that and is that what you're planning to do next in terms of sanctions? >> we are having conversations as i stand here at this podium with senior officials in the main european capitals as well as in brussels on the full range of sanctions options, including sanctions options or pressure options that relate to energy. i'm not going to negotiate that out of this podium. we want to make sure we're able to pull together a consensus. >> the kremlin is denying the images out of bucha saying they don't show any apparent execution. what is the u.s. doing to try and expose russia's actions to its own citizens? what can we do to sort of fight this disinformation war? >> first i would note that the

kremlin is working overtime to close down the information space inside of russia, which is not exactly the action of a strong and confident government that feels really good about the story that it would be telling if it were allowing independent news sources to come in. second, we are of course supporting through a variety of means the provision of information about these atrocities and about the entire effort by the russians to unjustly and unlawfully invade a sovereign neighboring country, not just to the russian people but to people everywhere. we will continue to do that. >> is it your sense that the atrocities that we're seeing in bucha are based on orders coming from putin or his senior military officials or is there a chance here that this is russian forces acting on their own and is there even a distinction? >> i don't want to get into the specific intelligence related to bucha at this point. but what i will say is as i said at the outset, even before the

invasion happened, we shared information with the public, with the press, including from this podium that russia was intending as a matter of policy, not as a matter of one guy in a unit in a suburb of kyiv, but as a matter of policy in this war to kill dissidents, to kill those who caused problems for the occupation, and to impose a reign of terror across occupied territories within ukraine. what is what we are seeing play out. so, no, we do not believe this is just a random accident or the rogue act of a particular individual. we believe this was part of the plan. we declared it from this podium as part of the plan and now we are seeing it play out in real life in living color in these terrible, tragic images we are seeing come from bucha. >> can you talk a little bit about the evidence gathering

aspect that's going to be crucial to combatting disinformation and what russians will say that ukrainian rebels are fighting us, that was legitimate warfare, what happened, that could be a tactic they're taking. so can you walk us through the evidence gathering, who's doing it, are people on the ground gathering it? how long does it take a build a case and what does it look like. >> i will directly answer your question, but i also think it is important for our team at the state department, which will take the lead on this, to give you a fully elaborate answer to this question in technical detail so that everybody understands exactly how this process works. but with that being said, there are four main sources of information that we will develop in an effort to help build the case for war crimes. the first is the information that we and our allies and partners gather through intelligence sources. and we within our intelligence community had previously stood

up a team to be able to document and analyze war crimes and work closely with the state department in doing so. we're also coordinating with key allies and partners who have their own capacities. the second is what the ukrainians themselves will do on the ground to develop this case, to document the forensics of these tragic and senseless killings in this particular instance and in other instances across ukraine. the third is international organizations, including the united nations but others also well. prominent international nongovernment organizations with real credibility and expertise in this area. and the fourth is all of you. because part of building this case is relying upon global independent media who has images, interviews, documentation. and when you put all of those four sources together, you can build, we believe, a package that can stand up to the relentless disinformation we are likely to see and have already started seeing from russia and

that ultimately the truth will withstand the assault on the truth that we can expect to come from moscow. >> jake, on former president trump, he's having save america rallies where he's decrying the biden administration, decrying the response that you all and the white house have been giving to this war in ukraine. he said if he was in office he would do it better, it wouldn't happen under him. what is your response to the former president, donald j. trump, saying these things about the current administration. >> i don't have a response to the former president. we are focused on getting the job done, getting the support to the ukrainian people that they need, applying unprecedented pressure to the russian economy and building a form of western unity that no one could have reasonably expected and we will sustain for the early weeks of the war and i'll leave the commentary of what the former president said to others. >> thanks, jake. to follow up on what you said about ukraine setting terms for any potential resolution, president zelenskyy said on

"face the nation" that with regard to any potential peace agreement, the important thing in this agreement are security guarantees, but he also said the u.s. has not provided any yet. is the u.s. considering that? and what would that look like? >> so we are in regular contact, and by regular i mean near daily contact. i personally am in near daily contact with my counterpart in the ukrainian government and we are talking constantly about how we can support a negotiated solution that defends ukraine sovereignty and territorial integrity. we are prepared to do our part to support that including ensuring that ukraine has the means to defend itself in the future. i'm not going to get into the specifics because i believe it's important that they have a protected space to be carried out. but you can rest assured that the united states is actively working in consultation with ukrainians to support their efforts at the peace table. >> a question on the sanctions.

you just said that you're under no illusions that russia will adjust its target. so what function will an additional sanctions package have when you announce it? >> i would say two things about sanctions. one is that sanctions are intended to impose costs so that russia cannot carry on these grotesque acts without paying a severe price for it. the other is to have an effect on russia's behavior over time. but as president biden has made clear repeatedly, we don't expect that that shift in behavior will be caused by sanctions overnight or in a week. it will take time to grind down the elements of russian power within the russian economy, to hit their industrial base hard, to hit the sources of revenue that have propped up this war and propped up the kleptocracy in russia. that's going to take some time to play out. but there's no better time than now to be working on that so the

costs end upsetting in and ends up sharpening russia's choices. so sanctions alone will not solve the problem but they are a critical tool in producing a better outcome to this conflict. >> how have the revelations about bucha prompted the u.s. or its allies to what kind of things will be provided. are tanks part of potential transfers that could be provided to the ukrainian military? >> i'm not going to get into certain specific systems because as i said at the outset there are operational sensitivities f our allies and partners about why we wouldn't speak about a particular capability like tanks. even before bucha, the united states was working with ukrainians on every item on its priority list and how we could go ahead and ensure that that could be provided to them. the only capability that we have discussed with them where there

has been a difference in perspective that has been played out in living color in this podium many times over is the direct facilitation from a u.s. air base in germany into contested airspace with mig 29s. before bucha we are working on a wide range of capabilities, including capabilities people here were writing we weren't prepared to provide. that wasn't right. it's hard for me to correct the record in every case because for very good reasons, some of these systems we cannot advertise, we cannot talk to you all about. but what i want to make clear as i said at the outset is the extent and depth of effort to acquire and transfer a variety of advanced weapons capabilities is extraordinary, it is unprecedented and it has been ongoing from well before the terrible images this weekend. >> one of the reasons the u.s. has set alternate venues is because the u.s. is not a

signatory. does that undercut the u.s. push to hold putin accountable when the u.s. is not a signatory to the international criminal court. >> the u.s. in the past has been able to collaborate with the international criminal court despite not being a signatory. there's a variety of reasons one might consider alternative venues. most importantly, this is not a decision the united states will make by itself. we are not going to make the call out of washington for the appropriate venue for accountability. that will be done in consultation with allies and with partners around the world. and i don't want to prejudge those conversations. they're ongoing. and what i can communicate is the very real, sustained and committed proposition that the united states has that we are going to ensure that there is accountability. >> jake, the u.s. had projected poland's plan for a peacekeeping force to protect civilians.

is that something that's being reconsidered given these atrocities? and is there any talk among the allies to do some type of operation? >> i don't quite accept the premise of the question. there have been various peacekeeping proposals floated. none of them have ever been given full shape or been formally put forward and suggested should actually be implemented. and so we continue to consult with our allies and partners, including poland, on what makes sense going forward. we have not yet seen a proposal that actually has been fleshed out that could be operationalized. the one thing that the united states has made clear throughout this is that it is not our intention to send u.s. soldiers to fight russian soldiers in ukraine. but in terms of the supply of capabilities. in terms of other steps to support the ukrainians, we continue to look at every possible option, including in consultation with our partners on that. i'll leave it at that.

thank you. >> come again. >> he will, i'm sure. he's probably our most frequent guest. i probably owe him something for that. okay, a couple of items for all of you at the top. today vice president harris and administration officials announced the biden-harris action plan for building better school infrastructure by leveraging funds from the bipartisan infrastructure law -- >> you have been listening to national security advisor jake sullivan with a series of headlines as relates to the war in ukraine and what he described as the further evidence of war crimes in the kyiv suburb of bucha, saying there is evidence that is not simply some kind of a rogue act. you heard the national security advisor describe what they expect to be russia's next action, which are concentrating its power on fewer lines of attack. specifically as we pull up the map here, in the eastern and southern parts of ukraine. not that he said that is an

indication they will be successful given the ukrainian resistance, but he also said that the u.s. is ready to announce along with allies more sanctions on russia this week because of what we have been seeing in bucha and additional military assistance too. you heard the national security advisor pressed a couple of distinction between the biden administration calling it war crimes versus genocide. he said we have not seen it rise to the level of genocide but that is a discussion that is ongoing. as we continue to see some of these images coming out of ukraine and as relates to the next push by the troops, by russian troops, he says they expect this to be a protracted conflict, meaning months or longer. let me go now to nbc's ali vitali and courtney kube. courtney, let me go to you first because you heard the national security advisor lay out the expectations for russia's next moves after what happened in bucha and he was unequivocal billion how horrific those

images out of bucha are. >> yeah, that's right. what a lot of our viewers may not know is bucha is just outside of kyiv. this is an area that has been surrounded by russian troops and bucha has had russian troops even inside of it for several weeks now. and now as these russian troops are starting to pull out of that area to move back and reposition back into many cases up north, the u.s., the world is starting to see what was happening there during these past few weeks. there hasn't been a whole lot of media coverage and seeing what's been going on there. now, according to a senior defense official, as of today about two-thirds of the russian troops that were arrayed in that area for the last month or so have pulled back. the belief is that they are moving back out, they are going to refit. they're going to figure out -- try to figure out some of the issues that they faced going south into kyiv over the last several weeks.

logistical issues, command and control issues. they'll try to work on that and then they'll move back around ukraine over to the eastern side of the country. the belief is that then they will move back into ukraine. then the focus is expected to be on the donbas area, that disputed area in the southeast part of the country. now, that being said, as the senior defense official and jake sullivan just alluded to, that is an assessment, a u.s. assessment of what the russians may be up to here. just because that may be their plan of action doesn't mean that kyiv and some of these areas around there are no longer under threat. in fact there still is some long-range fires, some missile strikes and some artillery that are targeting some of these cities where the russians have pulled out and moved away from. but again, the belief is that they're starting to refocus on a whole different part of the country. >> courtney kube, thank you. i know you have to get to that pentagon briefing. ali vitali, let me go to you posted up outside of the white house here. more sanctions coming this week

on russia given what we've seen in bucha and the biden administration being very careful not to describe what they are seeing there as genocide, which president zelenskyy when he was in bucha today did call it, as he has over the last 24 hours. >> yeah. they're being careful about those words, because really the theme of today's briefing is we are using words now with big implications. the word "war crime" then has lots of questions that spring from it. where to you adjudicate those war crimes? are they adjudicated at the hague? are they adjudicated in the u.n., where russia on the u.n. security council could veto any kind of vote on that? those were questions that were posed to jake sullivan today. of course drawing that delineation on the use of the word "genocide" even as zelenskyy uses it, that is a word that has implications as well in terms of rallying the community around other genocides. i was struck that sullivan did leave the door open there. the words he used were we watch

as things unfold. they are gathering evidence. i think it really underscored here that this is a moving target. it's one where our government as well as others are consistently watching what's happening on the ground and drawing new conclusions far from static. you see that even still as they're going to be putting more sanctions on already tightening sanctions as well, hallie. >> ali vitali, thank you so much. i want to bring in now the executive director of human rights watch, kenneth roth. mr. roth, thanks for being on with us this afternoon. >> thank you for having me. >> let me start to your reaction to what we have just heard from the white house and that briefing from the national security advisor calling what happened in bucha war crimes and stopping short as we just discussed of making this designation of genocide. >> there's no question that these are war crimes. if you are executing or mistreating a prisoner, that's a classic war crime. and at least some of the cases

in bucha seem to be like that. when you have people whose hands are bound and by all indications are executed, that's a classic war crime. other war crimes are the indiscriminate bombardment of civilian areas that we've seen in other parts of ukraine. so that is pretty straightforward. genocide is an entirely different crime. i have to say there's always this tendency to have charge inflation. you have like war crimes isn't bad enough, even though these are horrible crimes. genocide is a particular and requires an intent to eradicate in whole or in part in this case an ethnic or national group. the whole question is intent. it's not enough to have just a handful of executions. there has to be an effort to eradicate at least part of this group. so i think that's why the white house has backed away from that because that's a much more substantial charge and it requires a very extensive pattern in order to demonstrate that kind of intent. the other question that just came up is where can these war

crimes be prosecuted. the simple answer to that is at the international criminal court. in this case, ukraine is giving the court jurisdiction. that means any crime committed in the territory of ukraine, even by russia, which is not a party to the court, but if that crime is committed within ukraine, the court has jurisdiction. it has jurisdiction to prosecute not simply say the low-level soldier who might have executed someone. the court's real interest is the commanders. and in order to demonstrate command responsibility, that's what the criminal concept is called, you have to show either that the commander ordered the crime, which is often very hard to do, or more typically that they had knowledge of these crimes and didn't try to stop them. that's the real question now. can it be demonstrated that the chain of command potentially going all the way up to putin is aware of these crimes that are now all over the media and is not taking steps to stop it. that's a question of justice and

also a question for other civilians, for example in mariupol where some hundred thousand people are under russian occupation today. the response to what happened in bucha and other areas around kyiv has direct implications for the survival of people in mariupol. >> you've addressed one of the key questions that i had for you, mr. roth, which was exactly this issue of where would you like to see this. where ideally would this be prosecuted. let me ask you this. what have your teams seen on the ground that has given you the evidence to say, yes, these are war crimes. just tell me a little bit about what they are seeing and what your teams have come across. >> human rights watch investigators in ukraine have spoken directly to some of the eyewitnesses of these abuses. i could say that our report came out just as these photos emerged. so we are dealing with a period slightly before at least awareness of the photos but during a period contemporaneous with the crimes illustrated by

those photographs. in bucha, one direct witness said that russian troops rounded up some 40 people. they held them in the town square for questioning. they took their phones. and in the case of five young men, they forced them to kneel, they forced them to lift their shirts over their head, and one was just summarily executed with a gunshot to the head. in another case, in an area just to the east of kyiv, bucha is just to the west, there witnesses told us that russian troops went door to door. and in this particular case, they rounded up six men, led them away, assuring residents they'd be okay, and promptly executed them. their bodies were forced to just lie there for nine days. so these are just two illustrations of what would be a classic war crime, the execution of people in custody. and, you know, i fear that these

pictures we see of bodies strewn about are going to illustrate further ones. a mere body isn't evidence of a war crime. somebody could have killed in crossfire. there are various reasons why that person could be killed. but certainly the people whose arms or hands are bound, anything suggestive of somebody in custody who is then killed, that would be a war crime. >> kenneth roth, head of human rights watch, thank you very much for being on with us and helping us shine a light on what's happening inside ukraine. i appreciate it. as mentioned. john kirby has just taken the podium, taken the microphone. we want to listen as he briefs reporters on what's happening there. >> he reiterated the u.s. commitment to the provision of additional defensive assistance to bolster their capacity, and he highlighted that $300 million ukraine security assistance initiative package that i just talked about. he also expressed outrage at the

apparent atrocities committed in bucha and across ukraine and reiterated the u.s. commitment to using every tool available to help document and share information in an effort to hold accountable those responsible. and of course they have stayed in close contact and they will continue to stay in close contact. on the documents and evidence front, i want to stress that this is an administration effort. not dod specifically. that we in concert with so many other nations around the world will do what we can to make sure that clear evidence of these war crimes of documented and preserved for investigators to look at. i don't have anything specific to speak to in terms of dod capabilities with respect to that collection, but it's part of an interagency effort to make sure the war crimes are properly documented. and lastly -- not lastly. actually i have two more things. an exercise to talk about over the weekend, iceland and the u.s. 6 fleet kicked off the

biannual exercise northern viking with other allies in iceland. it will run through the 14th of april and demonstrates u.s. commitment to the defense of iceland and the greenland/iceland united kingdom gap as well as the strength of the 70-plus year defense relationship between the united states and iceland. u.s. navy and marine corps forces including the uss keer sarge, p-8 and maritime control aircraft and the henry j. kaiser class oiler and sailors from task force 68 and the virginia class attack submarine uss john warner will all participate. and then finally, while we're talking about naval issues, on friday the dod did release its annual freedom of navigation report for fiscal year 2021. i'll let you go look at the report. i won't give you the whole details, but it reports our comprehensive global freedom and

navigation program that seeks to challenge excessive maritime claims to preserve the rights, freedoms and uses of the sea and airspace guaranteed to all nations under international law. in fiscal year '21, u.s. forces challenged 37 different maritime

we can see any of those battalion tactical groups being actively resupplied and then reapplied into the fight. that hasn't really happened yet. that said, leta, we have seen efforts by the russian military to get more aggressive and go more on the offense in the

donbas. this is on the ground as they push south from that town called izium and push toward donbas, as they focus more of their area to donbas, as they press the wag inner group to add to their recruiting totals and then move those contractors into the donbas. certainly we have seen more kinetic activity, more military operations, if you will, in the donbas. clearly they are definitely putting a priority on that part of ukraine, we just haven't seen that there has been, out of the forces that are repositioning out of kyiv and chernihiv, we haven't seen them be reintroduced back into the fight yet. jen? >> do you have any indication, john, that these recent atrocities in bucha was carried out by the wag inner group, the chechens, the mercenary groups

that have been sent in, or was this widescale that is taking place in various cities? >> we don't know. we don't know exactly who committed these atrocities or what level or what the chain of command was, but clearly we certainly do not refute that they happened. >> and you talk about the difference in the kind of military aid now going from the drawdown weapons that are already -- off-the-shelf weapons you can send over. will you ever be going back to that and will there be a gap for this $300 million, will there be a gap in the flow of ukraine because of that? >> we certainly don't want a gap. that's why we'll expedite this as fast as we can so there isn't a gap. we're still on the $800 billion

drawdown the president recently signed. shipments arrived on that drawdown package over the course of the weekend. there will be another one arriving in the next 24 hours. we're prioritizing the kinds of capabilities in those shipments we know ukrainians need the most, javelins, stingers, uavs. all of that is being prioritized. our goal, i said it before, as fast as we can, as much as we can, and just to keep it going to make sure the ukrainians can continue to defend themselves. our goal would be no gap. on the first part of your question, i don't want to get ahead of the white house and the president. you heard jake sullivan just talk a little bit ago that there will be additional assistance to speak to in coming days, and i'll just leave it at that. you're not out of drawdown stockpiles and that'swhy you're going to this new -- >> i wouldn't characterize it as we're out of schlitz on that stuff and now we have to go to a

new route, this is just swift decisions but i don't want to get ahead of the president on things they haven't announced yet. >> you mention the the secretary today expressed outrage about bucha in his call to ukraine, defense minister. is there a point, in secretary austin's view, where this building feels like there is a moral obligation to prevent war crimes in ukraine? >> are you suggesting that we haven't expressed that there is a moral obligation not to commit war crimes there or anywhere? >> yes, you felt there was a moral obligation to prevent war crimes. >> there should be no war crimes. because there should be no war in ukraine. because vladamir putin still had diplomatic options on the table when he decided in late february to go ahead and cross over the border and invade a sovereign neighboring country. and so, look, the international community has spoken on this, the president has spoken on this, we've spoken on this, that we believe the russians are committing war crimes in

ukraine. they need to be documented, evidence needs to be collected, investigations need to be completed, the united states -- the united states, not just the d.o.d. -- the united states will be a participant in that process. >> and my second follow is a senior administration official said that about two-thirds of the russian troops around kyiv were repositioning. you mentioned that about potentially refitting and going back into ukraine. is there anything that could be done to prevent these forces from reentering ukraine? >> if you're asking is the united states going to get militarily involved in the fighting in ukraine, the president has been clear, that's not going to happen. but we are going to provide every advantage we can to the ukranian military to defend their territory, their sovereignty, their citizens, their towns and villages. so that support will go on. now, what operations the ukrainians will undertake inside their borders to defend

themselves, that's up to them to speak to, not the united states. >> so to jennifer's questions, it's not that the u.s. doesn't have some of these things to provide the u.s. military, but has the u.s. hit like a threshold in some of these speck -- specific capabilities, like javelins or stingers, that if the u.s. gives some of its military stock, it degrades their military readiness? >> that we're applying usaia is just another tool in the toolbox. it doesn't denoteu.s. readiness at this stage. >> and they indicated they were selling some ussds to bulgaria and i wonder if that's so the u.s. can sell migs to ukraine?

>> i'm not aware of it in that capacity. >> so you don't think bulgaria -- >> i'm not going to speak to another nation, but i would not draw any conclusions from that announcement to some sort of backfill requirement. that would be a misreading of what's happening. >> also the question i wanted to ask you -- >> i already answered. >> but bulgaria has said that they would give these migs if they had some f-16s as backup. so it's surprising that just as ukraine needs migs, the u.s. is deciding to -- >> i don't have anything more to add on this than what i did with courtney. i'm just going to leave it at that. i'm not going to speak for another nation and what another nation is willing or able to do in terms of supporting ukraine.

that's up to them to speak to. barbara? >> both you and jake sullivan were very specific this afternoon that u.s. troops would not be going into ukraine to fight russian soldiers. i just want to post a loop on that. not going in to fight russian soldiers, but is the door open for u.s. troops to go into ukraine in a non-combat role to assist, if and when it comes to it and i'm not speculating, the pole and initiative, if and when it comes to it, to assist in documentation of war crimes, as you said, the pentagon would be part of the intra-agency effort. is the door now open with these new missions to u.s. troops and ukraine in a non-combat zone? >> there are no plans to put u.s. troops in ukraine at this time. there are no discussions or conversations or plans or speculations about using u.s.